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.

***

 

 

 

 

 

If there was an award for the world’s most hypocritical political party, the Liberal Party of Canada would be frontrunners to take the prize.

In their bid to ramp up tensions between nuclear armed NATO and Russia, this country’s top two politicians flagrantly intervened in Ukrainian affairs while maintaining other nations must stay out of ours.

Last week the Globe and Mail reported that Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau both called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to demand that he block legal proceedings against former president Petro Poroshenko. His political rival is accused of treason.

How does pressuring Zelensky respect Canada’s stated aim of supporting Ukrainian “sovereignty”? Also, didn’t they tell us repeatedly they couldn’t stop the deportation of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou to the US because they opposed interfering in the legal system?

More important than Liberal party hypocrisy, intervening to support Poroshenko reflects Canada’s promotion of militaristic, regressive, political forces in the Ukraine. In the 2019 election Zelensky trounced (73% to 25%) Poroshenko by running on a pro-peace and anti-oligarch platform. Out of office Poroshenko has worked to scuttle Zelensky’s efforts. Alongside well organized (if electorally insignificant) far right groups, Poroshenko promoted demonstrations and provocative stunts that undermined Zelensky’s peace efforts with Russia and the breakaway republics in the eastern Donbass region.

Having come to power in the aftermath of the US and Canada backed EuroMaidan coup in 2014, Poroshenko is “a fiercely anti-Russian figure in Ukrainian politics”. At the Halifax International Security Forum (HISF) in mid-November Poroshenko instigated the latest bout of ‘Russia will invade’ rhetoric. According to the Globe and Mailreport: “Poroshenko says ‘extremely possible’ Russian military could cross border into Ukraine”. At the NATO-sponsored forum, the former president also called for a Ukrainian Membership Action Plan to “be adopted at the next NATO summit in June.”

Poroshenko has attended the last two HISFs, which receives $3 million a year from Canada’s Department of National Defence. In 2020 HISF President Peter Van Praagh put out a release noting, “in the best interests of Ukraine’s democratic future, President Zelensky should call an immediate halt to all proceedings against Mr. Poroshenko.”

Ottawa and Washington’s support for Poroshenko is part of their assistance to pro-NATO, anti-Russian and anti-socialist political forces in the Ukraine. Over the past three decades Canada has channeled over $1 billion to bolster their political allies in the Ukraine while the US has spent many billions of dollars more.

Canadian support for nationalist, anti-socialist, forces in the Ukraine has a longer history. In 1952 External Affairs Minister Lester Pearson launched a Ukrainian section of Radio Canada International (RCI) to disseminate the Canadian government’s perspective there. The previous year Pearson told Parliament that RCI was “playing a useful part in the psychological war against communism.”

RCI bolstered anti-Soviet, nationalist, elements among the émigré community. The Canadian government has alsosupported ultranationalist Ukrainian émigrés more directly. In 1940 McKenzie King’s Liberal government facilitated the creation of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC) to undercut more socialist and internationalist elements within the community. In “The Ukrainian Canadian Congress and its Fascist Roots” Richard Sanders writes, “their explicit goal in orchestrating the creation of this umbrella organisation was to rally all anticommunist Ukrainians into one body in order to squash the then-powerful influence of leftwing Ukrainians whose forebears had come to Canada during earlier waves of migration.” After World War II the UCC benefited from Canada opening its door to tens of thousands of Ukrainians nationalists, many of whom had fought with the Nazis against the Soviets.

Over the years Ottawa has provided various forms of financial and other support to the UCC. In so doing, they’ve helped the organization maintain its hegemony over Ukrainian Canadian politics and its sizable international influence. For the last 13 years Canadians have led the Ukrainian World Congress (UWC), which was set up as an anti-Soviet organization. The heads of the UWC and UCC met Poroshenko at the HISF in November.

The UWC, UCC and Canada’s large diaspora community more generally is influential in the Ukraine, which has by far the lowest per capita GDP in Europe. (Ukraine’s per capita GDP is 40% of Mexico’s and 1/12 Canada’s.) Chrystia Freeland provides a stark example of Canadian influence over Ukrainian politics. Long before she convinced President Zelensky to intervene in a legal case against his rival, Freeland was actively promoting a nationalist, anti-socialist position. During a 1989 visit, reports the Globe and Mail, Freeland “delivered cash, video- and audio-recording equipment, and even a personal computer to her contacts in Ukraine.” Freeland’s support to anti-Soviet, Ukrainian nationalists got her followed by the KGB and labeled by the press as an “anti-Soviet bourgeois nationalist.” Freeland represented the UCC and Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies at a 1989 congress of the Ukrainian People’s Front.

After the breakup of the Soviet Union Freeland supported Ukraine maintaining its nuclear weapons arsenal. Her mother also helped draft the Ukraine’s inaugural constitution.

Freeland’s family are hardline nationalists. Her grandfather, Michael Chomiak, was a Nazi propagandist during World War II. Chomiak edited a Ukrainian language newspaper that published speeches by Hitler and Goebbels, as well as the Nazi’s anti-Jewish/Soviet screeds. Fleeing the Ukraine after the Soviets defeated the Nazis, Chomiak was influential in Alberta’s Ukrainian community through the 1980s. Freeland has repeatedly praised him.

As Freeland highlights, Canada has nurtured ultranationalist forces in the Ukraine. While framed as defending that country from Russian imperialism, it’s hard to take Ottawa’s commitment to Ukrainian “sovereignty” seriously when top Canadian politicians flagrantly interfere in the country’s internal affairs.

But there is a broader question at hand as well. Amidst the pandemic, climate crisis and staggering inequities, do Canadians want to devote more resources and soldiers to ramping up tensions with Russia?

Let’s not forget that the US and Russia possess enough nuclear weapons to wipe out humanity.

On February 16 the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute will be hosting a webinar on “Canada, NATO, Russia and the Crisis over Ukraine”.

*

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

Featured image is from the author

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.

***

 

 

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Science Forum with COVID Experts at Ottawa Marriott Hotel, Dr. Alexander, Dr. Hodkinson, Dr. Bridle

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.

***

The four free covid-19 rapid tests President Joe Biden promised in December for every American household have begun arriving in earnest in mailboxes and on doorsteps.

A surge of covid infections spurred wide demand for over-the-counter antigen tests during the holidays: Clinics were overwhelmed with people seeking tests and the few off-the-shelf brands were nearly impossible to find at pharmacies or even online via Amazon. Prices for some test kits cracked the hundred-dollar mark. And the government vowed that its purchase could provide the tests faster and cheaper so people, by simply swabbing at home, could quell the spread of covid.

The Defense Department organized the bidding and announced in mid-January, after a limited competitive process, that three companies were awarded contracts totaling nearly $2 billion for 380 million over-the-counter antigen tests, all to be delivered by March 14.

The much-touted purchase was the latest tranche in trillions of dollars in public spending in response to the pandemic. How much is the government paying for each test? And what were the terms of the agreements? The government won’t yet say, even though, by law, this information should be available.

The cost — and, more importantly, the rate per test — would help demonstrate who is getting the best deal for protection in these covid times: the consumer or the corporation.

The reluctance to share pricing details flies against basic notions of cost control and accountability — and that’s just quoting from a long-held position by the Justice Department. “The prices in government contracts should not be secret,” according to its website. “Government contracts are ‘public contracts,’ and the taxpayers have a right to know — with very few exceptions —what the government has agreed to buy and at what prices.”

Americans often pay far more than people in other developed countries for tests, drugs, and medical devices, and the pandemic has accentuated those differences. Governments abroad had been buying rapid tests in bulk for over a year, and many national health services distributed free or low-cost tests, for less than $1, to their residents. In the U.S., retailers, companies, schools, hospitals, and everyday shoppers were competing months later to buy swabs in hopes of returning to normalcy. The retail price climbed as high as $25 for a single test in some pharmacies; tales abounded of corporate and wealthy customers hoarding tests for work or holiday use.

U.S. contracts valued at $10,000 or more are required to be routinely posted to sam.gov or the Federal Procurement Data System, known as fpds.gov. But none of the three new rapid-test contracts — awarded to iHealth Labs of California, Roche Diagnostics Corp. of Indiana, and Abbott Rapid Dx North America of Florida — could be found in the online databases.

“We don’t know why that data isn’t showing up in the FPDS database, as it should be visible and searchable. Army Contracting Command is looking into the issue and working to remedy it as quickly as possible,” spokesperson Jessica R. Maxwell said in an email in January. This month, she declined to provide more information about the contracts and referred all questions about the pricing to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Only vague information is available in DOD press releases, dated Jan. 13 and Jan. 14, that note the overall awards in the fixed-price contracts: iHealth Labs for $1.275 billion, Roche Diagnostics for $340 million, and Abbott Rapid Dx North America for $306 million. There were no specifics regarding contract standards or terms of completion — including how many test kits would be provided by each company.

Without knowing the price or how many tests each company agreed to supply, it is impossible to determine whether the U.S. government overpaid or to calculate if more tests could have been provided faster. As variants of the deadly virus continue to emerge, it is unclear if the government will re-up these contracts and under what terms.

To put forth a bid to fill an “urgent” national need, companies had to provide answersto the Defense Department by Dec. 24 about their capacity to scale up manufacturing to produce 500,000 or more tests a week in three months. Among the questions: Had a company already been granted “emergency use authorization” for the test kits, and did a company have “fully manufactured unallocated stock on hand to ship within two weeks of a contract award?”

Based on responses from about 60 companies, the Defense Department said it sent “requests for proposals” directly to the manufacturers. Twenty companies bid. Defense would not release the names of interested companies.

Emails to the three chosen companies to query the terms of the contracts went unanswered by iHealth and Abbott. Roche spokesperson Michelle A. Johnson responded in an email that she was “unable to provide that information to you. We do not share customer contract information.” The customers — listed as the Defense Department and the Army command — did not provide answers about the contract terms.

The Army’s Contracting Command, based in Alabama, initially could not be reached to answer questions. An email address on the command’s website for media bounced back as out-of-date. Six phone numbers listed on the command’s website for public information were unmanned in late January. At the command’s protocol office, the person who answered a phone in late January referred all queries to the Aberdeen Proving Ground offices in Maryland.

“Unfortunately, there is an issue with voicemail,” said Ralph Williams, a representative of the protocol office. “Voicemail is down. I mean, voicemail has been down for months.”

Asked about the bounced email traffic, Williams said he was surprised the address — [email protected] — was listed on the ACC website. “I’m not sure when that email was last used,” he said. “The army stopped using the email address about eight years ago.”

Williams provided a direct phone number for Aberdeen and apologized for the confusion. “People should have their phone forwarded,” he said. “But I can only do what I can do.”

Joyce Cobb, an Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground spokesperson, reached via phone and email, referred all questions to Defense personnel. Maxwell referred more detailed questions about the contracts to HHS, and emails to HHS went unanswered.

Both the Defense and Army spokespeople, after several emails, said the contracts would have to be reviewed, citing the Freedom of Information Act that protects privacy, before release. Neither explained how knowing the price per test could be a privacy or proprietary concern.

A Defense spokesperson added that the contracts had been fast-tracked “due to the urgent and compelling need” for antigen tests. Defense obtained “approval from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, & Technology to contract without providing for full and open competition.”

KHN separately searched for the contracts on the sam.gov website during a phone call with a government representative who assisted with the search. During an extended phone session, the representative called in a supervisor. Neither could locate the contracts, which are updated twice a week. The representative wondered whether the numbers listed in the Defense press release were wrong and offered: “You might want to double-check that.”

On Jan. 25, Defense spokesperson Maxwell, in an email, said that the Army Contracting Command “is working to prepare these contracts for public release and part of that includes proactively readying the contracts for the FOIA redaction.” Three days later, she sent an email stating that “under the limited competition authority … DOD was not required to make the Request for Proposal (RFP) available to the public.”

Maxwell did not respond when KHN pointed out that the contracting provision she cited does not prohibit the release of such information. In a Feb. 2 email, Maxwell said “we have nothing further to provide at this time.”

On sam.gov, the covid spreadsheets include a disclaimer that “due to the tempo of operations” in the pandemic response, the database shows only “a portion of the work that has been awarded to date.”

In other words, it could not vouch for the timeliness or accuracy of its own database.

*

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

Featured image is from LifeSiteNews

Covid-19 Vaccine: Myocarditis Cover-up Exposed

February 13th, 2022 by Dr. Vernon Coleman

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.

***

This is video 303 and it’s February 2022.

Back in December 2020 I warned that the mRNA covid jabs could cause a huge number of serious adverse events – including myocarditis, heart attacks and strokes.

The warning, the first in the world I believe, was largely ignored. Doctors sneered and ignored it and fact checkers denied it – even though the warning was based on evidence from the American Government.

Click here to watch the video.

And then a few months ago I revealed evidence proving the link between the covid jabs and myocarditis.

The video had over a million views on Brand New Tube alone.

Once again, however, the mainstream media ignored the evidence.

Now at last the mainstream media can no longer ignore what is happening.

Sports professionals, as fit as you can get, have been dropping down with heart trouble. There are so many heart problems among school children that there is a call to put defibrillators in all schools.

But the mainstream media is not, as you might expect, warning that the covid jabs are causing myocarditis and heart attacks.

They’ve found other, sometimes bizarre, explanations for this new epidemic of heart disease.

The Evening Standard in London says that up to 300,000 people are facing heart related illnesses due to something called Post Pandemic Stress Disorder. It’s even got an acronym PPSD so you know it’s real.

Tahir Hussain, a surgeon, is quoted as saying he has recently seen a big increase in thrombotic related vascular conditions.

I bet he has.

Thrombotic related vascular conditions are a known problem with the covid jabs.

‘Wales online’ reports that TV doctor Amir Khan, whom I have dealt with in a video before, says that the huge increase in energy prices is responsible for the increase in heart attacks and strokes. If it were the 1st of April I would think this an April Fool’s joke.

Maybe Khan would like to debate this and other covid issues with me on one of his live TV appearances. Or maybe he wouldn’t.

The Daily Record says that paracetamol, the painkiller, increases heart attack risks and the risk of strokes. So maybe that’s what’s causing all those footballers to fall down.

On the other hand the Daily Express could be right. They had a headline which read: ‘Heart attacks: Does skipping breakfast increase your risk?’

The Daily Mirror in Sri Lanka says the Delta variant of covid can cause heart trouble in patients with no previous history of problems.

And the Daily Mirror in the UK says there is now a new miracle jab to save 1000s of lives by preventing heart attacks. Make ‘em ill with one jab and mend ‘em with another. That’s pretty standard drug company policy. The Mirror seems to have become very fond of the drug industry these days.

ABC7 in Los Angeles reports that doctors have warned that Super Bowl games may trigger heart attacks – though doesn’t explain the heart attacks which happen between Super Bowl games and to be honest with you I’m doubtful that all those people collapsing with myocarditis are sick because of a Super Bowl game disappointment. But you have to give them points for trying.

The Mayo Clinic in the US says that stress and chaos can cause heart disease. Well, wow. I first pointed that out in 1978 in a book called Stress Control. I was widely vilified for saying that. But now it seems stress is running amok.

The Sun reports that the weather can cause heart attacks. I bet the climate change cultists love that one.

It’s even been argued that all the heart attacks are caused by people eating too much good food.

And there is word that vitamin D shortages can cause problems. Interestingly, I made a video about that very early on. YouTube took it down of course, presumably because it might have saved lives.

Scientific American says that covid-19 can lead to heart damage among people with no symptoms at all. Nothing. Secretly. And the big problem is myocarditis. Gosh.

National Geographic says that covid can cause heart palpitations, chest pain and blood clots.

And Bayer, a drug company, argues that long covid increases heart trouble.

Now that’s interesting because a French study of 26,000 people suggested that the symptoms of Long Covid are actually caused by things other than covid – and are largely psychological. Even the wretched fact checkers agree with that.

Which makes the report that 25% of companies now say that Long Covid is a major cause of long term staff absence rather interesting.

What a surprise. People who took a year off on full pay now don’t want to go back to work. And they’re blaming Long Covid for all those attacks of myocarditis and other heart problems.

We mustn’t call Long Covid malingering of course. Even if it largely is.

Governments don’t care. It’s all part of the Great Reset plan to destroy the global economy. The bottom line is that alleged Long Covid sufferers are helping the conspirators.

The amazing thing is that despite all these sometimes bizarre theories, as far as I know not one major newspaper, TV station or radio station anywhere in the world has admitted that all these heart troubles, strokes and other illnesses are caused by the damned jabs.

If you know anyone who doubts that the jabs are causing the heart trouble ask them to take a look at two videos.

First the one I made in December 2020 warning that there would be big problems with myocarditis etc.

And second, the one I made last year proving the link between the covid jab and myocarditis. That video was called ‘Finally! Medical Proof the Covid Jab is Murder’ – and that was published on 22nd November 2021.

There are links in the box below to both videos.

Those who work for the mainstream media will, I suspect, continue to prefer to suppress the truth – that the covid jabs are responsible for all this heart trouble – and keep thinking up bizarre reasons for the epidemic of heart disease suddenly sweeping the world.

How about this.

All the people who’ve had heart trouble in the last year have worn shoes.

What do you think, Dr Khan? Could wearing shoes be causing all the heart trouble?

Or maybe watching you on the TV is making people sick?

*

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

Vernon Coleman’s novel ‘Balancing the Books’ is available as an eBook and a paperback. It’s a black comedy about a widow who avenges her husband’s suicide by killing the people she believes were responsible. He was an author and the people she kills were all online reviewers. The ways she kills them are most imaginative…

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Canadian Vets Armed Forces assembled in front of Canada’s Parliament this February morning to express support for the truckers of the 2022 freedom convoy.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

Freedom Convoy students in Manitoba walk out against mandates.

Watch the video below.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Students in Steinbach, Manitoba Walked Out of High School to Oppose Mask Mandates and Restrictions
  • 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

In the name of a supposed health emergency, governments have assigned to themselves all sorts of new powers. This state of emergency was deemed to be a necessary requirement to facilitate the fight against the spread of the supposedly new coronavirus. To this day the government claims the existence of a dire health emergency on the basis of alleged evidence that has never been subjected to a thoroughgoing judicial evaluation in court. See this. 

These claims of emergency have never been seriously spelled out, let alone proven, in front of judges. Hence our judges have shown themselves to be unequal to the responsibilities of defending the rule of law when it is most subject to severe attack. Just when we needed fair and balanced arbitration the most, judges in many jurisdictions backed away from testing the rigged data put in front of them by the very governments that gave them their judicial appointments.

Now Ottawa is the site of yet another government claim that another emergency measure is warranted.

This time the real reason for the claim that added government powers are needed, is to facilitate the criminalization, harassment, and ejection of a group of justice-promoting truckers seeking an audience with our national government in Canada’s national capital.  The goal is to politicize the work of the Ottawa police force and put the agency at the disposal of the minority Liberal government led by a mentally unstable Justin Trudeau.

Ottawa police have already been declared exempt from vaccine mandates. This happened in the wake of Ottawa Police Chief Peter Sloly admitting that his staff had played a role in persuading GoFundMe to hold back $10 million in public donations. These donations were meant to facilitate the travels and political actions of the Truckers Freedom Convoy. See this. 

While the members of the Ottawa police force have been granted freedom from jobs-for-jabs tradeoffs, the same is not true of truckers. According to the dictates of the Trudeau and Biden regimes, truckers cannot pass back and forth across the Canada-US borders without being jabbed.    

The current fiasco unfolding in Ottawa shows that the criminal justice system is no more independent than the biased legacy media. The people directing the corrupt media venues have chosen to make themselves political instruments of the ruthless lobby pushing the fear mongering.

The 24/7 media instigation of public hysteria, panic, and social division remains the principal force driving the manufactured COVID crisis.

Now one more emergency measure is being added to a long chain of emergency measures. This extension of actions that empower government by disempowering citizens is making our degraded political culture even more insidious. This time the object of adding more power to a government is helping the Ottawa Police Force to become a political instrument of the minority Liberal government led by the psychologically unbalanced Justin Trudeau.

Part of the process of transforming the Ottawa police officers into armed instruments of Trudeau’s political control, was to exempt Ottawa cops from vaccine mandates

The observation is not made lightly that Trudeau seems to have come unhinged in his lunatic obsession to only talk about, rather than with, the representatives of the Canadian Truckers’ Convoy. The truckers are holding their ground in Ottawa until they are invited to negotiate terms with Canada’s national government.

In his currently crazed condition, Justin Trudeau makes no allowance for the fact that the truckers have attracted large and enthusiastic support when they wheeled across the country. In doing so they became envoys of a demonstrable popular upsurge felt by many Canadians. Hundreds of thousands of them went out into the mid-winter cold of northern North America to stand on guard for thee along the Trans-Canada Highway.

This popular demonstration of love of country combined with a growth of hostility to Canadian governments has made a big impact. It became more concrete with the arrival of the truckers’ convoy in Ottawa on January 29.

Canadians responded to the passage of the truckers through their communities by seeking help from convoy members in sending messages to the coddled class of politicians and civil servants who set the pace in our national capital. Some Ottawa residents and their municipal representatives have failed to recognize the special responsibilities that fall on their shoulders.

Ottawa residents should blame Trudeau, not the truckers, who are holding their ground until Justin comes out of hiding and acts like a Prime Minister rather than a fugitive.

A large mass of Canadians is being insulted because the cowardly Trudeau would rather send the nation’s envoys packing without providing the truckers a positive forum to hear their grievances. All kinds of political strings are being pulled to protect a dysfunctional political leader presently doing massive damage to Canada, to Parliament, to the Liberal Party, and to himself as well as to his seemingly estranged family.

Even with the propaganda onslaughts of a biased, bought-and-paid-for media, the truckers register way higher on the popularity scale than Justin Trudeau  and his scandal-ridden and ineffective Liberal Party. If the “Trudeau Team” of Liberals ever attempted a cross-Canada convoy, how many Canadians would stand in the cold by the roadside just to witness a bunch of political gangsters drive by?

Under these circumstances there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Trudeau’s neurological system has been injured by his three injections with lethal and injurious COVID injections. The issue of degenerate neurological inflictions being inculcated by the gene-modifying COVID injections has come into focus with the release of some previously hidden data.   

At a recent Washington DC hearing led by US Senator Ron Johnson, the issue of high numbers of neurological injuries from the COVID injections came up. Among members of US Armed Forces, neurological ailments went up in 2021 by nine times from 100,000 to 900,000.  

It turns out that the Pentagon has built up and preserved one of the most comprehensive databases that highlight the range and intensity of serious health problems generated by the COVID-19 jabs.

Here is a list of increases in patterns of infection, disability and illness plaguing US soldiers.

1. Hypertension – 2,081% increase

2. Diseases of the nervous system – 948% increase

3. Malignant neoplasms of esophagus – 794% increase

4. Multiple sclerosis – 580% increase

5. Malignant neoplasms of digestive organs – 524% increase

6. Guillain-Barre syndrome – 451% increase

7. Breast cancer – 387% increase

8. Demyelinating – 387% increase

9. Neoplasms of thyroid and other endocrine glands – 374% increase

10. Female infertility – 372% increase

11. Pulmonary embolism – 368% increase

12. Migraines – 352% increase

13. Ovarian dysfunction – 337% increase

14. Testicular cancer – 269% increase

15. Tachycardia – 202% increase

See this. 

There is no reason to imagine that the percentage increase in ailments suffered by jabbed soldiers is any different than the outcomes for jabbed people in general.

Accordingly, there is no reason to dismiss the possibility that Justin Trudeaus incoherence is part of a trend of dramatic increases in neurological ailments brought on by the COVID injections. Our Prime Minister incessantly pushes these injections with the intensity of an undercover nark.

Trudeau is presenting himself as an embittered raving madman. He seems to think that his unrelenting and unsupported defamation of a group of Canadian truckers and their supporters, is somehow consistent with his own self-delusion that he is a champion of national unity and inclusion. I dont see how he can ever put behind him the fool he has made of himself during the last few days.

In crossing Canada, the Canadian truckers and their wide array of allies and supporters kept in the forefront the illogical, unscientific and tyranny-based character of the injection mandates and of the segregationist vaccine passports.

As the days went by and thousands of miles passed in the Freedom Convoys‘ journeys, the truckers clearly took on board the sentiments they absorbed from the crowds that greeted them, fed them, and cheered them onwards.

In their engagement with the salt-of-the earth Canadian people along the Trans-Canada Highway, the truckers became sounding boards for many well-justified popular resentments.

The sense of popular betrayal was directed against the frauds and malfeasance heaped on us by many governing authorities. Attention was drawn to the excesses of often pointless or health-destroying restrictions. Emphasis was put on the endless stream of lies, exaggerations, and deceptions from our governments and their media propagandists.

With the much-anticipated arrival of the truckers in Ottawa, it seemed that many Canadians who have been badly let down by our governments, our media, our universities and our courts, had found a credible mouthpiece. It seemed that finally a credible group had stepped forward to convey a very popular insistence that enough is enough when it comes to this scamdemic. 

The failure of the federal government even at this late date to negotiate with envoys of the Canadian people does not bode well for the future. The evidence grows that we need  a thoroughgoing remaking of our institutions to make sure that our society is never again engulfed in such a monstrous plot to impose medicalized tyranny or any other kind of tyranny for that matter. We need changes that point away from, rather than towards, the Great financial Reset being promoted by the likes of Trudeau, Horgan, Legault, Schwab, Soros, Drosten, Newsom and Gates. See this.

Rights and Freedoms Not Protected When We Need Them the Most 

The disastrous lockdowns are among the most consequential restrictions forced on populations by the puppet dictators that appear to be in charge of many of the world’s governments. The pervasive imposition of a new form of universalized house arrest was justified on the basis of government lies. These lies conveyed fake news of vastly inflated numbers of  “COVID cases” and unsubstantiated voodoo science deployed to present fiction as fact concerning “asymptomatic” COVID carriers. These lies discredited real natural remedies and lauded COVID jabs as if they were safe and effective.

The lockdowns were weaponized to attack our ability to put up organized resistance against the onslaughts of illegal government incursions to block the exercise of our rights and freedoms. The lockdowns were used by governments intent on misleading us into thinking we had already become wards of governments. Since the spring of 2020 these governments began to stray far outside the realm of existing laws and far outside the many social contracts governments have historically negotiated with their constituents. This abandonment of rules extended to the abandonment of most precautionary measures in the development of the contents of the COVID injections.

Lockdowns were deployed to attack our morale and obliterate what remained of our social harmony. They were seized upon as a means of diminishing our physical, mental and domestic health. The lockdowns began the process of stripping down average people through a host of economic assaults.

These economic assaults multiplied unemployment and undermined the viability of small businesses, the middle class, and supply chains. The lockdowns were part of the process of discontinuing many forms of recreation, entertainment, travel, sports, and culture. This list is far from complete. 

The lockdowns are responsible for elevating rates of suicide, depression, addictions, domestic violence and unnecessary deaths from the cancellation of needed medical procedures including surgery.

The lies and crimes of the protagonists behind the manufactured COVID crisis have subjected millions of injected people around the world to plagues of mortality and injury whose full extent is still being kept hidden from the public. The restrictions and mandates have also pre-empted scores of constitutionally-guaranteed human rights and freedoms. The government violations include blocks on freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, as well as the freedom of expression, conscience, movement, travel, religion, and bodily autonomy.

In Canada the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should have protected Canadians. We should not have been subjected to the restrictions and mandates put in place by all levels of government in the name of fighting COVID-19.

Justin Trudeau has consistently argued that politicians are entitled to downgrade and disregard the Charter if they think it is “reasonable” to do so. Unfortunately those Canada’s judges who all gave green lights to the COVID restrictions, went along with Trudeau’s very political determination that the Charter, part of Canada’s “supreme law,” did not apply to the COVID lunacies.

Trudeau’s strategic insistence that, as Prime Minister of Canada, he is entitled to override the rights and freedoms of Canadians has caused much consternation. An influential critic of Trudeau and a champion of the Charter is Brian Peckford, Premier of Newfoundland from 1979 to 1989. Peckford helped draft and enact the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms in 1981 and 1982. Peckford’s stance coincides with that of many Canadians including most of the truckers in Ottawa.

Peckford has been an integral part of the contingent that has induced an eruption of public hostility against the manufactured nature of the COVID crisis. On January 29, the day the truckers rolled into Ottawa, Peckford addressed a huge gathering at the British Columbia Legislature in Victoria.

There Peckford announced he is taking the Canadian government to court for violating the free travel provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He makes a compelling case addressing the need for the Canadian government to conduct its affairs within the framework of the Canadian nation’s supreme law.

Criminality in Statecraft

What is to be said of the Ottawa government’s effort to invoke yet another round of emergency powers in the effort to shut down demonstrations by the truckers highlighting two years of repeated government malfeasance?

This pattern of repeating mistakes in the misguided quest to fix old mistakes seems to be a continuing feature of government activity throughout the COVID hoax so far. For instance, it makes no sense to respond to COVID injections that have not worked to prevent infection and transmission by advising people to take more unsafe, ineffective and sometimes lethal booster shots. It makes no sense to repeat old strategies that do not work. 

Like most of the world’s governments, the governments of Canada and its provinces have gone on an emergency-measure binge to which they are now obviously addicted. The government of Ottawa is acting pretty much like the governments of many cities during the Occupy Wall Street movement of 2011. Occupy Wall Street emerged first in New York as a kind of variation on the demonstrations earlier in 2011 at Tahrir Square in Cairo Egypt.

I took part in the Occupy Wall Street movement in many locations including in London England, Oakland California, and Calgary Alberta. In all these places the organizers eschewed short demonstrations. They emphasized, rather, setting up tent villages devoted to prolonged discussions, negotiation and enactments aimed at trying to identify and fix underlying problems driving the political economy of oppression.

In the effort to blot out the Occupy Movement, governments went to court seeking to eject the occupants of tent villages. By and large this strategy “worked.” Key phrases in domestic constitutions and international conventions dealing with the need to protect human freedoms were preempted by mere municipal bylaws and such. The same scenario seems to be currently playing out in Ottawa.

The menace to society is great when governments enact all kinds of unnecessary and unjustified emergency measures. This process of societal degradation took place in spades after the 9/11 false flag event. In the responding to a concocted interpretation of what transpired, the Global War on Terror was declared. It involved outright invasions of many Muslim-majority countries.

The post-9/11 violations of many rights and freedoms effectively undermined basic safeguards like the need to prove guilt in court before punishment is imposed. This tended to translate into incarcerating mostly innocent Muslims who were often tortured in US black sites. The resulting attack on the rule of law has been augmented again and again especially over the last two years of the engineered COVID panic.

In 2011 and in 2020-2022 it happened that the constitutional provisions that exist supposedly to protect us were simply suspended when put to the test. The system is so rigged that it most often protects the criminality of elites, a pattern as true in Ottawa as in Washington DC or in London England.

Meanwhile, too often the law is deployed as a means of controlling regular citizens in the quest to hold them back from impinging on the self-interested imperatives of elites. This pattern is well demonstrated by Ottawa Police Chief Peter Stoly being assigned to perform political dirty work for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Criminalizing the Innocent to Protect the Guilty

The effort by a coalition of the powerful to smear, criminalize, harass and eject the truckers gathered in Ottawa is reflective of the impoverishment of the rule of law these days. Efforts are made to discredit the political representations of working people through media smear campaigns sometimes combined with the effort of law enforcement officials to criminalize and harass those that offend the interests of power.

On the other hand serious allegations, like those advanced by David E. Martin in describing Justin Trudeau’s mishandling of the manufactured COVID crisis, are conspicuously disregarded by legacy media. Martin explained a number of alleged felonies by Trudeau involving racketeering, collusion, illegal restrictions on trade, and anti-trust violations. Martin entitled his spoken word essay, “On Canada’s Role in Producing the Weaponized “Covid” Injections Which Have Seriously Harmed and Killed Many.”

See this.

The petty complaints directed at the truckers in Ottawa pale in comparison to the major charges being pressed in courts against some of the leading figures of COVID Officialdom including Justin Trudeau. Excerpts from the much reproduced essay by Joachim Hagopian indicate the breakthroughs being made in pressing charges on the likes of Justin Trudeau, Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates. Hagopian explains, for instance

Not only is Britain’s largest police force now actively involved in the probe, but the Hammersmith Police alongside the International Criminal Court at the Hague in the Netherlands are also working conjointly together in what’s being called the world’s largest international crime investigation ever.

Under the formal banner of the Hammersmith CID (Criminal Investigation Division) Police Station, Case Number 6029679/21, this landmark criminal case was lodged in conjunction with the International Criminal Court (ICC Case Number OTP-CR-473/21)….

Though these monumental legal cases in both the Hague and UK have been confirmed legitimate, neither has been publicized whatsoever by the corporate lamestream press for the very same reason that MSM has been the principal truth-suppressing co-conspirator throughout the pandemic. These two enormously important lawsuits filed a month ago, in UK spearheaded by Dr. Sam White, MD, retired constable Mark Sexton and attorneys Philip Hyland and Lois Bayliss, is receiving further support from such international notables as Robert Kennedy Jr (JFK nephew and bestselling author of The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health), German-American lawyer Dr Reiner Fuellmich and former Pfizer Vice President Dr Michael Yeadon, along with dozens of other professional experts and authorities. The crimes against humanity involve charges of malfeasance and misconduct in public office, gross negligence, manslaughter, corporate manslaughter, murder and conspiracy to commit murder and genocide. For our future, these two cases filed on behalf of humanity, kept under such close Deep State wraps by the criminals, are both huge.

See this

The integrity of the rule of law cannot be sustained if the failure continues to hold top officials legally accountable for committing very high-level crimes.

*

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

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 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

You might have recognized that something is gravely amiss with the narrative regarding COVID.

You might have a general sense that you are being deceived or have even noticed the large discrepancy between public policy and medical evidence in terms of lockdowns, mask mandates, school closures, vaccine mandates, early outpatient treatment of COVID, etc.

You might be asking, what is going on?

Before we can begin to answer this question, it must be first understood that preemptive tactics have been employed, most likely without your awareness, to limit your ability to openly consider this question. A common technique used in propaganda focuses on pre-programming one’s reactions by linking a particular label to a notion of illegitimacy.

In this way a susceptible individual will be unable to objectively assess the content from any source once this label has been applied. Multiple entities, including mainstream media, have worked diligently to illegitimatize the term “conspiracy theory” by aggressively linking it with extremism, paranoia, and delusion. This is a dangerous misconception intended to undermine the basis of critical thinking.

What is a conspiracy theory? Put simply it is a theory about a conspiracy. But let’s further dissect these terms. 

The first component of this term is conspiracy. Are conspiracies the self-talk of paranoid schizophrenics or do actual conspiracies take place, specifically in the United States involving the US government and private sectors with the intent or effect of deceiving and manipulating American citizens?

The fact is that many such conspiracies have taken place in the United States in recent history. The details of these events are well established and typically disclosed when the documents are declassified, often after the government is pressured to divulge the information. This requires a significant amount of time to have elapsed after the event and, more importantly the persistent effort of critical thinking American citizens.

These events are often shocking and appalling. As the details are easy to find I will simply provide a short list of such conspiracies in no particular order. If these terms are unfamiliar, I encourage you to educate yourself on these important elements of recent US history. 

Cointelpro, Gulf of Tonkin incident, MK-Ultra, William Binney and NSA warrantless surveillance,

Dark alliance and Gary Webb,

Operation Mockingbird,

Project Sunshine, Operation Sea Spray, Operation CHAOS, Project Bluebird, Project Artichoke, QK-Hilltop, MK-Delta,

Pentagon bacteria test and over 200 similar tests on unknowing US citizens,

Salk Vaccine Dr. Bernice Eddy and SV40,

Operation Northwoods,

Ed Snowden documents,

Dept of Treasury Poisoned Alcohol,

Operation Paperclip,

“Tuskegee study of untreated syphilis in the negro male”,

Nayirah testimony,

FEMA Ricin toxin poisonings,

Michael R. Tayor Monsanto VP/FDA Deputy Director, Operation Berkshire,

Atomic Energy Commission radiation experiments including Fernald school radioactive oatmeal,

University of Rochester Uranium and University of Iowa radioactive iodine in pregnant women which prompted the formation of the ACHRE, U.S. military race-based testing of mustard gas. 

The list goes on and on.

The very recent declassification of UFO documents demonstrating the decades long cover-up of UFO sightings is a stark reminder. Not only was there an active cover-up right up until 2021, but these documents remain highly redacted[1-2]. Furthermore, the government admits that a significant portion of these documents remain classified[3]. Thus, portions of this cover-up actively continue. 

The bottom line is that the belief that conspiracies do not take place is naïve and frankly false.

In fact, there are so many nefarious government conspiracies that have taken place in recent history in the United States that there has not been a time in the last 80 years that a conspiracy was not taking place. While one could, and certainly should, debate about what conspiracies are taking place currently, the stance that no conspiracy is taking place is simply irrational. 

The second component of this term is theory. The message from mainstream media is that “theory” equates with falsehood, misconception, or inaccuracy. In science however, theory is not such a dirty word. On the contrary, the term theory is closely associated with truth.

Theory is an integral part of the scientific method for discovering truth.

All studies based on the scientific method begin with a hypothesis. The investigator then goes about seeking evidence to either support or refute the hypothesis. If refuted the hypothesis is rejected and then not considered a viable theory.

If the evidence does support the hypothesis, this becomes a theory that is accepted as probable.

Take for example the germ theory of disease. This is the theory that diseases are caused by germs or pathogens such as bacteria, viruses, parasites etc. Although the major model used to explain disease in western medicine, germ theory does not completely explain disease, which can occur via other mechanisms and is clearly influenced by other factors including factors intrinsic to the diseased individual.

This theory has an interesting history.

Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis, who was a highly respected physician, was committed to a mental asylum by his colleagues in 1865 simply for proposing this theory. Another common scientific theory is heliocentric theory: the theory that the earth revolves around the sun. We of course have an immense amount of evidence to support this theory. Einstein’s general theory of relativity explains gravity among other things. Cell theory is the theory that living things are composed of one or more cells. There are many theories that are widely considered a close approximation of truth. 

A civilian who is aware that conspiracies take place, but unable to prove their existence usually for decades after they occur, is in a challenging scenario. One can only speculate about conversations that occur in high places and behind closed doors. The power of government level entities to cover up details of such events leaves the rest of world relatively blind.

Nonetheless the pursuit of truth in this regard is vital to the health of any free nation.

Indeed, it is the duty of the citizens to press for this truth. So, what can be done? In the world of science there is a parallel that can be drawn upon from the study of physics, particularly astrophysics.

No one knows for sure what is happening light years away or what occurred billions of years ago. Nonetheless there is a burning desire to understand these events.

Thus, the field of physics is divided into two subdisciplines: theoretical physics and experimental physics.

The theoretical physicists, such as Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking, pose theories based on a combination of observation, calculation, and creativity, often with little actual evidence. Although the theories can never really be proven, the experimental physicists take these theories and try to disprove them by running experiments. They will take the stance for example that if the theory is valid, then x would also be true. They then test x. If a theory stands up to this scrutiny it remains a viable theory. Most theories are disproven. Others become the defining model of our universe. No one considers theoretic physicists to be delusional. They play a vital role in the pursuit of truth. 

The next time you hear the term “conspiracy theory”, pay attention to the intent of the speaker.

Is it being used in an attempt to invalidate the theory or persuade you to immediately reject the content of the theory without consideration? If so, this is a gross misuse of the term.

Also pay attention to your immediate intellectual reaction. Do you find yourself more apt to reject the content in question simply because it has been so labeled? Do not succumb to such manipulation.

The very fact that aggressive propaganda has been issued in this regard with increasing frequency should be an indication of the presence of an active conspiracy which is working to avoid discovery. I am not suggesting conspiracy theories be immediately accepted as fact.

Instead begin with the notion that the content is potentially valid and should be applied to an exercise of thought, exploring the evidence to either support or refute such a theory. Ask yourself if the content being discussed is actually a theory or is it simply evidence being presented that implies that a conspiracy exists.

Perhaps a theory has not even yet been overtly formulated. In that case, do not shy away from generating a theory to explain such information, then go about testing your theory with the evidence available. This is not a radical or fringe approach. This is a normal intellectual method for processing new information and discovering truth. 

The Covid Narrative

For the purpose of this paper, I will assume you are one of the many people who have come to recognize that a group of extremely powerful individuals have gone to unimaginable lengths to make a COVID vaccine mandatory and are intent on ensuring every person on earth receives it.

They created the virus and the “vaccine”, released the virus on the world, made sure that it spread, exaggerated the number of infections, exaggerated its lethality, attempted to block all effective treatment, circumvented informed consent and the Nuremberg code in administering the inoculation, refused to disclose the ingredients, covered up deaths and injuries that have resulted from the inoculation, effectively silenced all dissenting voices, destroyed the life of anyone who spoke out and have managed to get the majority of the world’s health care providers and leaders to ignore all of this and instead promote a false narrative through a combination of bribery, threats, retaliation and outright brainwashing. Establishing the above is beyond the scope of this paper, but if you are not convinced these are at least probable realities I encourage you to continue to explore the validity of the narrative you are being told. 

Given the above, the question then becomes: why? Why did they go to such lengths to establish the norm of universal global vaccine mandates? The exact details have not yet been revealed; therefore, we are left to develop theories. There is a significant amount of evidence that can be drawn upon to guide and support such theories, which we will examine. Like the investigator of any crime, we must first identify the motive. You might be tempted to consider that the money generated by the vaccines is the primary motive.

There are certainly massive conflicts of interest between government regulators and Big Pharma.

Until you consider the breadth of entities across the entire planet that have conceded and even contributed to this agenda in a highly coordinated and nearly simultaneous fashion from the very beginning. The United States is the only nation in the world that allows pharmaceutical companies to engage in direct-to-consumer advertising, other than New Zealand, which imposes very strict regulations on what can and cannot be said[4]. If pharmaceutical companies cannot even get the German or Australian governments for example, to let them run an ad on TV for any cost, does it stand to reason that they would comply with the most draconian vaccine mandates in history simply to financially benefit Pfizer? Also keep in mind that a vaccine dose costs about $40.

In contrast monoclonal antibody treatments cost about $450 up to $2300 per dose[5-6]. That’s a 10 to 50-fold potential increase in revenue per dose, yet monoclonal antibodies are being aggressively blocked. These products are manufactured by some of the largest and most influential pharmaceutical companies in the world including Roche, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca. Roche alone spends more money than Pfizer in lobbying every year[116]. This behavior is not consistent with a motive of making money for big pharma.

Finally, the cost of the pandemic, and especially lockdown measures, that has been incurred by essentially every sector and industry of the global economy, dwarfs the revenue generated by the handful of pharmaceutical companies who have benefited from COVID vaccinations[7-9

]. As an increasing mass of people become aware of the sinister agenda unfolding, and the evidence of nefarious intent becomes more apparent, I suspect the new false narrative will indeed become a collusion between big pharm and a few bad actors in high positions. These individuals may even take the fall. Make no mistake, this is a scapegoat, a distraction meant to hide the true intent of the scheme. Fauci is a patsy. Do not be duped into participating in spreading this false deception. Much grander ambitions are being pursued. 

We know that whoever is behind this agenda is extremely powerful.

Powerful enough to exert control over the governments, media, major corporations, and healthcare institutions of essentially every nation on the planet. Knowing this, establishing a motive is simple, and it is not money. Any individual or group with this much power and influence has more money than they could ever spend. The motivation of every leader of any large group, at any point in time is the same: control. Specifically control over human behavior. Not only does this feed into the ego drive of a leader, because this equates with supreme power, but it is also the most fundamental and functionally necessary target to achieve any other goal. As a leader you want your nation and your people to function as efficiently as possible, like a well-oiled machine. What is the barrier? The inability to control human behavior. As a modern leader, if you desire preservation of natural resources, longevity of earth’s ability to support human life, optimal population numbers, optimal productivity, minimal waste or even crime control, safety, and compliance in any fashion, you need to control human behavior.

The problem is that if you conflict too much with the desires and motivations of your people, they will ultimately revolt or fail to comply and you will lose control rather than gain it. Thus, there has always had to be a balance. The 40-hour work week, the cost of goods, even speed limits are examples of this balance. Traditional methods of controlling human behavior are well known: laws, punishment, manipulation of religion, establishment of cultural norms and expectations, etc. During the industrial revolution, the methods for obtaining control over human behavior became scientific. Frederick Taylor is famous for devising methods in the early 1900’s to optimize the efficiency of factory workers and mitigate the demands of highly skilled laborers by imposing a system of extreme divisions of labor.

The goal was to transform skilled and creative individuals into uniform, easily replaceable cogs in a wheel. His methods were quickly embraced by Mussolini and Lenin. Despite the undeniable effectiveness of Taylor’s methods, there were consequences. In their article “Where Have All the Robots Gone”, Harold Shepherd and Neal Herrick described that Taylor’s methods have diminishing returns beyond a certain point. Workers become dissatisfied and alienated, developing increasing resistance towards the system and even unfavorable voting patterns[10]. Taylor’s methods are felt to be a major contributor to Russia’s Kronstadt Rebellion of 1921[11]. 

Thus, over the last century a more equitable balance had to be struck between worker and employer. Other methods of control in the modern era include the institutionalization of education and propaganda through television and other media. While these methods have been effective, their success has been limited. Human behavior continues to pose a major barrier to the goals of world leaders. What else can be done? How can they achieve better control without diminishing returns and without people realizing or resisting? 

Medicine and Technology to Modify Human Behavior

The quest to utilize medicine and technology to manipulate human behavior began in the US around the time of World War II. Josef Mengel was educated at the Rockefeller Foundation funded German eugenics program before going on to become the “angel of death” at Auschwitz[85].

Several Nazi doctors who carried out this work under Hitler’s regime were brought illegally to the US via operation paperclip[12-13]. Project Bluebird and Project Artichoke officially began in the early 1950’s. These gave rise to MK-Ultra along with QK-Hilltop, MK-Naomi, and MK-Delta, all of which led to MK-Search. These CIA operations were explicitly aimed at human mind control and behavior modification. Thousands of American citizens underwent brutal and tortuous experimentation without their informed consent[13-14]. Despite the extensive experimentation on human subjects using various drugs, the most productive experiment was when they implanted microchips into animals.

In 1965 the CIA was able to literally remote control a group of dogs through a field by way of microchips implanted in their brains. Per declassified documents, the primary limitation noted by the investigators was that the dogs could only be controlled within a range of about 200 feet and plans were described to continue experimentation in “other species”[15-16].

In the same year Dr. Jose Delgado succeeded in remotely manipulating the behavior of a bull, also using an electronic device implanted in its brain[17]. Delgado continued his work on mind control using implanted devices through Yale University and published over 100 papers. After performing similar experiments in cats and monkeys he moved on to human trials. In a story published in Scientific American, writer John Horgan describes, “Delgado could induce fear, rage, lust, hilarity, garrulousness and other reactions” in his human subjects[18]. 

MK-ultra was exposed in 1974 by Seymour Hersh, a journalist with a long career of exposing government cover-ups via anonymous sources[19-20]. The program was subsequently investigated by a committee led by then Vice President Nelson Rockefeller.

The CIA claimed at that time that the program had conveniently been self-terminated just one year prior in 1973. Unfortunately, most of the documents of MK-Ultra were destroyed. Still tens of thousands of pages were ultimately declassified and made available to the public thanks to the freedom of information act. In keeping with the CIA narrative, documents only lead up to 1973.

Documentation beyond that point remains classified. Despite the narrative that MK-Ultra ended in 1973, there is no proof that these projects and the quest for control over human behavior was ever actually discontinued. In fact, following the completion of the investigations into CIA mind control experimentation, President Ford penned an executive order in 1976 prohibiting “experimentation with drugs on human subjects, except with the informed consent, in writing and witnessed by a disinterested party, of each such human subject.”[13, 20-21] Aside from the redundancy of this statement, which simply reiterates already well-established codes of medical and bioethics including the Nuremberg code, this executive order is suspiciously limiting.

Why was it necessary to add the phrase “with drugs”? Whether intentional or not, there is clear omission of any prohibition of experimentation using implantable devices, despite this being a component of MK-Ultra. In 2004 John Greenwald, founder of The Black Vault, a site which catalogues declassified government documents, uploaded the MK-Ultra documents. It was later discovered by a man named Oscar Diggs that thousands of pages were missing, and Mr. Greenwald subsequently requested these missing documents from the CIA in 2018. 

Remarkably the CIA replied that these pages were intentionally omitted from the original request because they pertained to “behavior modification” rather than “mind control”, which was the subject of the investigation into MK-Ultra[22-23]. In other words, the CIA considers “behavior modification” a separate component of their activities from “mind control”. While the actual distinction is nebulous at best, the fact that the CIA considers these to be distinct operations further supports the notion that at least the “behavior modification” component of their activities has indeed persisted. 

In 1965 a computer was roughly as large as a full-sized refrigerator yet had roughly the processing power of a basic handheld calculator[24]. In contrast, Intel’s most current 2021 processor is just 7 nanometers (nm) large[25-26]. For perspective, 1nm is one billionth of a meter, smaller than the wavelength of visible light. A single atom has a width of 0.5nm. If living animals could be controlled like remote control cars in 1965, it is not hard to imagine how far the trajectory of technological advancement would take us nearly 60 years later.

While the technology possessed by government entities typically well exceeds that available in the private sector, we can nonetheless look to known and published technology in the private sector today to give us an idea of what might be currently possible. One field of science that is relevant to the goal of control over human behavior is genetic modification. Our DNA can be altered in a nearly infinite number of ways. This technology has been around for decades, hence the prevalence of GMO (genetically modified organism) food. One can hardly find non-GMO corn anywhere in North America now. Genomics is one of the largest fields of science in practice and focuses on the function and editing of genomes[27]. Genetic modification is powerful, and the possibilities are limitless, but the changes are permanent and difficult to control, particularly with regard to manipulating behavior. 

Nanotechnology

Nanotechnology and specifically nanobots offer a form of technology that seems more attractive and is certainly more in line with the evolution of techniques that were being explored in the 1960’s. These are robots 50 to 100nm wide. This is about 1/10,000 the size of a human cell or 1/1,000 the size of the nucleus. They can be made of a variety of materials, are of course invisible to the naked eye and can easily be injected through a needle and syringe. They can enter the brain, target areas that control certain behaviors and influence those behaviors[28-31].

The largest barrier to nanorobot’s ability to enter the brain is the blood brain barrier, a highly selective semi-permeable border that protects the brain from elements in circulation. Spike protein is known to aggressively disrupt the blood brain barrier[32-33]. This may be the very reason for the spike protein having been placed on the virus and why the “vaccine” contains the mRNA to generate spike.

More importantly, the mRNA itself is encapsuled in lipid nanoparticles and we know the jab contains significant amounts of this ingredient. Lipid nanoparticles were designed as a vehicle to assist in the transit of materials across the blood brain barrier and into the brain. Indeed, this is precisely how they have primarily been used prior to the development of COVID vaccines[120].

When a sufficient number of nanomachines assemble, they become a microchip or computer processor. They can receive and transmit information via electromagnetic waves[34-37]. Thus, behavior could be remotely controlled and modified in a certain fashion one minute and modified differently the next.

This is not science fiction but rather an entire established field of science with such a large body of ongoing published literature that there are over 75 different peer reviewed periodic journals in print dedicated just to keeping up with the literature related to this field[38-43]. One subdiscipline of nanotechnology involves using DNA to build these nanobots, called DNA origami nanomachine technology[44]. In 2014 researchers in Israel injected DNA origami nanobots into a living cockroach and built what the investigators described as a computer to manipulate certain tissues[45].

DNA Origami

I have read through a considerable amount of the literature on DNA origami nanotechnology and from what I have seen, the vast majority comes out of Asia and third world countries. It seems unlikely that the United States and European countries would not have an interest in this field. Perhaps research from the west is not being published because of the obvious implications of what they are developing. Meanwhile, in a 2015 webinar Ray Kurzweil, director of engineering at Google, openly asserted, “In the 2030s we are going to send nano-robots into the brain.”[46-48].

This statement came off as more of a threat than a prediction, which was endorsed in the same year by Nicholas Negroponte, founder of the MIT Media Lab, and James Friend, a professor of mechanical engineering at UC San Diego. In fact, Dr. Friend estimated in 2015 that we were only two to five years away from human brain nanobots[47]. Despite their enthusiasm in this regard, according to a 2014 pew research survey 72% of Americans are not interested in a brain implant even if it could improve memory or mental capacity[49]. Apparently, this technology may not be implemented based on choice. 

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) tracks adverse events that occur in association with vaccinations. VAERS was established in 1990 and is managed by the CDC and the FDA. The system allows the lot number of the vaccine dose in question to be entered along with the reported event, providing the ability to track adverse events in relation to a particular lot or set of lots[50]. The adverse events associated with COVID have been historically unprecedented in comparison to prior vaccines[51].

As you might imagine the rate of adverse events in a given vaccine, for example the seasonal flu shot, will be relatively consistent across batches, i.e. low lot-to-lot variability. Isolated lots that are contaminated or corrupted will show up as outliers and thus can be identified using this system to facilitate a recall and root cause analysis. Based on an unpublished analysis of VAERS data from COVID vaccines performed by Paardekooper et. al. there has allegedly been extreme lot-to-lot variability in association with COVID vaccines, far beyond what would be expected from any naturally occurring variability and highly unusual based on other vaccines in the system.

According to their review this phenomenon is present across all three COVID vaccine manufacturers distributing in the US. Many lots have few or even zero serious adverse events while many others have thousands of serious adverse events. If this is accurate, it would indicate that COVID vaccine lots do not all have the same contents. Their data suggest that there are at least 2 or 3 distinctly different categories of lots within a given product, each containing different ingredients, or at least a different ingredient, that is responsible for this very high rate of adverse events, including deaths and miscarriages[52]. It is important to understand that those who wish to examine the contents of a vaccine vial, including the FDA or any independent lab, cannot simply identify all the contents.

There is no method or technology that accomplishes this task. This is a basic limitation of toxicology. Instead, one must test a sample for a specific ingredient. In this manner you can check for the presence or absence of any given known ingredient but will be incapable of identifying the presence of an ingredient you do not specifically look for.

This highlights just how little is known about what these injections contain. It is well known that the FDA does not have all the drug and/or vaccine information on a given product during their review processes and are at the mercy of the manufacturer to provide this information. Such information has often been nefariously withheld by the manufacturer, which was recently well demonstrated during the Purdue OxyContin debacle[53-54].

It is another matter entirely however when the FDA is seen to actively collude with the pharmaceutical industry to hide safety information from the public. Shockingly, after a group of more than 30 academic professors and scientists requested the FDA share the data it utilized to determine the safety of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Comirnaty vaccine via the Freedom of Information Act, the FDA requested the courts allow more than 55 years to provide this information.

This is a glaring indication of these two entities conspiring to hide something about the vaccine, potentially related to its contents. The courts ultimately granted at least 8 months to provide this information. As of the time of this writing Pfizer is stepping in to intervene in the lawsuit as well as to “help redact those pages” during this release process. Also remember this only pertains to the Comirnaty formulation, which is not actually being administered to anyone at this time. We can know absolutely nothing about any of the EUA vaccines, which include the legally distinct EUA version of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, as none of these products have been granted FDA approval[56-58]. 

Some have suggested that the intent of the vaccinations may be to kill off a percentage of the population or directly decrease biologic fertility. This theory is certainly supported by the Gates and Rockefeller family ties to the eugenics movement as well as Bill Gate’s longstanding contention that overpopulation is one of the greatest problems facing humanity[59-64].

In addition, the lot-to-lot variability data, if accurate, indicate the presence of an experimental design to assess the lethality and fertility effects of a given ingredient or set of ingredients. Keep in mind, however, that you do not need to kill people, or even render them infertile to decrease the population if you can control their behavior, particularly their drive to reproduce. Furthermore, it is important to note that the planet is actually approaching a population decline in the next twenty years if current trends continue. Global fertility rates have been steadily declining for decades and now over 95 countries have either fallen below replacement fertility levels, including the United States and every country in the European union, or will be at sub-replacement levels within the next 3 years[65-70]. There is no question that those behind this will want to be extremely selective of which demographics they adjust and at what rate. They will need to be able nimbly adjust reproduction rates, and they are just as likely to want to increase those rates versus decrease. 

To review, based on the preponderance of evidence the primary goal of those behind the COVID agenda is most likely to achieve control over human behavior via the introduction of a highly effective and covert means for such manipulation. As Dr. McCullough has pointed out, “all roads lead to the vaccine”. The nanotechnology currently available can manipulate human behavior and can be implemented via an injection. Spike protein and lipid nanoparticles in the vaccine will facilitate entry into the brain.

The US government has a decades long history of performing dangerous interventions on US citizens aimed at mind control and behavior modification without their knowledge or consent and there is no proof this was ever discontinued. While we have no way of knowing everything that is in the vaccines, VAERS data, the open efforts of both the FDA and Pfizer to withhold the safety data, and Pfizer’s attempts to deceive the public regarding the distinctions between its various formulations[56-58], indicate that we are being lied to about their contents. 

If the effects of this manipulation were to become apparent to the unvaccinated, most of those individuals would never willing submit to inoculation. There would be a war. Therefore, the entire population must be inoculated before the effects are evident. Three potential scenarios, or a combination thereof, then exist. The first is that the technology has the ability to lay dormant until everyone has received the inoculation, at which point it can be activated remotely. Based on the current state of technology this is absolutely possible. Alternatively, the current injection does not actually contain this technology. In this scenario the purpose of this phase is simply to normalize universal global vaccine mandates with the intention that during a future pandemic or wave there will a brisk global acceptance of the technology-containing inoculation within a short timeframe. Finally, the current vaccinations are intended to test this technology on mass scale for future implementation. A combination of the above is most likely. 

Bill Gates has been very outspoken regarding his intention to vaccinate the entire planet

He has been integrally involved with every facet of the global response to the pandemic since well before it began.

There are multiple hints that indicate that Gates and others behind this agenda are planning on facing significant resistance to full compliance with the vaccine.

Ultimately, they are not planning on this being voluntary, nor are they planning that simply making it a law or a mandate will lead to compliance.

This will need to be strictly enforced under harsh penalty for their objectives to be met. Bill Gates has funded MIT to develop an application of what is known as Quantum dot technology to create a sort of tattoo which is placed simultaneously with a vaccine.

The Quantum Dot Imprinting Technology 

It is invisible to the naked eye but can be read by a cell phone camera and will contain the vaccine data along with any other personal health information[70-72]. Quantum dot imprinting is done using a bioluminescent enzyme called luciferase or luciferin, which is noted 60 times in the Moderna COVID vaccine patent US 10,898,57474-75. Although this enzyme has other uses, together these facts raise concern that those who have received this inoculation may have already received a Quantum dot imprint without being aware. In 2018 Gates filed a patent for an implantable sensor which tracks your “biometric data” and links this information to the generation of cryptocurrency. According to the patent, the device will “award cryptocurrency to the user whose body activity data is verified”. This application was filed around the time that event 201 was being drafted[76-77].

CryptoCurrency

Also, around this time Bill Gates teamed up with Google and Ripple, the company who developed the cryptocurrency XRP and who develops financial exchange technology, to create Mojaloop Foundation.

According to their website Mojaloop’s mission is to develop software to be used for digital payment systems to enable financial services between individual users, banks, government entities, merchants, mobile network operators, providers, and technology companies – connecting the underserved with the emerging digital economy.

They aspire for their system to get “people to use digital payments instead of cash” and state that there must be “full involvement of the private sector”[78-80]. Together these technologies point to a plan to control access to finances based on compliance with vaccination. 

*

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

Notes

1. smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/you-can-now-explore-cias-entire-collection-ufo-related-documents-180976756/ 

2. theblackvault.com/documentarchive/ufos-the-central-intelligence-agency-cia-collection/ 

3. theblackvault.com/documentarchive/u-s-navy-denies-request-to-release-key-ufo-documents/ 

4. Magrini N, Font M. Direct to consumer advertising of drugs in Europe. Bmj. 2007 Sep 13;335(7619):526-. 

5. cms.gov/medicare/covid-19/medicare-covid-19-vaccine-shot-payment 

6. cms.gov/medicare/medicare-part-b-drug-average-sales-price/covid-19-vaccines-and-monoclonal-antibodies 

7. Mandel A, Veetil V. The economic cost of COVID lockdowns: an out-of-equilibrium analysis. Economics of Disasters and Climate Change. 2020 Oct;4(3):431-51. 

8. Cutler DM, Summers LH. The COVID-19 pandemic and the $16 trillion virus. Jama. 2020 Oct 20;324(15):1495-6. 

9. Keogh-Brown MR, Jensen HT, Edmunds WJ, Smith RD. The impact of Covid-19, associated behaviours and policies on the UK economy: A computable general equilibrium model. SSM-population health. 2020 Dec 1;12:100651. 

10. journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000271627340600188 

11. libcom.org/history/kronstadt-rebellion-still-significant-90-years 

12. history.com/news/what-was-operation-paperclip 

13. npr.org/2019/09/09/758989641/the-cias-secret-quest-for-mind-control-torture-lsd-and-a-poisoner-in-chief 

14. intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/hearings/95mkultra.pdf 

15. Whalen, Andrew. December 7, 2018. “How the CIA used brain surgery to make six remote control dogs”. Newsweek. Retrieved December 12, 2018. 

16. O’Neill, Natalie. December 11, 2018. “CIA once secretly implanted mind-control devices in dogs’ brains”. New York Post. Retrieved December 12, 2018. 

17. Marzullo TC. The missing manuscript of Dr. Jose Delgado’s radio controlled bulls. Journal of undergraduate neuroscience education. 2017;15(2):R29. 

18. Hogan, John. September 25, 2017. “Tribute to Jose Delgado, legendary and slightly scary pioneer of mind control.” Scientific American. 

19. Phelan, Matthew. February 28, 2011. Seymour Hersh and the men who want him committed Archived March 2, 2011, at the Wayback Machine, Salon.com 

20. history.com/topics/us-government/history-of-mk-ultra 

21. bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/achre/final/chap3_4.html 

22. Whalen, Andrew. August 15, 2018. “More than 4,00 new MKUltra documents requested from CIA after crowdfunding campaign.” Newsweek. 

23. theblackvault.com/documentarchive/cia-mkultra-collection/ 

24. computerhistory.org/timeline/1965/#:~:text=Designed%20by%20engineer%20Gardner%20Hendrie,The%20basic%20computer%20cost%20%2428%2C500. 

25. Morra, James. May 9, 2019 “Intel to introduce chips based on 7-nanometers in 2021” Electronic Design 

26. Kan, Michael. March 24, 2021. “Intel’s 7nm PC chip to arrive in 2023 next to TSMC-made CPU”. PCMag 

27. energy.gov/science/doe-explainsgenomics 

28. Gutierrez B, Villalobos Bermúdez C, Corrales Ureña YR, Vargas Chacón S, Vega Baudrit J. Nanobots: development and future. 

29. Bhat AS. Nanobots: the future of medicine. International Journal of Management and Engineering Sciences. 2014;5(1):44-9. 

30. Shapiro K. This Is Your Brain on Nanobots. COMMENTARY. 2005 Dec 1;120(5):64-8. 

31. Chen J, Wang Y. Personalized dynamic transport of magnetic nanorobots inside the brain vasculature. Nanotechnology. 2020 Oct 2;31(49):495706. 

32. Buzhdygan TP, DeOre BJ, Baldwin-Leclair A, Bullock TA, McGary HM, Khan JA, Razmpour R, Hale JF, Galie PA, Potula R, Andrews AM. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alters barrier function in 2D static and 3D microfluidic in-vitro models of the human blood–brain barrier. Neurobiology of Disease. 2020 Dec 1;146:105131. 

33. DeOre BJ, Tran KA, Andrews AM, Ramirez SH, Galie PA. SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Disrupts Blood–Brain Barrier Integrity via RhoA Activation. Journal of Neuroimmune Pharmacology. 2021 Oct 23:1-7. 

34. Freitas Jr RA. Computational tasks in medical nanorobotics. Bio-Inspired and Nano-Scale Integrated Computing. 2009 Sep 22:391-428. 

35. Bhore PR. A survey on nanorobotics technology. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Technology. 2016 Sep;7(9):415-22. 

36. Hassanzadeh P, Atyabi F, Dinarvand R. Creation of nanorobots: Both state-of-the-science and state-of-the-art. Biomedical Reviews. 2017 Mar 20;27:19-26. 

37. Kim Y, Chae JK, Lee JH, Choi E, Lee YK, Song J. Free manipulation system for nanorobot cluster based on complicated multi-coil electromagnetic actuator. Scientific reports. 2021 Oct 5;11(1):1-9. 

38. jnanobiotechnology.biomedcentral.com/about 

39. nature.com/nnano/aims 

40. pubs.acs.org/page/ancac3/about.html 

41. worldscientific.com/page/nano/aims-scope 

42. sciencedirect.com/journal/nano-today 

43. scimagojr.com/journalrank.php?category=2509&page=2&total_size=79 

44. Endo M, Sugiyama H. DNA origami nanomachines. Molecules. 2018 Jul;23(7):1766. 

45. Amir Y, Ben-Ishay E, Levner D, Ittah S, Abu-Horowitz A, Bachelet I. Universal computing by DNA origami robots in a living animal. Nature nanotechnology. 2014 May;9(5):353-7. 

46. Diamandis, Peter H. October 12, 2015. “Ray Kurzweil’s widest prediction: nanobots will plug our brains into the web by the 2030’s” Singularity Hub 

47. Miles, Kathleen. October 1, 2015. “Ray Kurzweil: In the 2030’s, nanobots in our brains will make us ‘Godlike”. Noema. 

48. youtube.com/watch?v=6BsluRkxs78 

49. Smith, Aaron. April 17, 2014. “U.S. views of technology and the future. Science in the next 50 years.” Pew Research Center 

50. wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/vaers.html 

51. Kostoff RN, Calina D, Kanduc D, Briggs MB, Vlachoyiannopoulos P, Svistunov AA, Tsatsakis A. Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?. Toxicology Reports. 2021 Jan 1;8:1665-84. 

52. www.bitchute.com/video/4HlIyBmOEJeY/ 

53. Ausness RC. Role of Litigation in the Fight against Prescription Drug Abuse. W. Va. L. Rev.. 2013;116:1117. 

54. Haffajee RL, Mello MM. Drug companies’ liability for the opioid epidemic. New England Journal of Medicine. 2017 Dec 14;377(24):2301-5. 

55. Greene, Jenna. November 18,2021. “Wait what? FDA wants 55 years to process FOIA request over vaccine data.” Reuters. 

56. Dwilson Stephanie. August 26, 2021. “Comirnaty vs Pfizer vaccine: Pfizer comments on ‘legally distinct’ wording”. Heavy. 

57. Bursco, Bo John. December 7, 2021. “Federal Judge rejects Pfizer’s interchangeability and questions the existence of Comirnaty”. Lynwood Times. 

58. Nevradakis, Michael Ph.D. December 1, 2021. “Federal Judge rejects claim that Pfizer EUA and Comirnaty vaccines are ‘interchangeable’. Mandating EU vaccines is illegal!” Belizean Rights and Justice Movement. 

59. Stuart Glascock. June 2013. “The immense impact of Bill Gate Sr.” University of Washington Magazine. 

60. Gur-Arie, Rachel. November 22, 2014. “American Eugenics Society”. The embryo project encyclopedia. 

61. Nash, Ethan. April 10, 2020. “The Gates family, Eugenics and Covid-19”. Tott News. 

62. Harris, Paul. May 30, 2009. “They’re called the good club – and they want to save the world.” The Guardian. 

63. Edwin, Black. November 9, 2003. “Eugenics and the Nazis – the California connection. San Francisco Chronicle. 

64. Bill Gates. February 2010. “Innovating to zero!” Ted talk. 

65. Wolf, Jared. December 8, 2021. “3 reasons why overpopulation is a myth.” Sustainable Review 

66. Ruse, Austin. “The myth of overpopulation and folks who brought it to you.” United Conference of Catholic Bishops. 

67. Creeley, Briana. December 10 “The dangerous myth of overpopulation” The World Mind Issue 7.2 

68. “Figure 8: Population by Total Fertility (millions)” in World Population Prospects, the 2010 Revision. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2011). 

69. “Fertility rate, total (births per woman)”. The World Bank. World Bank Group. 

70. pop.org/simple/countries-with-below-replacement-fertility-levels-projected-2020-2025/ 

71. Tangermann, Victor. December 21, 2019. “An invisible quantum dot ‘tattoo’ could be used to ID vaccinated kids”. Science Alert 

72. Armstrong, Martin. October 21, 2020. “Bill Gates and MIT unveil quantum dots to mark children”. Armstrong Economics. 

73. December 19, 2019. “Quantum dots deliver vaccines and invisibly encode vaccination history in skin.” Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News 

74. US patent 10,898,574 

75. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/29/f1/5c/fda42b8d8dd5ca/US10898574.pdf 

76. US patent 2020/060606 

77. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/11/a4/fe/095b0d0459d9c4/WO2020060606A1.pdf 

78. Masnavi, Siamak. October 19, 2018. “Bill & Melinda Gates foundation partnering with ripple and coil on mojaloop”. Cryptoglobe. 

79. Brown, Collin. May 9, 2020. “Ripple, Bill Gates and Google join forces to provide access to financial services worldwide” Crypto New Flash

80. https://mojaloop.io

 

 

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.

***

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nikole Hannah-Jones, a New York Times journalist and Howard University journalism professor, is the architect of the revised and expanded book version of “A New Orgin Story: The 1619 Project, published in late 2021.

Hannah-Jones often discusses the influence of 19th and early 20th century journalist, women’s rights organizer, anti-lynching campaigner and public speaker, Ida B. Wells-Barnett (1862-1931), on her initial interests and pursuit of a career as a writer focused on themes related to racial justice in the United States.

Many of the issues which Wells-Barnett was engaged in during her lifetime remain as key elements of the repressive apparatus of state power. Therefore, two chapters in the latest iteration of the 1619 Project examines the questions of self-defense and punishment as they relate to the continuing plight of African Americans living under national oppression and institutional racism in the 21st century.

The notion of self-defense in most cases in the U.S. is far different when it relates to African Americans and whites. Within the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution, the Second Amendment has historically, and remains, a code word for the right to bear arms against perceived threats, real or imagined.

Whites, by and large, have been given carte blanche authority to carry and utilize arms to inflict punishment upon African Americans. During the period of enslavement from the 17th to the 19th centuries in North America, laws within both the British colonies and the later U.S. territory, provided a rationale for the use of maximum force against enslaved and free Africans who were considered a threat to the racist social order.

Severe beatings, sexual assault and outright murder were all allowed when the interests of white landowners and slave masters were thought to be under attack. There are numerous historical examples of African resistance to bondage in North America being routinely met by mass executions of purported suspects absence of any semblance of due process.

In fact, the infamous Dred Scott decision of 1857 articulated clearly the belief that African people were less than human beings. The laws which were enacted through the Constitution, said Supreme Court Justice Roger Taney, did not apply to people of African descent.

The Right to Self-Defense Did Not Apply to African People

Nikole Hannah-Jones 1619 Project (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

The chapter entitled “Self-Defense” in the 1619 Project was authored by Emory University historian Carol Anderson. In emphasizing the racial character of the legal system originating during the colonial and antebellum period, it delineates clear lines between the right to self-defense for whites as opposed to people of African descent.

Anderson notes that,

“Though it did not explicitly say so, the Second Amendment was motivated in large part by a need for the new federal government to assure white people in the South that they would be able to defend themselves against Black people. This was codified in a number of state laws in the antebellum period; these were supported by a series of court decisions, such as an 1843 case in Maryland that described free Black people as a ‘dangerous population’ that could not have access to guns even to defend their religious gatherings from attack. The 1846 Nunn decision by the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that a law curtailing the open carrying of guns for white people violated the Second Amendment’s ‘natural right of self-defense’ but kept in place an 1833 law banning free Black people from carrying any type of gun whatsoever.” (pp. 251-252)

After 1862 during the Civil War, when the Union was threatened with defeat by the armed forces of the Confederate State of America, African people were enlisted as soldiers into the military forces by then President Abraham Lincoln. Nearly 200,000 African men and some women participated in the fighting that defeated the Confederacy in 1865. Yet in the aftermath of the Civil War, efforts were undertaken to disarm the Black soldiers. In Memphis, a clash over disarming African American soldiers in 1866 led to the eruption of violent racist attacks against the Black communities which lasted for several days.

Although the freedom of African Americans was won in armed struggle and blood during the War, the social status of Black people remained an open question. Even Lincoln during previous years had advocated the forced immigration of Africans to other countries such as Haiti, an independent Black republic won in a twelve-year revolution against France, or in Liberia, where the American Colonization Society had aided in the relocation of emancipated Africans where an ostensibly independent state was formed in 1847.

After the assassination of Lincoln  in April 1865, just days following the surrender of the Confederate army, presidential successor Andrew Johnson of Tennessee granted amnesty to many of the Confederate leaders. These same former slaveowners and treasonous soldiers against the U.S., retook positions in state governments where they enacted racially restrictive laws known as the Black Codes.

The failure of Reconstruction after the Compromise of 1876, can at least in part, be attributed to the disarming of African American soldiers and others who served in the war to defeat the insurrection by the slavocracy. With withdrawal of federal troops from the South in 1877, the remaining decades of the 19th century were characterized by the reimposition of a system of exploitation and oppression as severe if not worse than the colonial and antebellum periods of enslavement.

Punishment and the Continuation of National Oppression

The chapter in the 1619 Project on punishment was written by Bryan Stevenson, a lawyer, professor and founder of the Equal Justice Initiative (EJI) which works to defend people wrongfully convicted of crimes which result in long prison terms and capital punishment.

Stevenson points out that,

“The Thirteenth Amendment is credited with ending slavery, but it stopped short of that. It made an exception for those convicted of crimes: ‘Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.’… The existing racial hierarchy was sustained by myths about Black criminality, which led many white people to insist that only the threat of extreme and brutal punishment could preserve order where Black people were concerned. After emancipation, Black people, once seen as less than fully human ‘slaves’, were now seen as less than fully human ‘criminals.’” (p. 279)

This same author emphasizes the growth in the prison population in the U.S. since the 1970s, when less than 350,000 people were incarcerated. Over the last forty years since the early 1980s, the number of people imprisoned has grown exponentially with 2.3 million locked up in prisons and jails. There is another 4.5 million under some form of judicial and law-enforcement supervision through probation, parole and other means.

Disproportionately those entrapped in the criminal justice system are African Americans and people of Latin American descent. Numerous federal and state laws require maximum sentencing for crimes which are often associated with poverty, drug addiction and mental illness. The death penalty is still utilized in some states where the victims of this cruel and unusual punishment are Black, Brown and impoverished.

Consequently, the system of law-enforcement and imprisonment serves the interest of the rulers within a racist capitalist society. Only the complete transformation of the U.S. system of governance can provide relief to entire groups of people seeking equal justice.

Ida B. Wells-Barnett: A Legacy Remembered

Born during the Civil War (1862) in Holly Springs, Mississippi as an enslaved person, Ida B. Wells-Barnett was educated as a teacher at what became known as Rust College and eventually settled in Memphis, Tennessee. She taught for several years in the Shelby County school system where she later became highly critical of the unequal distribution of resources solely based upon a racial hierarchy. Due to her outspoken advocacy for the rights of African Americans, she was removed as a teacher within the segregated school system.

Becoming a journalist and later publisher of the African American newspaper Free Speech in Memphis, Wells-Barnett exposed institutional racism and mob violence against Black people. A triple lynching of three African American men in 1892 and the subsequent response, her newspaper offices were destroyed in Memphis by a court-sanctioned mob forcing Wells-Barnett to relocate to Chicago, where she continued to work in the founding of the African American women’s club movement and initiating an international campaign against lynching.

Wells-Barnett intervened in numerous struggles including the fight for a national amendment guaranteeing the right to vote for women; the formation of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in 1909; and the effort to win justice for African American soldiers framed during World War I at Camp Logan in Texas for defending themselves against a white racist mob; among many other movements. (See this)

Consequently, it is not surprising that her influence continues well into the 21st century. The 1619 Project led by Hannah-Jones is a tribute to the actual legacy of Wells-Barnett. A renewed interest in her contributions remains very much in evidence in 2022.

The right to self-defense, freedom from unjust punishment and the total liberation from racial capitalism guides the mass mobilizations against the police and vigilante executions of African Americans and other oppressed peoples. Understanding this important history serves to provide the ideological and political underpinning for the building of organizations that can ensure the eventual end to the system of economic exploitation and institutional racial oppression.

*

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

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Ida B. Wells-Barnett Crusade for Justice (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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

With global attention increasingly focusing on the deepening crisis in Ukraine, the steady drumbeat towards war is becoming ever more audible with each passing day. If the world is to avoid falling into the abyss of another catastrophic global conflict, it is crucial for us to learn and understand the lessons of history. While there are undoubtedly many factors that have led the world to this critical point in time, one of the most important ones continues to be ignored by the mainstream media. Despite what we are being told, the corporate driving forces behind the current crisis are precisely the same ones that led to the previous two global wars.

It is no coincidence that the escalation of the crisis in Ukraine comes at a time when, just as the world begins to transition away from polluting fossil fuels, soaring energy prices are forcing millions of people to choose between putting food on the table and heating their homes.

Neither is it coincidental that the escalation towards war coincides with experimental mRNA- and DNA-based COVID-19 vaccines directing skyrocketing profits into the bulging pockets of the pharmaceutical industry.

It is already clear that a global transition away from fossil fuels will decimate the current business models of oil and gas producers. But what is less well understood is that the profits of the pharmaceutical industry are now equally at threat. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, drug company business models were on the brink of terminal decline. By 2018, researchers examining the industry were predicting that decreasing success rates in new drug development, rising clinical trial costs, and increasing competition from cheaper generic manufacturers could soon combine to result in pharmaceutical production no longer being a profitable business.

Couple this with a growing awareness of the potential risks and proven dangers of today’s experimental COVID-19 vaccines, and the fact that effective, safe, non-patentable approaches to controlling infectious diseases, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer with vitamins and other natural substances now exist, and it becomes crystal clear that a viable transition away from pharmaceutical-based medicine lies ahead. Just like their counterparts in the oil and gas industries, however, the business models of drug companies would be decimated by such a development. This possibility makes the crisis in Ukraine all the more dangerous, as history shows us that oil and drug companies have in the past had close links to the perpetration of global wars.

The lessons of history

The parallels between the current crisis and the events that led to the two previous world wars go far beyond their initiation on European soil. Official documents from the 1947-1948 Nuremberg Trial against the infamous IG Farben cartel prove that oil and drug companies were the chief economic driving force behind World War Two.

Costing the lives of more than 60 million people, the fact is that World War Two was planned and principally financed by IG Farben, a corporate cartel consisting of the German companies Bayer, BASF, Hoechst, and others. Their shared ambition was to achieve control of the global oil and drug markets and eliminate, by force, any competition.

A further historical parallel can be seen in the criminal medical experiments that were forced on the innocent inmates of concentration camps during World War Two. These experiments involved the use of dangerous vaccines and drugs produced by Bayer, Hoechst, and other IG Farben companies. Some of the chemicals used in these deadly tests later went on to earn their manufacturers billions of dollars through becoming the first generation of so-called ‘chemotherapy’ drugs. The mandatory enforcing of experimental COVID-19 vaccines on innocent people today thus reflects a chilling history that the world has seemingly yet to learn the lessons of.

IG Farben companies also played key roles in the perpetration of World War One. The patent owner for the mustard gas and other chemical warfare agents used in this war was Bayer, for example. Clearly then, the profiting of large corporations from the death and destruction of war has a history that goes back much further in time than most people currently realize.

The design of Europe today has its origins in the two world wars

The official goal of Germany’s corporate and political stakeholders in World War One was known as the ‘September Program’ and was published in September 1914, only a few weeks after the initial outbreak of war. The then German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg summarized it as follows:

“Our goal is to enforce a CENTRAL EUROPEAN ECONOMIC UNION with joint custom regulations that includes France, Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Austria-Hungary, Poland, and potentially Italy, Sweden and Norway.

This Union – under German leadership – has to stabilize the economic dominance of Germany over Central Europe.”

Although Germany went on to be defeated, the plan wasn’t shelved. Instead, a mere two decades later, it became the central economic goal of World War Two. Proof of this came during the aforementioned 1947-1948 Nuremberg Trial against the IG Farben cartel. Discussing the charges against Fritz ter Meer, one of IG Farben’s senior directors, his legal counsel admitted that the concept of a ‘Total European Economic Area’ had shaped his client’s war aims.

Further evidence of the real economic and political goals of World War Two can be found in a 1941 book authored by Arno Sölter, head of the Nazi ‘Central Research Institute for National Economic Order and Greater Sphere Economy’ in Dresden, Germany. Sölter’s institute was one of the official economic planning offices for the Nazi/IG Farben coalition. Entitled ‘The Greater Sphere Cartel – An Instrument of Industrial Market Order in a New Europe’, his book provides the blueprint for what would later become the structure of the European Union (EU). Sölter specifically describes concepts such as the ‘European Commission – the unelected executive body of Europe – and the system of so-called ‘Directives’ through which the continent’s laws are enforced.

Subsequent to World War Two, the key architects of what was to become the EU were recruited from among the same technocrats who had designed the plans for a post-war Europe under the control of Nazi Germany. One of the most notable of these was Walter Hallstein, a lawyer who had represented the Nazi government in official state negotiations. Despite having publicly supported the Nuremberg Race Laws, which excluded German Jews from Reich citizenship and prohibited them from marrying, or even having sexual relations, with persons of German or related blood, Hallstein was appointed as founding president of the European Commission in 1958.

History repeating itself

Once one understands the hidden history upon which the EU has been built, the wider dangers of the crisis in Ukraine are immediately apparent. Today, just as in the past, the expansion of global markets for its largest multinational corporations remains central to the EU’s goals. It is therefore no coincidence that the loudest voices in the push towards war come from Germany and France, with support from the United States and the United Kingdom. Together, these are four of the richest and most powerful pharmaceutical exporting countries.

No small wonder then that European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen responded to the discovery of the Omicron variant by saying it was time to consider making vaccination against COVID-19 mandatory in Europe. Far from being a matter of protecting European citizens, her statement was far more about protecting the future of the pharmaceutical industry and expanding its profits. Anyone who doubts this need simply ask themselves why European plans for vaccine passports were already in place 20 months prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Just as the EU’s architects did in the past, their successors today are playing a long game. As much as anything else, therefore, preventing war today means preventing history from repeating itself.

*

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

This article was originally published on Dr. Rath Health Foundation.

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. Paul’s background was in the music industry, where he worked as a keyboard player and programmer with artists including Paul McCartney, Bryan Ferry, Bill Withers, the Verve, Texas, and Primal Scream. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

Featured image is from DRHF

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Preventing a Third World War: The Corporate Driving Forces Behind the Crisis in Ukraine Are the Same Ones that Led to World Wars I and II
  • Tags: ,

According to the World Economic Forum (WEF), “There is an urgent need for global stakeholders to cooperate in simultaneously managing the direct consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. To improve the state of the world, the World Economic Forum is starting The Great Reset initiative.”

There is no gainsaying that the COVID-19 pandemic has drastically and massively disrupted the social, political and economic order. But take note, the WEF is already leading the pack in addressing the dire consequences of the “public health emergency” of which they are the cause. In fact, the WEF has predicted that in 2030, “you’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.”

What is this so-called The Great Reset initiative? And why should we be worried?

Read our selection below, send to your email list/s and share on social media.

***

Colossal Financial Pyramid: BlackRock and the WEF “Great Reset”

By F. William Engdahl, February 07, 2022

A virtually unregulated investment firm today exercises more political and financial influence than the Federal Reserve and most governments on this planet. The firm, BlackRock Inc., the world’s largest asset manager, invests a staggering $9 trillion in client funds worldwide, a sum more than double the annual GDP of the Federal Republic of Germany.

What Will the World Look Like in 2032? Reversing the COVID Narrative, Confronting “The Great Reset”, Restoring Democracy

By Peter Koenig, February 03, 2022

It is unlikely that such depopulation goals would be reached. But the fact that they are put up as targets means that the effort to reach the plan is relentless, unless we the People through an international legal movement such as that put forth by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich brings the worst perpetrators and their puppets to justice – in a case that may be called Nuremberg 2.0.

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

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 10, 2022

Under the so-called “New Normal” Great Reset put forth by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the creditors (including the   billionaires) are intent upon buying out important sectors of the real economy as well as taking over bankrupt entities.

“The Great Reset” Is Here: Follow the Money. “Insane Lockdown” of the Global Economy, “The Green Agenda”

By F. William Engdahl, November 16, 2021

The top-down reorganization of the world economy by a cabal of technocratic corporativists, led by the group around the Davos World Economic Forum– the so-called Great Reset or UN Agenda 2030– is no future proposal. It is well into actualization as the world remains in insane lockdown for a virus. 

Depopulation and the mRNA Vaccine

By Peter Koenig, June 15, 2021

The World Food Program – WFP estimated total population suffering from acute famine at more than a quarter of a billion (265 million) by end 2020, about half of them are covid-related – and steadily raising. “These new numbers show the scale of the catastrophe we are facing,’ says the WFP.

Klaus Schwab’s WEF “School for Covid Dictators”, a Plan for the “Great Reset”

By Michael Lord, February 05, 2022

Economist Ernst Wolff believes that a hidden alliance of political and corporate leaders is exploiting the pandemic with the aim of crashing national economies and introducing a global digital currency.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Global Research Weekender: What Is WEF’s “The Great Reset” and Why Should We be Worried?

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.

.

***

“The divide is not the truckers didn’t have an accurate common sense in stating that these mandates must fall.

It’s not just Hodkinson and myself as academic scientists and clinicians who are saying that these mandates must fall and have no scientific basis. We have thousands of scientists but they are afraid! And the time has come that you must become brave and stand up to the Colleges and stand up to the government and say ENOUGH!”

– Dr Paul Alexander (February 11, 2022) [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Freedom Convoy made up of truckers and their allies and supporters are as of Saturday February 12th into their sixteenth day in the city of Ottawa. This action which has inspired similar actions across Canada and around the world is leading the charge in its call to end vaccine mandates and other COVID restrictions choking our collective breath since the first lockdown was introduced almost 2 years ago.

But critical questions have begun to surface as the leading convoy in Ottawa is being struck by suspect moves on the part of the federal, provincial, and municipal governments.

Last weekend, for example, the city of Ottawa declared a state of emergency. This allows the government to  reflect on “the serious danger and threat to the safety and security of residents posed by the ongoing demonstrations and highlights the need for support from other jurisdictions and levels of government.” Currently supporters bringing gasoline and other material to the truckers can be placed under arrest.

Now, the government of Ontario has similarly declared a state of emergency for the entire province. Consequently, the Ottawa police force will increase “boots on the ground” as the numbers of protesters rises on the weekend AND under the state of emergency see the power of the forces expanded. Stiffer fines and penalties are being invoked for the protesters’ non-compliance, with a maximum penalty of $100,000 and a year in prison.

The Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has condemned the protest as “illegal” and that “everything” short of military intervention is on the table.

And the Mainstream or “legacy” media in the country are certainly playing the role of exaggerating the crimes of the demonstrators as noisy, violent, and racist right wing thugs, thereby helping the political leaders with their character assassination of the truckers from across Canada.

The major organizers seem to have indicated some concern that these measures could enable a horrendous and epic crackdown in the days ahead. The protesters and the lawyers who represent them claim the protest is peaceful and therefore legal under our charter. Once another emergency situation is invoked it could set the stage for a number of new governmental measures to suppress dissent.

Remember the January 6th riot?

On this week’s Global Research News Hour, we will explore further the efforts by the trucking brigade to prevail in their determination to be free of the COVID measures which have caused so much damage to a number of people across the country and around the world.

In our first interview, Allison Pejovic joins us to tell us about the laws defending the organizers’ right to their protest and the possible injustice on the part of governmental authorities to upset the demonstration.

Then we hear from Tom Marazzio, a lead organizer of Freedom Convoy, clarifying the role of his group and the hazards ahead. Finally, we hear from Dr Roger Hodkinson and Dr Paul Alexander about the failed science of the standard approach to treating COVID-19 and about their support for the truckers.

Allison Pejovic is a barrister and solicitor with Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms which is providing services and representation for the lead organizers of the Freedom Convoy.

Tom Marrazio is an organizer and spokesperson for the Freedom Convoy.

Dr Roger Hodkinson is a retired pathologist and general practitioner. He was also an assistant professor at the University of Alberta and the CEO of the large commercial laboratory called MedMalDoctors.

Dr Paul Alexander is a COVID-19 Consultant Researcher in Evidence-Based Medicine (EMB), research methodology, and clinical epidemiology. He has also informally provided support to some members of the US Congress.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 343)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

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

Other stations airing the show:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

  1. https://rumble.com/vuoqf2-dr.-paul-e.-alexander-castigates-the-canadian-government-for-lying-to-the-p.html
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Will the Canadian State Cancel the Right of Protest? Freedom Convoy No More?

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.

***

But the influx of many recent current events and significant news breaking developments reflecting positive changes unfolding on this earth is the primary focus of much of this presentation.

After all, at least 1,011 scientific studies have now proven beyond any questionable doubt that the Covid-19 non-vaccines are in fact lethal.

That old “follow the science” line that the enemy keeps using ad nauseam just doesn’t wash any more.  The deceivers are realizing that regardless of how many times they repeat their lies to those no longer buying it, it will only lead to their own downfall sooner than later. Clearly the despots’ narrative is quickly falling apart, smashed to smithereens by real science.

Along similar lines, when the Microbiology and Immunology Department head at the prestigious Tel Aviv University writes an open letter to the Israeli Health Ministry caustically calling out its gross failures that have virtually doomed one of the world’s most vaxxed nations, this glaring truth can simply no longer be ignored or denied.

A plethora of egregious scientific findings are pouring out recently to unequivocally demonstrate the pure evil of Big Pharma.

Pregnant mothers that accepted Pfizer’s experimental bioweapon during its initial trial phase that after only 108 days the FDA approved for experimental authorization use (EAU) only, according to its available database, Pfizer killed every single tracked unborn baby.

Despite such wholesale mass slaughter, after only three and a half months, the FDA still granted Pfizer the greenlight to continue massacring more babies at large after granting EAU status, and then on top of that, has the criminal audacity to refuse releasing its documentation for the next 55 years. In the first batch of released documents after the FDA was sued and forced to publicly report its data used prior to granting EAU, 28 babies died out of all 27 reported pregnancies included within the released dataset, with another 243 cases of unknown outcomes undisclosed among recently released documents.

In another table within the published data, the 28 fetal deaths resulted from 32 pregnancies with known outcomes, with the overwhelming majority resulting in spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) that to any sane person constitutes coldblooded murder.

Brave whistleblowing nurse of 17 years, Collette Martin spoke at a Louisiana Health and Welfare hearing last month:

As of now, we have more children that died from the COVID vaccine than COVID itself. And then the Health Department to come out and say the new variant has all the side effects of the vaccine reactions we’re currently seeing now. It’s maddening, and I don’t understand why more people don’t see it. I think they do, but they fear speaking out and, even worse, being fired.

Let’s face it, all the guilty parties at both the drug companies and their FDA whores, including medical staff knowing they’re wantonly violating their oath to do no harm, injecting poisons that are killing and injuring millions of people, all of these criminally bad actors need to be held accountable at their Nuremberg 2 trials that must be prosecuted far sooner than the 55 years that the murderers sought and plotted with Biden’s Justice Department in a vain attempt for self-protection, so they could all safely go to their graves without punishment, not unlike century long blackouts decreed in the UK to protect all its British VIP pedophiles.

Perhaps with this writing on the wall now, and victims’ fresh bloodstains lingering on so many of today’s breaking stories evading Tech and Media’s complicit censorship, the tide might be finally turning.

The FDA equivalent of the European Union, the EU Medical Regulators last week, warned of potentially serious health risks from taking booster shots every few months, in effect, “tiring out the immune system through its repetitive use.” That appears to be a lame, feeble, half-ass attempt later to be used to maintain a slightest degree of plausible deniability acknowledging the cold hard fact that bioweapons’ poisonous spike proteins responsible for Antibody Dependency Enhancement (ADE) are ultimately the common killer traveling to various bodily organs and instructing autoimmune cells to turn against themselves.

Two months ago even the MSM standard The Atlantic published a piece called “The Pandemic Is Ending with a  Whimper,” and a month ago experts were optimistically predicting the end of the Coronavirus pandemic, citing the latest spreading Omicron variant to be more infectious yet far less aggressive and lethal. Professors and physicians at Hebrew University of Jerusalem also warned against the need for boosters since true herd immunity appears eminent. A recent January 17th article from middle of the road medium.com, entitled “The Pandemic Is Ending – According to Experts,” logically reasons:

Most experts believe SARS-CoV-2 will become endemic. As the disease moves from Pandemic to endemic, the health impacts will be less severe, and we as a society will be better able to manage the risks associated with COVID-19.

All these encouraging signs from both the scientific community as well as limited hangouts within mainstream media as of late have been accompanied by months and months of ferociously defiant pushback displayed worldwide by an angry public growing angrier, sending the very loud and clear message to their governments to back the f_ off, refusing to play their fictitious, yet devastatingly false high stakes game of continued enforced mandates, lockdowns and prohibitive passports any longer. Yet in so many Western nations, the elitist pandemic engineers are insisting on full bore restriction leading to even more drastic, draconian tyranny.

A turning point milestone was likely reached when the world’s #1 podcaster in the highly informed Joe Rogan at the end of December interviewed Dr. Robert Malone, a leading COVID vaccine critic credited as the mRNA inventor. As soon as it immediately went viral, the nail in the cabal coffin was hammered shut in the court of prevailing public opinion. Less disputed, essential facts are now in, and the cabal concedes that after nearly two years of a fake pandemic and a year of no longer hidden mass deaths and severe injury, the increasingly exasperated, rebellious masses are no longer so easily frightened, swayed nor controlled. They’ve drawn their line in the sand and are finally ready to fight for humanity’s survival.

Moreover, certain despotic nations like the United Kingdom are actually following the current trend and formally ending the pandemic.

While as globalist Prime Minister the bumbling Boris Johnson faces increasing calls for his resignation, this week his national government abruptly stopped its policy enforcing vaccine passports as well as mask mandates. Several explanations have been circulating beyond Johnson’s excuse that less COVID cases are occurring. The one that Boris won’t acknowledge is his waning popularity after reports emerged that all the while when he was issuing repeated lockdown restrictions including during recent yearend holidays for all Britons, rumors continue swirling of his own ruckus parties throughout the pandemic, hypocritically celebrating inside his plush 10 Downing Street address. The “do as I say, not as I do” meme characterizing virtually all policymakers everywhere always makes certain to publicly warn that living with the Coronavirus is here to stay, and that includes UK’s healthcare workers’ vaccination mandate despite 160,000 petition signatures. Boris digs his own grave.

The elephant in the room reason why Boris Johnson is suddenly calling off his Gestapo guard dogs only a month after initiating yet another of his many lockdowns is the Metropolitan Police of London have agreed to take on a criminal case investigating a legal complaint filed on December 20, 2021.

Not only is Britain’s largest police force now actively involved in the probe, but the Hammersmith Police alongside the International Criminal Court at the Hague in the Netherlands are also working conjointly together in what’s being called the world’s largest international crime investigation ever.

Under the formal banner of the Hammersmith CID (Criminal Investigation Division) Police Station, Case Number 6029679/21, this landmark criminal case was lodged in conjunction with the International Criminal Court (ICC Case Number OTP-CR-473/21).

The head of the current UK police probe into all COVID related crimes is Met Superintendent Jon Simpson, former assistant to Metro Police Chief Cressida Dick. Exactly two weeks prior to the UK criminal complaint, a 46-page document was launched in the ICC, charging the usual suspects Bill Gates, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the onetime WHO veterinarian Dr. Peter Daszak, chiefly responsible as Fauci’s middleman promoting the gain-of-function SARS-CoV-2 baton to Wuhan’s “bat woman” Dr. Shi Zhengli, compliments of $600,000 US taxpaid dollars’ worth of treason to America’s foremost adversary.

Though these monumental legal cases in both the Hague and UK have been confirmed legitimate, neither has been publicized whatsoever by the corporate lamestream press for the very same reason that MSM has been the principal truth-suppressing co-conspirator throughout the pandemic. These two enormously important lawsuits filed a month ago, in UK spearheaded by Dr. Sam White, MD, retired constable Mark Sexton and attorneys Philip Hyland and Lois Bayliss, is receiving further support from such international notables as Robert Kennedy Jr (JFK nephew and bestselling author of The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health), German-American lawyer Dr Reiner Fuellmich and former Pfizer Vice President Dr Michael Yeadon, along with dozens of other professional experts and authorities. The crimes against humanity involve charges of malfeasance and misconduct in public office, gross negligence, manslaughter, corporate manslaughter, murder and conspiracy to commit murder and genocide. For our future, these two cases filed on behalf of humanity, kept under such close Deep State wraps by the criminals, are both huge.

Since July 2021 attorney Reiner Fuellmich has headed the Corona Investigative Committee, interviewing numerous scientists, doctors, journalists and respected foremost experts on the entire Corona fiasco. Among those luminaries submitting evidence for premeditated mass murder is respected virologist and former Pfizer insider Dr. Michael Yeadon.

Reiner Fuellmich and his committee have carefully reviewed all available evidence to conclusively assert that beyond question the Covid-19 “vaccines” are designed to kill with clear malicious infliction of harm for the purposes of depopulating the planet. With experts like Dr Yeadon analyzing the data, according to Reiner, it has been determined that Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson as the most lethal kill shot producers have used certain specific batches with traceable lot numbers to attain the highest mortality rates amongst the global population, and that these manufacturers are collectively experimenting and actively, sequentially coordinating with each other in order to attain the optimal dosage allegedly with clear intent to exterminate the most people.

During a recent interview, Reiner stated he expects the court proceedings of a grand jury investigation to begin by the end of January 2022, when his team will start presenting evidence to seek criminal indictments against four co-defendants – Bill Gates, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the WHO’s Dr. Tedros Adhanom and German virologist Dr. Christian Drosten, maker of the false positive PCR test. Drosten allegedly pre-fenagled heads of WHO and Germany, Chancellor Andrea Merkel, to begin promoting PCR misdiagnoses in January 2020 as videos went viral showing Chinese dropping dead like flies in the streets of Wuhan.

Incidentally, the only WHO Director-General not a medical doctor, Tedros Adhanom is currently accused of violating multiple UN codes of conduct, running roughshod over the UN policy of neutrality. The WHO chief has a blatant history of interfering in the internal affairs of his own country Ethiopia, pulling rank and favoring cronyism, specifically the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), willfully undermining both his nation’s government as well as on the ground UN officials in its capital Addis Ababa.

When you run in the rarified circles of globalist elites like Bill Gates and Angela Merkel, obviously Tedros quickly grew a swollen fathead, full of self-inflated, hot air importance, openly operating to destabilize his own African nation. The TPLF dictatorship ruthlessly ruled Ethiopia from 1991 to 2018, with Tedros rising in its ranks as Health Minister to third man in charge as Foreign Minister, until taking over the Gates controlled WHO job in 2017. A year later in 2018, TPLF was overthrown, and the treasonous technocrat’s been opposing Ethiopia’s democratically elected government ever since. As the Gates go-between to China, Fauci, the Clinton Foundation and genocide, some allege that Tedros is a terrorist. Like his cronies violating the Nuremberg Code, he also needs to be prosecuted for his crimes against humanity.

Attorney Reiner Fuellmich believes that he and his legal team of 50 other lawyers have already gathered and filed enough compelling evidence at the Hague to sufficiently prove that in a Nuremberg-like court of law, pharmaceutical corporations, have globally conspired with major national governments, public health organizations, Big Media and Big Tech.

Proving premeditated criminal intent in using a vaccine bioweapon to commit acts of domestic bioterrorism against a preyed upon, frightened global masses should award guilty verdicts and punitive damages.

A third lawsuit in India filed in late July 2021 by attorney Dipali Ojha, an expert in the Nuremberg Trials and Reiner Fuellmich colleague in both the UK and Hague cases as well, is charging the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others with genocide.

This isn’t the first time Bill Gates has been indicted in India. In 2014, the Indian Supreme Court called for his arrest for illegally vaccinating tribal girls without parental consent in addition to jabbing thousands of children, resulting in deaths and permanent injury dating back to more than a dozen years ago. Damage to the Third World populations in Asia, Africa and South America, and now world, clearly shows a sinister, calculated passionate glee for eugenics killing.

As the cabal Corona duo designated by their puppet masters to go down with the viral sinking ship, Gates’ fellow mass killer Fauci is under attack on a near daily basis now.

Aside from Fauci’s crucial role during the chief White House medical advisor’s 2021 confrontative encounters in Senate hearings with Rand Paul, Fauci repeatedly committed perjury under oath, lying about having nothing to do with either gain-of-function research nor covertly handing more than a half million of taxpayer bucks over to America’s #1 enemy Red China to treasonously create today’s bioweapon.

As the nation’s highest paid federal employee, Anthony Fauci raked in $434,312 during his first big bonanza pandemic year of 2020, the same year he delivered on his crystal ball promise made just weeks after Trump’s inauguration that a pandemic would suspiciously show up before the end of his first term in office. Along with his wife Christine Grady, the National Institutes of Health chief of bioethics and human subjects research, under increasing scrutiny, Fauci and wife were forced to respond to frequent freedom of information orders disclosing his financial records, and their hefty $10.4 million investment portfolio.

Finally, look at the thousands upon thousands of noncompliant citizens taking to the streets all over the planet to resist humankind’s draconian slide into nightmarish control, enslavement and suffocating darkness. One retired Aussie Special Forces Lieutenant Colonel Riccardo Bosi leading the Australia One party is openly challenging his brutal authoritarian police state.

The dominos in the cabal’s house of cards are freefalling.

With the writing on the wall, Britain’s island neighbor Ireland just opted to drop nearly all of its COVID restrictions. Last month’s trend to turn the unvaccinated into locked up criminals for not submitting to the jab in places like Austria as of February 1st was turned back. Widespread passport policies that were being strictly enforced in most European countries, along with Australia, New Zealand and Canada, New York and West Coast states, are ending.

Systematically locking the unvaccinated up on house arrest lockdown, prohibiting them from access to grocery stores, public buildings and venues is no longer being enforced. Police in Spain and France have joined the people in the streets protesters, unwilling to enforce the medical tyranny any longer. That trend is spreading. Despite five national leaders suspiciously dying soon after declaring their refusal to play the global pandemic game, recently Ghana’s red-pilled President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo publicly exposed the Rockefeller Foundation’s Lockstep pandemic playbook as well as key genocidal players Bill Gates and Dr Fauci.

Many brave and honest doctors, scientists and nurses around the world, despite shameful, criminally complicit censorship and harassment, heroically persisted in warning us of the inherent lethal dangers of the Big Pharma kill shots. And now because enough people heard and heed their dire message, the crime cabal’s equally persistent false narrative is rapidly falling apart, no longer believed. And now, clearly on the wrong side of history, the pharmaceutical corporations, the governments and their so-called public health experts like Fauci, the global healthcare system, Big Media and Big Tech, have all lost their credibility, and they will all have to account for their worldwide murderous rampage at Nuremberg 2 trials set to begin shortly.

*

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

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate, former Army officer and author of “Don’t Let the Bastards Getcha Down,” exposing a faulty US military leadership system based on ticket punching up the seniority ladder, invariably weeding out the best and brightest, leaving mediocrity and order followers rising to the top as politician-bureaucrat generals designated to lose every modern US war by elite design. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In Los Angeles he found himself battling the largest county child protective services in the nation within America’s thoroughly broken and corrupt child welfare system.

The experience in both the military and child welfare system prepared him well as a researcher and independent journalist, exposing the evils of Big Pharma and how the Rockefeller controlled medical and psychiatric system inflict more harm than good, case in point the current diabolically lethal pandemic hoax and genocide. As an independent journalist for the last 8 years, Joachim has written hundreds of articles for many news sites, particularly Global Research and lewrockwell.com. As a published author of a 5-book volume series entitled Pedophilia& Empire: Satan, Sodomy & the Deep State, Joachim’s books and chapters are Amazon bestsellers in child advocacy and human rights categories. His A-Z sourcebook series fully documents and exposes the global pedophilia scourge and remains available for free at the late Robert David Steele’s https://pedoempire.org. Joachim’s empire exposed blogsite was recently deplatformed.

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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Introduction

The COVID narrative is falling apart,[i] and the great post-pandemic cover-up has begun.

On Saturday January 22, 2022, Canada’s Globe and Mail ran a retrospective on the pandemic by well-known psychiatrist and author, Dr. Norman Doidge – entitled “Vaccines are a tool, not a silver bullet.”[ii] 

The next day the article was tweeted to me:

Curious, I read over what turned out to be a 7,113-word limited hangout[iii] justifying the Covid-19 response – and shared Mr. Farquharson’s anger about what had not been addressed.

This may be the first serious media attempt to gloss over mounting evidence that the world was made to endure the prolonged Covid-19 disaster unnecessarily.

Why did the Globe and Mail publish a near book-length rationale[iv] for a two-year horror show in which the media and Big Tech systematically suppressed all expert medical divergence from the official public health narrative?

Coincidentally, the Globe article appeared the same day, January 22, as a two-hour podcast entitled “Collapse of the Public Health Narrative, & the Gathering Storm,” featuring two of the organizers of the Worldwide Freedom March that was to be held the next day in Washington DC.

These organizers, Dr. Bret Weinstein and Dr. Chris Martenson, are two very concerned evolutionary biologists.

Scheduled to speak at the Washington rally were a group of practising, highly successful early treatment doctors – including Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Paul Marik, and Dr. Peter McCullough, along with pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole and vaccinologist Dr. Robert W. Malone.

Dr. Malone, who holds some of the earliest patents for mRNA technology, had earlier become known to Americans during a drug safety interview with Dr. Weinstein and philanthropist Steve Kirsch in a June 2021 podcast that went viral.[v]

Many Malone interviews followed, and on the last day of 2021 he was heard by 50 million people in a 3-hour interview with Joe Rogan, who is more popular than CNN.

They discussed one of the most mysterious aspects of the official narrative:  why is a cheap, safe, and plentiful early treatment drug like ivermectin, listed by the WHO as an essential medicine, so maligned as “horse paste?” And why, given its strong evidence of efficacy with Covid,[vi] are doctors prevented from prescribing it?

This growing controversy was threatening to spill over into the mainstream, which needed a famous psychiatrist to cool things down before the Freedom March and the truck convoys began.

We will turn first to the Globe’s marathon op-ed, and then to its coincident same-day antithesis, the Weinstein-Martenson podcast.

*

Part I:  The Globe

The Globe reports that in April 2020 (early in the pandemic), following WHO financier Bill Gates’ emphatic statement that “the only thing that really lets us go back completely to normal and feel good…is to create a vaccine,”

“we put our faith in the vaccines, while other approaches – such as drugs for early treatment, or a role for our natural immunity, or lowering our personal risk factors, for instance – got comparatively less attention.”

Indeed these “other approaches” received virtually no attention. Successful early treatments were entirely suppressed during the eight months the world waited for rushed clinical trials that would usher in the experimental mRNA vaccines by late December 2020.

“Our personal risk factors”, such as obesity and Vitamin D deficiency, which between them were present in at least 78% of US hospitalizations,[vii] were never mentioned by NIH’s Dr. Fauci or the media.

The vaccines were the only thing that could help us. All we could do was lock down and maintain six feet while we endured the long lonely months of 2020. If we got sick, we were to wait until we couldn’t breathe, then go to emergency.

The Globe continues:

So why hasn’t treatment focused more on repurposed drugs?

First, because the master narrative, once it took hold, directed our attention away from this possibility. Second, in North America, the first repurposed drug that came to public attention was hydroxychloroquine. When it was endorsed by then-president Donald Trump it became highly politicized. People’s opinions about it often had more to do with their political affiliation than whether they had read any of the (now) 303 studies. Third, agencies that regulate drugs, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada, mandate that any drug they evaluate have a sponsor, usually a drug company agreeing to assume liabilities for the drug. It’s an extremely expensive process. If an old, cheap generic drug shows promise for repurposing, it still needs a sponsor to get approved for that. But drug companies have no financial incentive to do so. So usually there are no sponsors, and the drugs languish.

Yes, there was indeed a master narrative, managed and policed by the Trusted News Initiative’s[viii] early warning system and an army of vigilante fact-checkers.

But in other respects, the Globe claims in the paragraph above depart from well-known facts:

  1. Public political affiliations have little to do with the WHO/FDA/CDC drug approval process;
  2. The FDA regulators had long approved hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and ivermectin (IVM), both of which have been on the WHO list of essential medicines for decades. Neither needed a sponsor.
  3. There was never any need to approve physician off-label prescriptions for Covid. Instead, the FDA recommended against prescribing of hydroxychloroquine to outpatients in June, 2020,[ix]causing untold thousands of deaths while the world awaited the experimental injections.
  4. The drugs did not languish. They were actively suppressed by state pharmacy boards, medical regulating bodies, medical journal editors, leading public health agencies, the media, and Big Tech.[x]

The Globe’s psychiatrist then devoted 5,000 words to the psychological state of being at war with the virus – the need to fight nature with a weaponized vaccine – rather than allowing natural processes, such as inborn immunity – to heal the 99% of infected under-70-year-olds whose immune systems had worked perfectly well.

Towards the end of the piece, from his January 2022 perspective, Dr. Doidge concludes:

“What is called for is not more scapegoating and coercion, but healing, and more early treatment for both groups, now that we have it…”

…as if thousands of doctors had not been shut down, losing their licenses, and watching patients die unnecessarily for two years for want of hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin. Professor Paul Marik MD was brought to tears by his frustration during January 2022 testimony.[xi]

Next, the Globe acknowledges the ridicule – without identifying the deadly mainstream hecklers[xii] – against the Great Barrington Declaration’s traditional public health wisdom, written by top epidemiologists, to provide focused protection for the vulnerable:

More and more officials are saying openly what the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration[xiii] (the ridiculed view of 60,000 public health scientists and physician signatories) said some time ago: Our goal is not eradication of the virus, or a one-size-fits-all policy, but lessening of deaths in the vulnerable through focused protection, and focused vaccination. The immunity we have will be a mix of vaccine immunity and natural immunity, depending on the person.”

 And ending with a psychiatrist’s acquittal:

It’s been a blow to our Baconian narcissism to be upended by nature these past two years. That thin-skinned Baconian within seems almost offended to admit that protection has come not only from scientific advances, but from natural immunity. Others might see this as a reassuring reminder that natural processes are not always and only the enemy. We shall find out, as we observe the unvaccinated, to what extent natural immunity, accumulating in waves of infection over time, does or does not protect, for the current or future variants.

Till then, let’s give infallibility the day off.[xiv]

So the whole two-year misery was due to narcissistic fallibility. No wonder my Twitter friend was upset.

Urgent, Important Issues the Globe did not Address

  1. Unprecedented changes in public health policy: The common cold is usually either a coronavirus or a rhinovirus, and often moves to the lungs as pneumonia. According to the World Health Organization, this particular SARS-2 coronavirus kills only 0.23% of those infected.[xv]

However, coronavirus lockdowns are unprecedented. Passports are unheard of. And the words “pandemic,” “vaccine,” and “herd immunity” were redefined to support this global Covid-19 coronavirus policy.[xvi] These aberrations must be reversed to regain standard public health practise.

  1. The Globe’s absolution does not address the origin of the virus: the US-sponsored gain-of-function research and resulting Wuhan laboratory leak that was confirmed by a startling FOIA document from the US military a week before its article was published.[xvii] Nor does the Globe mention Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the NIAID research-sponsoring agency, located within the US National Institutes of Health.
  2. Nor does the Globe mention the unprecedented numbers of mRNA injection injuries and deaths that have been posted to the US, UK, and EU vaccine adverse reactions databases[xviii] – or the number of world class athletes who have collapsed or died following injection.[xix]

There are so many omissions and inaccuracies in this easy comfortable acquittal of public health policy that one wonders what is being hidden – was it simply mismanagement, or incompetence, or something more sinister?

One thing is certain:  if we hadn’t been saved from the two-year furor by the relatively gentle omicron variant, which as of January 22, 2022, constituted 99.9% of the circulating strain,[xx] the boosters chasing the variants and the accompanying repressive mandates may have continued indefinitely.

Let us now turn to Dr. Martenson and Dr. Weinstein, who explore the murky underside of this massively coordinated public policy assault on humanity, and why it is essential to identify and investigate its architects – at this particular moment in time, before it gets further glossed over – so that it never happens again.

Part II:  The Weinstein-Martenson Podcast, January 22, 2022[xxi]

Who are Dr. Martenson and Dr. Weinstein?

Chris Martenson, PhD in pathology/toxicology (Duke), MBA (Cornell), is an economic researcher and futurist specializing in energy and resource depletion, and distillation of the interconnected forces in the Economy, Energy and the Environment.  His insights are used by institutions such as the UN, the UK House of Commons and US State Legislatures.[xxii]

Brett Weinstein, PhD in biology (Univ. of Michigan) is a theoretical evolutionary biologist focused on adaptive patterns within complex, dynamic systems, and former professor of evolutionary theory. He has an interest in the evolution of wisdom and moral self-sacrifice. His main focus is on a current path that we will not survive – on “a way of living on the earth that evolved, and if we are to change it, we must take evolution from autopilot and into our own hands.”[xxiii]

We see that they share not only long-term biology backgrounds, but a strong interest in patterns and interconnections – which gives them mutual perspective as both specialists and generalists.

The theme is set early in the podcast by Dr. Weinstein: “My sense is that something is over, but something else is about to begin – and I think people need to see it clearly so it doesn’t catch them off guard.”

Their discussion is informed by the people who have “stared down the stigmas that were thrown at us to enter a much better, smarter conversation than what the public is being exposed to.”

These people are, among other things, “the global resistance to the fervor for mandates.”

What specifically are they resisting?

Dr. Weinstein: “In the resistance movement, everybody knows that all-cause mortality is an important thing that is rarely conveyed” – whereas PCR tests and hospitalization data are notoriously unreliable.

“We know that we want autopsies done, because autopsies tell you something we can’t find out otherwise, and we know that the level of autopsies has been artificially reduced, and that suggests that there is an obvious desire not to know what kind of harm is being done” by the injections.”

Dr. Martenson: Every single time if there was something favourable that they didn’t like, e.g., the [British] data Dr. John Campbell was talking about where there were 17,300 people in the whole Covid experience, all two years, who had died of Covid specifically, who weren’t burdened with a comorbidity – that came out because of a freedom of information act request. It was shocking. That data had to be pried out – and that should have been put out there and broadcast by that same organization, if they were doing the right thing, but instead they had to pry it out.

Dr. Weinstein: You go looking for something that isn’t consistently wrong – something that is open to various possibilities and you’ll find that that’s a very vibrant discussion – it’s just that the interesting stuff is on the fringe.

Why?  Because it was driven there.  Right, the natural people who would be at the head of the conversation of figuring out what’s going on with Covid, and what we should do about it – those people have been driven to the edge.  They’ve either been silenced, or they’ve been threatened, or they’ve chosen to self-censor.”

The Earliest Sign of Trouble with the Narrative

To an evolutionary biologist, the sudden appearance of a coronavirus that had seemingly skipped many generations of natural mutation to become a highly aggressive zoonosis (animal-to-human disease), raised disturbing questions about a laboratory origin.

The lab escape idea first gained widespread attention following a long investigation into the circumstantial evidence of SARS-2 gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab (“Who Opened Pandora’s Box at Wuhan? People or Nature?”) by former NYT author Nicholas Wade in May 2021.[xxiv]

On January 11, 2022, a Project Veritas FOI request confirmed, from the US military’s DARPA files, “that SARS-CoV-2 matches the SARS vaccine variants the NIH-EcoHealth program was making in Wuhan.”[xxv] This research had been financed by the National Institutes of Health under the leadership of Dr. Anthony Fauci.[xxvi]

Dr. Weinstein calls such gain-of-function research – which was made illegal in the US by President Obama in 2014 – “a recipe for disaster.”

He likened an engineered virus lab escape to the introduction of the mongoose into remote and isolated Hawaii, where it thrived, playing havoc with natural evolution, and threatening birds and wildlife. Similarly, a lab-manufactured virus introduces a menacing evolutionary jump:

You’re going to create something in a lab and think that you’re its master… you’re just playing with fire – and what’s more you’re not playing with fire in the way that people used to play with fire. They would just blow themselves up.

You’re talking about the whole world.

Somebody made an error. In fact, people were wise enough to see it coming and they tried to ban this research, but Anthony Fauci decided to override them. That error – Anthony Fauci overriding a gain-of-function research ban – very likely resulted in a particular viral particle escaping off a particular lab bench into a particular human being and then Covid-19. That is the capacity to take a tiny error – literally a microscopic error – and turn it into a global catastrophe.

That’s the power of the process you’re playing with, and if you don’t respect it we’re going to be facing this again and again…

Understanding the laboratory origin of Covid-19 is enormously important for how we go into the future – yet Weinstein said it was very difficult to establish:

“That was a surprise win. I didn’t think we were going to win that…

Having won it there are now two others:  there’s the question of early treatment and there’s the question of vaccine safety and efficacy. If the public wakes up on all three of those fronts, suddenly we know something: that the following systems have completely failed to protect us and in fact have steered us into greater danger:  the academy, the press, Big Tech, the public health apparatus, and all of the government structures it is plugged into.

The Coordinated Suppression of Effective Early Treatment

What will it will take to put our institutions back on track?

The story of Ivermectin may be the best clue.

In March, 2021, a world-class review paper on Ivermectin (IVM) by prominent toxicologist Dr. Jacques Descotes showed that it is among the safest and most well-tolerated drugs ever introduced to the market.[xxvii]

Indeed, penicillin, aspirin, and ivermectin belong to a select group of drugs that has had the greatest beneficial impact on the health and well-being of humanity. All three are of natural origin and all three led to a Nobel Prize.

Ivermectin has improved the lives of millions of people since its discovery in 1975.  Our environmental biologists were astonished by how it was targeted:

Dr. Martenson: From a toxicology standpoint, Ivermectin is literally the safest compound I’ve ever looked at; its curve between effective dose and lethal dose is SO wide…in 500 studies zero deaths had ever been ascribed to it.

Then we watched the Pharma campaign come out where all of a sudden it was horse dewormer everywhere because somebody had decided that’s what needed to happen now – some people sat in a room and said, “look we can’t get this on safety – what do we do with this?”

And they had enough power to blanket the airwaves, have major articles appear in all the major newspapers, have it show up on CNN, MSNBC, even have the FDA itself tweet out a little “y’all stop taking horse dewormer.” So that’s power.

The use of this media and Big Tech power to prevent the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC, established March 2020)[xxviii] from treating people with Ivermectin has been nothing short of criminal:

Dr. Martenson:  I remember six to eight months ago their FLCCC Facebook page would get taken down; they were getting YouTube strikes left and right and having channels pulled down.

They were highly qualified medical doctors discussing data. That was it. They weren’t out there railing against Pfizer or anything like that – there was nothing that would rise to libel. They were very careful – and watching that level of friction and hostility that came at them was astonishing. I’d never seen anything like that before.

Dr. Weinstein:  That was astonishing in a way I’d never seen it, and there was something just impossible to stomach about watching these obviously highly dedicated people who actually save lives for a living – they do it day in and day out – being treated as if they were UP to something.

It just couldn’t possibly be more the inverse of what was happening.  You had doctors trying to be doctors, trying to sort out a live situation that we’ve all been told is of utmost importance, and being demonized for the effort because their conclusion didn’t match the public health authority, which was obviously wrong – and then to watch the Tech sector leap to attention and start treating them as if these were somehow dangerous monsters.

It was just such a preposterous show a force on the part of whatever the thing is that is arranging the narrative.

The broken narrative continues. Why? Because after withholding and suppressing IVM and other life-saving therapies for so long, the health agencies and the media cannot now admit that early treatment works.[xxix]  Once the public knows this, all the hospitals will be overwhelmed with lawsuits.

What will it Take to Expose and Accept the Truth about Vaccine Injuries?

The issue of vaccine safety and efficacy was identified above by Dr. Weinstein as the third battle for truth. Officially, vaccine injuries are claimed to be exceedingly rare, so vaccination continues to be rigorously pursued through endless boosters.

In reality, vaccine injuries are off the charts – that is, according to three DOD whistleblowers who have released medical billing data for 2021 from the US Defense Medical Epidemiology Database.[xxx]

During testimony at a Senate hearing on January 24, 2022, the whistleblowers reported a 300% increase in cancers and a 1000% increase in neurological injuries over the 5-year baseline average during 2021, the first year of Covid-19 vaccinations.[xxxi] [xxxii]

Regarding deaths, the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS) reports Covid-19 vaccines as relating to 78% of all vaccine deaths.

From Page 1 of their January 21, 2022 report:

Page 2 of the report shows the comparative death percentages for influenza and measles vaccines, which are also given to millions of people:

Millions also receive mumps, polio, tetanus, and others vaccines:

Early in 2022, startling news emerged from Indiana, where “we are seeing, right now, the highest death rates we have seen in the history of this business,” OneAmerica CEO Scott Davison reported. The head of OneAmerica insurance said the death rate [for the first mRNA vaccine year, 2021] is up a stunning 40% from pre-pandemic levels among working-age people.”[xxxiii]

Martenson and Weinstein decry suffering from the mRNA injections:

Martenson: How awful it must be to be like the mother of Maddie De Garay, Stephanie De Garay,[xxxiv] and know that you were doing the right thing, and then as soon as things went a little wrong, the system basically said we think your daughter’s just nuts, and no support…

Weinstein: There’s something about watching the gaslighting of the injured…if this was an honest effort to control the pandemic and people had been injured because we had a vaccine that worked but had an unfortunately high price, a certain number of people rolled the dice and it came up bad for them, we would take care of those people.

The point is, they did this so that we could be safe, and we could go back to life. These would be heroes. We would not be gaslighting them. We would be accepting that they were harmed. They would be getting free care for the rest of their lives for the cost that they paid on the rest of our behalf – and to watch them gaslit tells you what kind of monsters we’re dealing with.

The other thing that does that for me, is the withdrawal of treatments that work early. You’re going to simultaneously tell us that we have this very dangerous disease as you withdraw therapies in which there is no profit – but that work. That is a level of indifference to human suffering that is almost impossible to imagine…

No process that is capable of those two things can be defended. It’s not an accident, and there is no decency to it.

Is Societal Reform Possible?

The two doctors next discuss whether our system and its institutions, which “failed across-the-board,” is reformable. How do we organize ourselves, when the crisis has been about money and power, and damning the consequences to human suffering?

Dr. Weinstein: I am certain that the system must be reformed – that’s the only thing we can do. You cannot rebuild the system. You’re going to have to take the edifice and figure out how to make it function in spite of the fact that it is completely riddled with corruption of various kinds.

As the narrative comes apart, I don’t need to see Fauci punished…he has visited one of the most colossal catastrophes on planet Earth that we have ever seen…What I do need is for him never to be anywhere near control over anything important ever again.

And we can say that about many other people whose names we don’t necessarily know who have been integral to the response, which has been so disastrous.

Now we have also learned the names of many people who are willing to stand up to garbage narratives and tell us what we need to know rather than what we want to hear.

So there is an obvious solution but we’re going to watch everything thrown at the question of how to avoid it; everything will be thrown at the process of derailing an attempt to simply take the people who make sense and put them in positions where they can do good.

But there is a bright side:

Dr. Weinstein:  I know from long experience that there are three kinds of people in all these systems. Some, not very common, are those who will pursue their own interests, no matter what. There are people who will do the right thing no matter how costly it is to them, also not very common. Then there is the vast middle ground of people who will do what they have to do

but they might prefer to do the right thing.  We can’t spot them because at the moment they are doing the wrong thing. Why? Because they don’t have a better choice.

So my hope is that if we actually do manage to put decent people with the proper expertise in the roles at the heads of these organizations – yes, they have some bad apples but also a lot of decent people who haven’t been given a decent choice – and that maybe suggests that reform could work…

Dr. Martenson: The fear that they have been putting out has been very contagious, but I’ve watched the opposite:  courage can be just as contagious. And so it’s really important that the people who have that capability to be courageous do so…

Watching somebody like Dr. Pierre Kory, who’s just dripping with integrity…watching what happened when he ripped his mask off in that Senate testimony, and I could just feel the galvanizing effect. I thought wow, that is really impressive and they’re going to come after him, and they did.

This is the time for us to stand up and stand together as courageously as we can. It is the biggest moment in history I’m aware of, so many things are going to be decided in the next few years.

Dr. Weinstein: Back at the beginning of the pandemic, I was asked, “Well, when will be go back to normal,” and I heard myself say, “We’re never going back to normal. This is the biggest thing that’s ever happened on planet Earth.”

This is a truly global process that has unfolded… Something that can amplify a microscopic error into a global catastrophe, that tells you where we are and how much danger there is…You can’t roll the dice with these processes running loose for very long and have it always come up your way.

This is telling us that our lives – whether we like it or not – are overlapping a moment on which everything hangs. We are stuck with the responsibility of solving a problem no one has seen before and we have to get it right.

Getting it right means somehow getting the media to stop playing the narrative game – or at least enough of the media to provide an accessible alternative.

Media Propaganda Must be Identified and Eliminated

There is no question that the media has been insanely corrupt during the pandemic. Dr. Christian Perronne, who held top positions on vaccine policy for France and the WHO, “pointed to the French government which,” in addition to tens of millions of Euros they give to primary media each year, for two years has given 3 billion Euros to media.”[xxxvii]

A major problem in our relationship with the media is that the difference between problems and predicaments is not understood. Problems have solutions, and can be solved, whereas predicaments have outcomes that require management.

The media has been relentlessly focusing our attention on problems of often marginal interest to society as a whole, and of moderate importance to our ultimate welfare.

We do not hear as much news about the predicaments that require concerted, unifying cooperation to address:  world poverty and hunger; overfishing and plastic contamination of the rising oceans, land and soil degradation, deforestation, and increasing drought and wildfires. Yet we are collectively responsible for catastrophic neglect in these areas.

In the grand scheme of things, Covid-19 fits in the problem category, although it was given a mighty boost by the enormous coordination of media and Big Tech under the umbrella of the “Trusted News Initiative” (TNI) and its early warning system – for which there is a full accounting in the essay cited below:

“An international process of editorial standardization has delivered unprecedented news coverage of the monopolized message:

    The pandemic threatens the survival of all humanity

    There is no therapy to cure the sick

    It is necessary to confine the whole population, and

    The delivery will come only from a vaccine.”

Many people have been dismayed by the singularity of this propaganda.”[xxxviii]

The TNI rigorously linked government agencies, the corporate media, and the tech companies – who together have given pharmaceutical companies the leverage to censor anyone who raised medical evidence supporting early Covid treatment, or exposing vaccine injuries.

The public has been so propagandized for two years that its irrational acceptance of insanely contradictory Covid-19 claims has been described by clinical psychologist Dr. Mattias Desmet as a mass psychosis phenomenon[xxxix] – in which an estimated half to two-thirds of the public mind simply will not or cannot question the meandering narrative.

Indeed, most of the public would prefer to believe that their two-year ordeal was caused by an honest response to a natural event, such as the Globe has presented.

Weinstein supports Desmet:

Something has captured our focus and it has mesmerized us into behaving in a way that is actually harming us – and waking up from that is not going to be fun for a lot of people, but the longer you wait the less fun it’s going to be.

The main point here is we have got to put a stop to this now. The way mass psychosis or formations are stopped is with brave people standing up, and saying, “No. Let’s stop.  Just let’s stop.”

Our Opportunity for Future Survival Has a Narrow Window

As Dr. Weinstein noted earlier:

We now know that the following systems have completely failed to protect us and in fact have steered us into greater danger:  the academy, the press, Big Tech, the public health apparatus.

That is an amazing across-the-board failure, and no one who is paying attention could possibly look at a failure of all of those things and come away with the impression that anything small could possibly put us back on track.

Dr. Martenson concurs:

I don’t know that in our lifetimes we will get a better opportunity to have the conversation we need about civilizational collapse, which is looming, because our systems have stopped doing what they’re supposed to do. So my greatest fear is waking up one day and Biden and Macron and all the other leaders are going say:  this is just like the seasonal flu, it’s endemic, we’re done, and let’s move on.

Why is that a fear? Because it means that we won’t have the accounting that we need – they’ll just try and slide past those failures.  I think those failures need to be brought forward…because they’re indicative of a larger system issue.

I think this is one of the most pivotal moments in human history… and the way we begin to address this is we have to have really open honest conversations where no ox is too sacred to gore – everything is on the table.  We need all hands on deck…

Dr. Weinstein echoes the point:

What we have said is, the level of dysfunction in the system will be fatal for humanity in short order.  Covid reveals those failures, but the point is somebody has unhooked all of the things that are supposed to allow you to steer the ship back on course and away from the iceberg.

But sooner or later there will be an emergency of the highest order.  It’s not the Covid emergency, but Covid reveals the emergency. Covid, because of the across-the-board failure of everything, reveals the problem. There’s no reason to think we are going to get a better chance in our lifetimes to actually discuss it. The curtain is never going to be pulled this far back again, or if it is it may be too late for the next emergency.

The next emergency may not be such a survivable one so we have to figure out what’s gone wrong and we have to fix it because our job is to leave the planet intact for future generations. They have to have a decent place to live.

 Going Forward: The Role of Wisdom and Integrity

The needed transformation is too important to leave to chance.  We need to ensure that the kind of people who lead us forward are the high integrity kind, not the kind who do things for themselves.

We have seen the wisdom of two minds exploring the extent of our failed institutions, and how we must view this moment as a vital demarcation between past and future – a precious window in time – in which to finally address the problems and predicaments we have been neglecting.

Perhaps it should begin with recognition of our vulnerability, as Dr. Martenson points out:

The good news about Covid-19 is that it showed how vulnerable we are, and not just at the level of our biology.  It showed how vulnerable we are to propaganda and to being induced to viciousness toward each other, and to demonizing those who are trying to tell us things we need to know.

So this was a trial run, and if we learned the lesson of it we could come out of it much stronger, but that’s the reason I’m afraid the lesson is going to be buried.

We cannot bury Covid-19 and go back to normal.

Normal is what caused this pandemic.

We need the honesty and wisdom and determination to seize this moment, and to make our institutions reform normal.

*

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

[i] Scott Morefield, “The Covid Narrative Falls Apart in South Africa,” Brownstone Institute, 26 January 2022 (https://brownstone.org/articles/the-covid-narrative-falls-apart-in-south-africa/).

[ii] Norman Doidge, “Vaccines are a tool, not a silver bullet,” Globe and Mail, 22 January, 2022   (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-vaccines-are-a-tool-not-a-silver-bullet-if-wed-allowed-more-scientific/).

[iii] A limited hangout or partial hangout is “spy jargon for a gimmick of the clandestine professionals. When they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting some of the truth while withholding the key and damaging facts. The public is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further.” (https://www.definitions.net/definition/limited+hangout).

[iv] Incredibly, this Globe article is the same length as the May 2020 NYT hit piece (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/magazine/didier-raoult-hydroxychloroquine.html) on France’s leading microbiologist, Dr. Didier Raoult – who was having encouraging results with the legendary safe drug hydroxychloroquine – and appeared the same week that the Lancet published its astonishingly corrupt hit piece on hydroxychloroquine heart toxicity – retracted under massive protest (https://www.palmerfoundation.com.au/global-research-media-sabotage-of-hydroxychloroquine-use-for-covid-19-doctors-worldwide-protest-the-disaster/).

[v] “How to save the world, in three easy steps: Darkhorse Podcast with Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch & Bret Weinstein,” June 2021 (https://open.spotify.com/episode/2GkYPouJqLMnMqDzMsdaeh?si=0424e0517c2f424b&nd=1)

[vi] “Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 78 studies: Covid Analysis,” 2 February 2022 (https://ivmmeta.com/).

[vii] Berkeley Lovelace Jr. “CDC study finds about 78% of people hospitalized for Covid were overweight or obese,” CNBC, 8 March 2021 (https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/covid-cdc-study-finds-roughly-78percent-of-people-hospitalized-were-overweight-or-obese.html).

[viii] “What is the Trusted News Initiative?” 13 August 2021 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5gJz3PHitE).

[ix] Harvey Risch, “FDA obstruction: Patients die, while Trump gets the blame,” Washington Examiner, 19 October 2020 (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/fda-obstruction-patients-die-while-trump-gets-the-blame).

[x] See my other articles on these actions at (https://www.globalresearch.ca/author/elizabeth-woodworth).

[xi] “Dr. Brought To Tears As He Recounts Watching His Patients Die When He Wasn’t Allowed To Treat Them,” 24 January 2022 (https://brandnewtube.com/watch/dr-brought-to-tears-as-he-recounts-watching-his-patients-die-when-he-wasn-039-s-allowed-to-treat-t_G2vWLGNseXzVIsC.html). Dr. Marik was professor of medicine and chief of pulmonary and critical care medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School.

[xii] Oxford Professor of Epidemiology, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, was warned by a BBC producer not to discuss the Great Barrington Declaration just before going on air. Toby Young, “Why can’t we talk about the Great Barrington Declaration?” The Spectator, 15 October 2020 (https://spectatorworld.com/life/great-barrington-declaration/).

[xiii] Great Barrington Declaration (https://gbdeclaration.org/).

[xiv] Doidge, ibid.

[xv] Ioannidis J. “The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data,” Bull World Health Organ., Epub Oct. 14, 2020
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33716331).

[xvi] Sarah Mae Saliong, “CDC And WHO Redefine ‘Vaccine’ And ‘Herd Immunity’ To Manipulate People Into Getting The Jabs,” Christianity Daily, 21 September 2021 (https://www.christianitydaily.com/articles/13341/20210921/cdc-and-who-redefine-vaccine-and-herd-immunity-to-manipulate-people-into-getting-the-jabs.htm).

[xvii] Memo from Maj. Joseph P. Murphy to Captain xxxxx (redacted), Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), circa August 21, 2021      (https://assets.ctfassets.net/syq3snmxclc9/2mVob3c1aDd8CNvVnyei6n/95af7dbfd2958d4c2b8494048b4889b5/JAG_Docs_pt1_Og_WATERMARK_OVER_Redacted.pdf).

[xviii] https://vaersanalysis.info/; https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions; https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/overview/public-health-threats/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/treatments-vaccines/vaccines-covid-19/safety-covid-19-vaccines

[xix The Covid World, “A List of World Class Athletes Who Died Or Suffered Severe Injuries After COVID-19 Vaccine,” 7 November 2021 (https://thecovidworld.com/world-class-athletes-who-died-or-suffered-severe-injuries-after-covid-19-vaccine/); “318 Athlete Cardiac Arrests & 178 Deaths in 2021 After COVID Shot,” Belizean Rights and Justice Movement, 17 December 2021, (censored),   (https://web.archive.org/web/20220122042215/https://brjm.org/2021/12/318-athlete-cardiac-arrests-after-covid-vax/).

[xx] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “COVID Data Tracker,” 22 January 2022 (https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions).

[xxi] “Bret Speaks with Chris Martenson – Collapse of the Public Health Narrative, & the Gathering Storm,” 22 January 2022 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOT6nzzKrO8&list=PLjQ2gC-5yHEug8_VK8ve0oDSJLoIU4b93&t=5533s).

[xxii] “About Chris Martenson,” (https://www.peakprosperity.com/about/).

[xxiii] “Bret Weinstein: Theoretical Evolutionary Biologist,” (https://www.edge.org/memberbio/bret_weinstein).

[xiv] Nicholas Wade, “Origins of COVID-19: Who Opened Pandora’s Box at Wuhan – People or Nature?” The Wire, 10 May 2021 (https://science.thewire.in/the-sciences/origins-of-covid-19-who-opened-pandoras-box-at-wuhan-people-or-nature/).

[xxv] Memo from Maj. Joseph P. Murphy to Captain xxxxx (redacted), DARPA, circa August 21, 2021      (https://assets.ctfassets.net/syq3snmxclc9/2mVob3c1aDd8CNvVnyei6n/95af7dbfd2958d4c2b8494048b4889b5/JAG_Docs_pt1_Og_WATERMARK_OVER_Redacted.pdf).

[xxvi] Glen Owen, “REVEALED: U.S. government gave $3.7million grant to Wuhan lab…,” Updated 16 May 2020 (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211291/U-S-government-gave-3-7million-grant-Wuhan-lab-experimented-coronavirus-source-bats.html).

[xxvii] Jacques Descotes, “Medical Safety of Ivermectin,” Medincell, 5 March 2021 (https://c19ivermectin.com/descotes.html), (https://invest.medincell.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/PR_MDCL_safety_ivermectine-50321.pdf).

[xxviii] https://covid19criticalcare.com/

[xxix] “COVID-19 early treatment: real-time analysis of 1,375 studies” (https://c19early.com/).

[xxx] Daniel Horowitz, “Horowitz: Whistleblowers share DOD medical data that blows vaccine safety debate wide open,” 26 January, 2022 (https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-whistleblowers-share-dod-medical-data-that-blows-vaccine-safety-debate-wide-open).

[xxxi] “Ron Johnson – Senate Hearing – COVID-19: A Second Opinion – January 24, 2022” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ciuRLFLoLL0&t=13s) (at 0:35 minutes). Full Hearing at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asw_FBipVpg.

[xxxii] Stacey Lennox, “Military Whistleblowers May Blow Up the COVID Vaccine Narrative,” 25 January 2022 (https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2022/01/25/military-whistleblowers-may-blow-up-the-covid-vaccine-narrative-n1552966).

[xxxiii] Margaret Menge, “Insurance CEO says deaths up 40% among working age people, and it’s not just COVID,” 1 January 2022 (https://justthenews.com/nation/states/indiana-life-insurance-ceo-says-deaths-are-40-among-people-ages-18-64).

[xxxiv] Tucker Carlson, “Mom details 12-year-old daughter’s extreme reactions to COVID vaccine, says she’s now in wheelchair,” 2 July 2021 (https://www.foxnews.com/media/ohio-woman-daughter-covid-vaccine-reaction-wheelchair).  Maddie had volunteered for the Pfizer coronavirus trial and then nearly died.

[xxxv] “Top French vaccine expert: We have flouted science and flouted rights,” Israel National News, 30 January 2022 (https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/321386).

[xxxvi] Elizabeth Woodworth, ‘COVID-19 and the Shadowy “Trusted News Initiative”:  How it Methodically Censors Top World Public Health Experts Using an Early Warning System,’ 22 January 2022 (https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-shadowy-trusted-news-initiative/5752930).

[xxxvii] “Why People WILLINGLY Give Up Their Freedoms W/ Prof. Mattias Desmet |Mass Formation Psychosis,” 20 October 2021 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqPJiM5Ir3A). Dr. Mattias Desmet is a Professor of Clinical Psychology at Ghent University in Belgium.

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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

 

 

The Maghreb region, with an estimated population of over 100 million people, has been an interesting geographical region for key global players due to its tremendous untapped natural resources. Algeria, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia established the Arab Maghreb Union in 1989 to promote cooperation and economic integration. The union included Western Sahara implicitly under Morocco’s membership, and ended Morocco’s long cold war with Algeria over this territory. However, this progress was short-lived, and the union is now dormant.

That however, the region is an important gateway to Europe and to sub-Saharan Africa. Europe particularly has some investment, so also the United States. Now Russia is steadily making its way through war-thorn Libya and politically troubled Morocco and Tunisia. That compared Russia has significant trust-based relations with Egypt.

As Russia feverishly preparing for the second all-African leaders summit, Kester Kenn Klomegah held an emailed interview focusing on some aspects of Russia-Maghreb relations with Dr. Chtatou Mohamed, a senior professor of Middle Eastern politics at the International University of Rabat (IUR) as well as education science at Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco.

The following are excerpts from the interview.

Kester Kenn Klomegah: In terms of geopolitical diplomacy, how do we assess Russia’s interest and approach since Soviet collapse in the Maghreb region? Do the current political changes pose challenges for Russia?

Dr. Chtatou Mohamed: Given its geographical remoteness, the Maghreb did not constitute – unlike the Middle East – a pole of major strategic interest for the Soviet Union, and this until the period of decolonization in the 1950s. From this point on, and especially with the Algerian war of independence, Moscow began to invest in this sub-region of the Arab world. In fact, as in the Mashreq, the Soviet position strategic criteria, which explained the choice of a partnership with Algeria as early as 1962, and then, to a lesser extent, with Colonel Qadhafi’s Libya after he took power in 1969.

However, it was more in the name of the “anti-imperialist” struggle than of a real ideological proximity that these alliances were formed. Indeed, during the entire Cold War period, Soviet power could not count on local relays to strengthen its influence. The Maghrebi parties of communist persuasion were indeed far from having the weight and influence of their Middle Eastern counterparts, such as in Iraq or Iran. They were promptly removed from power and even repressed after independence, even if some of their leaders were later co-opted by the regimes in place, particularly in Morocco and Algeria. Nevertheless, the revolutionary Third Worldism claimed by Algiers as well as by Tripoli, even if it did not claim to be based on Marxist-Leninist ideology, was perceived by the USSR as conforming to its interests and its politico-strategic projections.

For all that, the leaders of the two “friendly” Maghreb countries, while taking into account the interest that an extended cooperation with Moscow (which also passed by links with satellite countries of Eastern Europe, particularly in terms of security with the German Democratic Republic), they were careful to keep a certain distance from this partner, refusing any form of subjection according to the principles of non-alignment.

Today, the Maghreb is not a fundamental interest for Russia, but rather a source of economic and political opportunities. The Russian redeployment in the Maghreb, which began during Vladimir Putin’s second term in 2004 and has been over the last decade, relies on new vectors, distinct from the old anti-imperialist aura from which the Soviet Union had benefited in Algeria and Libya. Three in particular stand out: (1) Investment in the economic sphere; (2) Increased cooperation in the security field, and; (3) A shared vision of international and regional issues.

Today, the federal state of Russia is increasingly present in the countries of North Africa; strategic partnership with Algeria, Morocco and Egypt, and is among the key players in the Libyan crisis.

Russia and the Maghreb countries seek above all to cultivate their economic relations. These relations cover various fields such as energy, agricultural products, tourism, space or, in the case of Algeria, the sale of arms. For Moscow, this also responds to the need to deal with the sanctions of the European Union imposed following the annexation of Crimea in 2014, seeking alternatives to European products, especially agro-food. Russia meets a similar desire on the Maghreb side, where there is a desire to diversify the partnerships dominated until now by the countries of the European Union. In 2016, Russia thus became, by passing France, the first supplier of wheat to Algeria and has remained so since. It should be noted that the Russian economic projection in the region does not necessarily responds to a state strategy driven by the Kremlin, but often satisfies commercial ambitions in search of new opportunities, although the political authorities can facilitate contacts with the various Maghrebi economic actors.

The North African countries have considerably developed their relations with Russia, as they did before with China, without however prohibiting themselves from cooperating with the other Western powers. Their objective is to take advantage of any opportunity that arises to develop their economies and avoid remaining aligned and dependent on a single pole as in the days of the Cold War, given that the world is increasingly multipolar.

Therefore, questions arise, what are the mutual interests behind this revival in relations between Russia and the countries of North Africa, and what are the future prospects of these relations?

Russia has a war fleet and a merchant fleet in the Black Sea. This sea is located between Europe, the Caucasus and Anatolia, it is a semi-enclosed sea since it only communicates with the Mediterranean through the Bosphorus Strait, the Sea of Marmara and the Dardanelles Strait. Therefore, the Mediterranean is an unavoidable access corridor for Russian ships, connected to its Black Sea ports, to go to the Atlantic Ocean via the Strait of Gibraltar, or to the Indian Ocean via the Suez Canal.

For the Kremlin, the countries of North Africa are of paramount geostrategic importance on the maritime level, because its merchant ships and warships transiting in the Mediterranean Sea cross 3 obligatory passages which are bordered by: Egypt for the Suez Canal, Tunisia for the Strait of Sicily and Morocco for the Strait of Gibraltar. These compulsory passages are, from the point of view of freedom of navigation, locks that can be easily controlled by the countries that border them on both sides.

On the geo-economic level, the five Arab countries of North Africa present themselves for the Kremlin as an unavoidable interface to enter the African continent, rich in raw materials and presented as the great world consumer market in the future because of the demographic explosion of its population. It was during his visit to Algeria in 2006 that Putin laid the first milestone for Russia’s return to Africa. It is also Egypt, which played a leading role in the organization of the 1st Russia-Africa summit in October 2019 in Sochi.

Russia’s economic interests in Africa are increasingly growing in recent years, Moscow’s trade with African countries exceeded $20 billion in 2019. This figure is still lower than that of China ($204 billion), the US and even some European countries such as France and Germany.

Russia aims to diversify its trade with African countries by focusing on high technology, such as civil nuclear power (in Egypt) and satellite launches (in Angola and Tunisia). Russia is also very active in the medical sector in Africa, vaccination campaign against the Ebola virus in Guinea, etc…

KKK: United States and European Union have concrete strategic instruments, for instance, the U.S.-Maghreb FTA and Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. What could be described as Russia’s strategic economic tool in North Africa?

DCM: While China has been the focus of public attention on the African continent for some years, Moscow is no longer behind. After a prolonged absence since the demise of the Soviet Union, Russia is becoming more and more active, mixing armed forces presence, arms sales, economic investment, soft power and diplomatic support.

At the BRICS summit in Johannesburg on July 27, 2018, the Russian President raised the idea of a Russian-African summit bringing together all the continent’s leaders and himself. This ambitious initiative does not leave the traditional players established in this field worried that the Russian proposals will prove attractive enough for a number of local heads of state.

Indeed, Russia intends to return to the continent where its presence has often been fluctuating. Even in the 1970s, the height of the Soviet grip on Africa, its presence was episodic, with rare exceptions, such as in Algeria, Libya and Angola. Then the gradual removal of many heads of state who were allies of the Soviet Union led Mikhail Gorbachev, from 1988 onwards, to gradually weaken ties with the continent. These did not survive the disappearance of the USSR in 1991, and the Yeltsin period sounded the death knell for these friendships. It was not until the second term of Vladimir Putin, from 2008, that timid initiatives were taken to remind certain countries of Russia’s past role.

One of the notable changes from the Cold War era is that the new Russian policy in the Maghreb no longer relies solely on the historical partner of Algeria, but also extends to previously neglected states, namely Morocco and Tunisia, because of their political and historical ties to the Western world. Libya is a special case.

Russia’s renewed interest in the Maghreb is based on a number of parameters that have already been essentially well identified. First and foremost, there is the development of economic partnerships, whether in the fields of armaments, energy, infrastructure or agriculture. Next, in order of priority, are security issues, with the fight against terrorism and jihadism, but more broadly the effects of the Libyan crisis, even if Russia’s investment in this issue appears less developed and partisan than it appears at first glance.

The emphasis placed on the political-diplomatic aspect, crystallized from the Arab uprisings and more particularly since the overthrow of the Libyan regime following NATO’s intervention in 2011, constitutes the most novel parameter of this Russian reinvestment. As in the rest of the Arab world, Moscow is defending the status quo, or rather a “principle of conservation” defined by its support for the regimes in place, non-interference in the internal affairs of a state, and its opposition to regime change through foreign military intervention.

While Russia’s preferred visions and modes of action in the Maghreb seem to be fairly well identified, the perceptions and expectations, but also the possible reservations on the Maghreb are more rarely expressed by the leaders of these countries and little studied at the academic level. Perhaps we should look at this, as far as the powers that be are concerned, a concern for discretion regarding the sensitive aspects of this foreign policy component – this is particularly true for Algeria – an area on which they generally communicate little and for the academic research community in North Africa, a lack of knowledge related to the history, geography and culture of contemporary Russia.

If there is undoubtedly, on the Maghreb side and with important nuances from one country to another, a manifest interest in a development or a deepening of the partnership with Moscow, questions may remain about Russia’s objectives, especially in Rabat and Tunis. Despite this, the general and regional orientations of Russian policy are generally well perceived in the Maghreb capitals, because they correspond to local visions without, however, having the intrusive character that sometimes reproached to the historical European partners (France, Italy, Spain) and American partners.

Thus, the Russian approach responds to expectations of diversification in terms of partnership which correspond to an economic rather than a strategic necessity. This relationship appears to be facilitated by a convergence of views on major regional issues and the principles governing international relations, perhaps also because of the limits set for it. However, certain expectations on the Maghreb side could be disappointed, particularly concerning economic investments, but also a possible attempt at Russian mediation to facilitate a settlement process for the Libyan crisis, knowing that Moscow has some conditions.

One of the discreet tools used by the Russia in the Maghreb and Africa is the Wagner Group that is present in Algeria providing tactical help to the Polisario Front fighting Morocco over the Western Sahara and in Libya, on the side of Marshal Haftar forces.

The Wagner Group should be approached as a nebulous or informal entity, since it is a structure without any legal existence. Unlike other Russian private military companies, of which there are many and of which RSB-Group is a well-known example, Wagner is not registered as a commercial company. Wagner’s lack of a defined legal status is advantageous for the Russian government, as it allows it to deny responsibility for its actions when the group is mobilized in different fields.

The links between the Russian executive and Wagner are important and take various forms. First, logistically, the training of the members of the Wagner group took place in Russia, in a military base belonging to the Russian armed forces. Some of the weapons available to Wagner members in Syria and Libya came from the Russian military surplus, and their deployment is usually carried out by Russian military aircraft. The Wagner Group is furthermore financed by a businessman considered close to Vladimir Putin, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who has secured some fairly large contracts in the Kremlin, particularly in the catering business.

Thus, there are obvious military logistical links and personal affinities between the Wagner Group and the Russian government. However, the link between the two entities is not organic and not all of Wagner’s interventions are linked to the Russian executive. Sometimes they proceed from a more lucrative logic, specific to the personal interests of Yevgeny Prigozhin.

First of all, the Wagner Group is able to participate in armed operations. In this, it is not just a private military company but a mercenary company. As examples, the group was employed by the Syrian government to liberate the Syrian Al Sha’er oil field in Homs from the Islamic State after the battle of Palmyra in 2016, but also as support to the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in the fighting in Khusham in February 2018. Wagner has also provided support for Marshal Haftar’s offensives against Tripoli in 2019 and 2020. The group has participated in armed operations in northern Mozambique against Islamist insurgents seeking to establish an independent state in Cabo Delgado province, and more recently engaged with the Central African Republic’s army against the Patriot Coalition.

With regard to Russian strategy in the region, there has been a renewed interest in sub-Saharan Africa over the past decade. Defence diplomacy, that is, strengthening the country’s presence via the military tool (training or physical presence), has been an important instrument for Russia since 2014-2015, and particularly in this region. About twenty agreements have thus been signed between Moscow and sub-Saharan African countries in the field of defence since that date.

Economic issues also motivate the renewed Russian interest in the region. In the field of armaments, the countries of the zone are an interesting clientele for Russia. In 2010, they represented 10% of Russian arms sales. Today they account for 30%, making Russia the leading supplier of arms to the region.

Finally, the Russian strategy has a geopolitical dimension. While the context between Russia and Western countries is highly troubled, and characterized in particular by a regime of sanctions and counter-sanctions, Moscow has more room for manoeuvre with the countries of sub-Saharan Africa. However, the tensions between Russia and Western countries are also present in sub-Saharan Africa: the issues surrounding the Wagner group are one of the facets of this crisis.

KKK: Do you detect any competition and rivalry among key foreign players for influence in the region? In your opinion, how effective and useful the emerging China-Russia alliance could be in Maghreb countries?

DCM: The impression is striking of a flashback to the West-Russia tensions that characterized the second half of the 20th century, from the aftermath of World War II until the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The two rival camps are beginning to openly sketch out the comparison, although observers note significant differences.

Following the gradual advent of the multi-polarity of the world since the beginning of the 2000s, most Mediterranean Arab countries have opened up to practically all the major world powers, the USA, China, Russia, the European powers and the powers emerging. The objective is to better serve the interests of their peoples and find solutions to the problems that prevent their development by exploiting the opportunities presented by each of these powers.

Currently the geopolitical relations of most Mediterranean Arab countries with Russia are good, even for those who were allies of the USA during the period of world bipolarity along the years of the Cold War (the case of Egypt and from Morocco).

Algiers, October 2, 2021, the Algerian government decides to recall its ambassador in Paris and close its airspace to French military aircraft. This decision was prompted by a speech by Emmanuel Macron on the Algerian memory issue, which was deemed disrespectful.  This incident represents the second act of a political-diplomatic standoff between Algeria and France, which decided in late September to drastically reduce the issuance of visas to nationals of Maghreb countries. Since this measure, relations between the two countries have continued to deteriorate, further weakening the popularity of France on an African continent that is already attracting the covetousness of many powers such as Russia, a historical ally of Algeria, whose eyes are now turned towards Mali.

Since the early 2000s, Russia has placed Africa and the Mediterranean at the center of its foreign policy. This position became even more important in 2015 when Moscow saw Syria as a way to reaffirm its status as an international power while defending its security and economic interests, which are the fight against terrorism and the development of trade agreements around energy.

In such a paradigm, the regional power that is Algeria is a choice ally, especially since their relations have been at a good level since the end of the Cold War. Moscow and Algiers share a similar conception of domestic and foreign policy. The report of the Mediterranean Foundation for Strategic Studies highlights this:

“In the end, Russia and Algeria share many common representations and biases: a focus on the sacrosanct stability (particularly through the importance given to the fight against terrorism), a preference for flexibility in diplomatic relations and a willingness to contribute – through mediation – to the resolution of conflicts. The two countries share the same aspiration to assert themselves as an independent power and to establish themselves as a regional and international power, respectively. This convergence of vision pushes the two states to help each other. One example is the case of Vladimir Putin who does not hesitate to relay the anti-colonialist speeches of Algiers by encouraging African countries to mobilize for political and economic independence. The Russian president thus urged “African countries to stop their dependence on France and to work to develop the continent considered the richest in the world” (Algérie Patriotique. (21 octobre 2020). « Alger et Moscou ne veulent plus laisser Rabat et Paris jouer seuls en Afrique »).

However, once we move away from political statements, it is easy to see that, behind its airs of mentor, Russia is an actor who enjoys a form of dependence from Algeria via unequal cooperation in several key areas. Thus, in 2017, Dmitri Medvedev, then head of the Russian state, signed with Algiers no less than six (6) documents on Russian-Algerian cooperation in a multitude of areas such as justice, energy, education or health. It is also not anecdotal that the choice of vaccine in the fight against Covid-19 was the Sputnik-V vaccine. Such a choice clearly reflects Algeria’s distrust of other Western powers, but above all Russia’s unavoidable position as the sponsor of an Algerian state that is too weak to prosper alone. By offering its help to a fragile Algeria, Russia ensures, without exposing itself, a real anchorage on the African continent.

After the 2008 crisis, Beijing’s geopolitical positioning on the international stage remains highly ambiguous. On the one hand, China is described as a developing country because of the domestic economic and political problems it faces (the nature of its economic growth, environmental challenges, the fight against inequality, social tensions). These structural obstacles require reforms that slow down its international deployment. On the other hand, China is perceived as a major emerging country, given its strong economic growth and its status as the world’s second largest economy, which mechanically pushes it to take a greater interest in international issues and to move away from its policy of “non-interference.

Today, Beijing’s positioning is characterized by approaches that are sometimes cautious when the issues concern it less, and sometimes more assertive when it comes to neighborhood issues where its interests may be directly at stake. In the end, this ambivalent policy and its internal problems explain China’s positioning: a true emerging power on the economic level, it is not yet completely so on the geopolitical level.

Nevertheless, China already carries so much weight on the international scene that it is changing the world order. The question is to know how willing and able it will be to transform the functioning of the international system. In many ways the emergence of Russia-China alliance will strengthen the hand of these two countries politically, economically and socially in the Maghreb. Many see the emergence of such important block as a viable alternative to the West that has oppressed and exploited the region for centuries. Today many Maghrebi students go east to study and many businessmen go there to do commerce.

KKK: How is “soft power” working in this region? What could be the expectations from Maghreb bloc during the forthcoming second Russia-Africa summit planned this November 2022?

DCM: The North Africa region has undergone extremely rapid modernization. Growing literacy (in less than fifty years, societies in the region have achieved a literacy rate of over 70% among adults and close to 100% in all countries among 15-24 year olds, including women) or the affirmation of the place of women are signs of a modernization in progress. The demographic and socio-cultural structures of these countries are changing and the political order of their societies, which explains some of the instability in the region and the “Arab Spring”. Other countries, where frustrations are great and where the states are struggling to respond to the political and economic aspirations of their populations could experience similar episodes.

In recent years, the alleged return of Russia to the African continent has attracted attention. It is not only the media that are interested in it, but also diplomats and governments of countries that, since the fall of the USSR, are in economic competition on the continent.

The increase in this interest began with the holding of the first Russia-Africa summit in Sochi in October 2019. The second summit, scheduled for 2022, is helping to reinforce the hypothesis of Russia’s repositioning on the continent. Is this a real geostrategic turning point? Or can we rather suspect tactical re-compositions in search of arms export markets or the exploitation of rare minerals?

The private security company Wagner, run by a man close to Vladimir Putin, has become the main instrument of Moscow’s reengagement on the continent, against a backdrop of rivalry and tension with the West.

Is this the beginning of a strategic shift that would see a new “Russafrique” supporting “Chinafrique” in an anti-Western conspiracy? Or a media fantasy dramatizing punctual and opportunistic, often fragile, breakthroughs? The arrival of Russian instructors and paramilitaries from the private security company Wagner, which is close to the Kremlin, in Mali at the end of 2021, is raising questions in Europe and the United States about Moscow’s plans in Africa. Through the multiplication of defence agreements and the activities of the Wagner Group, Russia has succeeded in meddling in several African countries: Mali, Libya, Sudan, Central African Republic, Mozambique… An advance that is sometimes erratic, contested or deceptive, and which extends over about five years.

In Egypt, in 2014, Russia got closer to the newly elected President Al-Sissi. It took advantage of the American disengagement following the Arab Spring and signed a $3.5 billion arms contract. Other agreements will link the two countries: military cooperation treaties (supply of arms and training), an agreement for the construction of the first Egyptian nuclear power plant, an economic outlet for its grain, et cetera. More recently, the two countries signed a contract to supply Russian Su-35 fighter planes to Egypt.

Russia is thus rapidly becoming the main arms seller in Africa. Over the period 2014-2019, it provided 49% of the arms sold to the continent, far ahead of the other main contributors: the United States (14%), China (13%) and France (6.1%).

However, these contracts mainly concern North Africa, the picture being much more mixed for West Africa, for example. Russia has not been involved in any major arms agreement with Mali, with the exception of the 2016 agreement where Mali signed a contract with Russia for four Mi-35M combat helicopters.

Russia’s return to Africa is not limited to debt cancellation and arms sales. In 2018, Russia’s trade with the African continent reached $20 billion (17.2% more than the previous year) and its investments reached $5 billion (a far cry from the $130 billion invested per year by China). Its ability to offer technologies sought after by African countries gives it a place of choice. For example, it cooperates with Algeria, Nigeria, Zambia and Egypt in the nuclear field. Moreover, its companies are particularly present in the exploitation of minerals, oil or gas. Gazprom, Rosneft and Lukoil are very active in the Sahara, North Africa, Nigeria and Ghana.

These links have also been strengthened from a diplomatic point of view, with the organization of the first Russia-Africa summit in Sochi in October 2019, which will have enabled Russia to bring together some thirty African heads of state and to sign several bilateral treaties (the joint statement mentions “92 agreements, contracts and memoranda of understanding […] with a total value of 1,400 billion rubles”. This is in line with Russia’s goal of doubling its trade with African states by 2024 (which would make it a direct competitor of France).

Russian realpolitik may explain Russia’s growing influence in Africa. Unlike other actors such as the United States or France, which may make the granting of aid or the signing of partnerships conditional on the respect of certain principles, Russia does not demand any conditions related to democracy or human rights. This is the case in Nigeria, where the United States cancelled a contract that had already been signed for human rights violations by Nigerian forces in the fight against Boko Harm. This withdrawal allowed Russia to sign a new arms contract with the country.

With the decision to return and raise its influence on the continent, and especially the Maghreb region, Russia has to make consistent efforts, at least, in addressing significant aspects of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Africa. That however, the worsening of the Libyan crisis and the deterioration of relations with European states are the only two obstacles that could limit or more seriously slow down this nascent economic cooperation. The next few years will undoubtedly be decisive for the realization of structuring projects between the Russian Federation and the Maghreb.

*

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

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a frequent contributor to Global Research. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

Featured image is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia-Maghreb Relations: Moscow’s Geopolitical and Economic Objectives
  • 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

President Joe Biden called for American citizens in Ukraine to leave the country as soon as possible after revealing the potential for a “world war” and warning that “things could go crazy quickly” between the US and Russia. Biden’s bombastic rhetoric was preceded by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov meeting with British Secretary of State Liz Truss, where she embarrassed herself by failing to grasp the basic geography of the region. The Anglo escalation is part of their effort to derail dialogue between Moscow and the two European Union powerhouses of France and Germany to overcome the Ukraine crisis.

“American citizens should leave now,” Biden said in an interview with NBC News on February 10. “It’s not like we’re dealing with a terrorist organization. We’re dealing with one of the largest armies in the world. It’s a very different situation, and things could go crazy quickly.”

When asked what could prompt his order to send troops to Ukraine, Biden said:

“There’s not. That’s a world war when Americans and Russia start shooting at one another. We’re in a very different world than we’ve ever been.” The American president also sent a message to his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, saying that if he “is foolish enough to come in, he’s smart enough to actually do nothing that could negatively impact American citizens.”

Tensions between Washington and Moscow are at their highest point since the Cold War, especially as the West manufactures an “impending Russian invasion of Ukraine” narrative. This manufactured crisis is being used as a pretext to send more NATO military equipment to Russia’s borders as the Kiev government seeks to conquer the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk in eastern Ukraine instead of finding a peaceful solution.

However, the West still remains deeply divided about escalating tensions in Ukraine, mostly between the Anglo Alliance (US, UK and Australia, or AUKUS) and EU members France and Germany. Even their manner of engagement with Moscow points to stark differences, with the French and Germans taking the matter seriously, whilst Truss seemingly has little knowledge of geography. This is what triggered Lavrov to say in a press conference following his meeting with Truss on February 10: “It’s like they’re listening to us but not hearing.”

Britain’s top diplomat demanded Russian soldiers to withdraw from the border with Ukraine, prompting Lavrov to reiterate that they are stationed within their own sovereign territory and Russia has the right to conduct such maneuvers.

According to Russian media, Lavrov questioned whether London recognizes Moscow’s sovereignty over the Rostov and Voronezh Oblasts, in which Truss replied: “[the UK] will never recognize Russia’s sovereignty over these regions.” British Ambassador to Moscow Deborah Bronnert had to embarrassingly intervene and reminded Truss that the two oblasts are actually considered Russian territory by London and are not claimed by any other country, including Ukraine.

This embarrassment follows on from Truss saying on January 30 that “we are supplying and offering extra support to our Baltic allies across the Black Sea” – the Baltics and the Black Sea are on the opposite sides of Europe to each other.

The Anglo Alliance demonstrates that their collective effort to provoke Moscow is disjointed, but none-the-less united behind the common propaganda that the Russian military is on the verge of invading Ukraine. Although Biden was certainly harsher in his tone towards Moscow and created hysteria by using buzzwords like “world war” and warning that things “can go crazy quickly”, he none-the-less managed to embarrass himself like Truss on February 10 by saying: “there is no way we were ever going to unite Ukraine — I mean, excuse me, Iraq… Afghanistan.”

Given that Biden said this on the same day that Truss revealed she did not know the differences between the Russian Oblasts of Rostov and Voronezh [East of Kharkiv] and the Donbass People’s Republics in eastern Ukraine, it was an embarrassing day for Anglo diplomacy. The dangerous language used though, especially from Biden, threatens to undermine the recent work of French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz. The German and French leaders are critical of Russia, but unlike AUKUS, they still seek genuine dialogue to resolve the Ukraine impasse to avoid war on the continent.

 

 

It is for this reason that Brandon Weichert, a former US congressional staffer and geopolitical expert, warned that Germany and France would surely “[throw] the Americans under the bus, which they will because Paris thinks that would weaken America’s unwanted hold over European affairs.” Biden’s threats of “world war”, as well as Truss struggling to grasp the basic geography of a region that she berates Moscow about, highlights that the Anglo Alliance is only becoming increasingly desperate in maintaining tensions and instability as the Europeans attempt to find a solution.

*

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

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dangerous Crossroads: Biden Warns of “World War”. “Things Could Go Crazy” Says Biden

Someone Needs to Tell the Kremlin that the “Ukraine Crisis” Is Over

February 11th, 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

As I have warned for some time, sooner or later the Kremlin will lose its patience with Washington and its European puppet states.  Signs of this are now appearing.  The normally very diplomatic Russian Foreign Minister, Lavrov,  just compared his discussion with his British counterpart, Liz Truss, with talking to a deaf person.  He added: “Russia has been cheated and wronged for many years, many times, when it comes to agreements and obligations from other states.” 

At a February 10 press conference, Lavrov said his Ukrainian counterpart was “lying with a straight face” and is a member of the “school of Goebbels, and maybe even surpasses the art of the chief propagandist of the Third Reich.”

The Russian Foreign Ministry said that Russia will not attend this year’s Munich Security Conference because the conference “has been increasingly transformed into  a transatlantic forum” and has lost “its inclusiveness and objectivity.”  This is a sign that Russia is learning to give up on endless talk.

Russia’s UN ambassador, Gennady Gatilov, said Russia’s “serious concern is that the US and its allies are exacerbating the situation to the point where the game of raising the stakes could turn into a real tragedy.”

Even Putin is losing patience: 

“Not an inch to the East they told us in the 1990s, and look what happened – they cheated us, vehemently and blatantly.”

Russia’s anger is long overdue. I wouldn’t have been able to keep my patience so long.  Nevertheless, I don’t understand why Russia goes on about it.  Russia made it clear at the security talks that it means war if Ukraine is made a member of NATO. The West understood the message. When Blinken and Stoltenberg say it is up to them and Ukraine whether Ukraine becomes a NATO member, they are merely saving face by asserting a right they dare not use.  No NATO country would invite its own destruction by knowingly provoking Russia to war. The US and NATO lack the capability of confronting Russia in conventional war, as the few droplets of troops and equipment sent to Europe “to deter Russian aggression” testify. Even as insane as Washington is, Washington will not destroy itself and its European empire over Ukraine or Poland or Romania.

The Donbass republics, the flashpoint for military confrontation, have already begged the Kremlin to reabsorb them into Russia, their home country. The Kremlin could erase the flashpoint by reabsorbing the Donbass Russians and reminding the West to “get off our doorstep before you are driven off.”  But the Kremlin doesn’t want Donbass any more than it wants Ukraine. The Kremlin came up with the Minsk Agreement, because the Kremlin wants to keep the Donbass Russians in Ukraine for the same reason that the Soviet government put them there–to water down the Ukrainian neo-Nazis and prevent a train wreck. The Kremlin does not want the responsibility for Ukraine, and the Kremlin doesn’t want to give Western propagandists support for their claim that Putin wants to restore the Soviet empire. The only reason Russia would invade Ukraine would be to forestall US missile bases being located there.

I don’t believe there is a crisis.  It is an illusion of crisis produced by endless talks that the Russians find frustrating.  They should stop talking. Ukraine will never be put in NATO unless Russia collapses militarily.  If Donbass is again part of Russia, no one will attack Donbass.  The flashpoint for the past seven years will be gone.

The alleged “Ukraine Crisis” has proved that NATO has no capability of defending Ukraine or any Eastern European member, nor in my opinion any Western European member.  The Polish and Romanian governments know this as well as anyone. The US missile bases endanger them, not defend them.  They will have the bases removed. The bases serve no Polish or Romanian purpose.

It is obvious that Washington, its British puppet, and Stoltenberg are doing their best to provoke Russia into invading Ukraine. The question is why?  One reason could be that a show of Russian teeth will frighten the NATO countries back into Washington’s arms, but why does Europe, or some of it, support this?  Do European countries prefer to be puppets instead of sovereign states?

Those years in the past when the US had a media instead of a collection of whores, reporters would be asking Biden and Blinken why they are trying to provoke a Russian invasion of Ukraine.  But of course, whores don’t ask such questions.  They just take the money and perform the necessary act.

I wonder if the Kremlin has an explanation why Russia is being provoked in this way.  If Russia decides to attack, I doubt that Shogu would waste Russian military resources on such a non-threat as Ukraine, which is being used by Washington as a pawn.  Russia, one assumes, would focus its attention on the real threat.  The best way to do that is to ignore Washington and go about Russia’s business.

It is time for Russia to get on with its partnership with China, setting up a new payments system and a new reserve currency and developing the Asian trade relations to which both countries have committed. It is inexplicable why Russia and China got themselves entangled in Washington’s financial tentacles. It is difficult to believe that Putin and XI are as gullible as the average American. It is long past time for both countries to jettison the neoliberal economics that holds both countries back.  As Michael Hudson and I have made clear, there is no validity to neoliberal economics.  Russia should use its exports of energy to Europe to strengthen the ruble by billing in rubles.  Why should Russia strengthen the Euro and dollar by billing in those currencies?

Russia and China should simply exit the Western world. They don’t even need diplomatic contact.  The West is dying. Its economies are shot. As Covid mandates and forced vaccinations proved, the Western leadership class is committed to tyranny. Australia even has citizens in concentration camps. The Canadian and American governments have declared peaceful protest to be “domestic terrorism” and are trying to blame the truckers’ protest on Russia. The Western media does nothing but lie for the governments.  The culture is rotten and sordid, civil liberty eroded. 

Russia and China have emerged from the tyranny associated with Stalin and Mao, while the West has fallen into tyranny.  If there is any hope for mankind, it is not in the West, which is demonizing its own founding fathers, demolishing its own historical monuments, black-listing its own classic literature, demonizing its own ethnic populations and permitting  immigrant-invaders to dilute national ethnicities  by overrunning national borders.  Western countries are becoming Towers of Babel, devoid of a nationalist consciousness that patriotism requires.  Countries with populations that have nothing in common can only be held together by force. Such countries are weak and are incapable of standing up to unified countries.

*

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

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from epthinktank.eu

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.

***

Children’s Health Defense said it is poised to take legal action against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory panel if the committee recommends Pfizer’s Emergency Use Authorization vaccine for children under 5.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD), along with Chairman and Chief Legal Counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., today delivered a letter to top public health officials and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) urging them to reject Pfizer’s application for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of its COVID vaccine for children 6 months through 4 years of age.

The letter reads, in part:

“We are writing to put you on notice that should you recommend this pediatric EUA vaccine to children under five years old, CHD is poised to take legal action against you.

“CHD will seek to hold you accountable for recklessly endangering this population with a product that has little, no, or even negative net efficacy but which may put them, without warning, at risk of many adverse health consequences, including heart damage, stroke and other thrombotic events and reproductive harms.”

VRBPAC will meet Feb. 15 to consider Pfizer’s application for EUA status for this age group.

“There is absolutely no COVID emergency for children under 5 years old,” said CHD president and general counsel Mary Holland. “Considering that healthy children have virtually zero risk of complications or death from COVID and that the adverse events being reported following COVID vaccination are at historic rates and climbing, it’s outrageous that the FDA is even discussing an EUA vaccine for this age group.”

The latest data from the U.S. government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System shows a total of 1,088,560 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines. This includes 23,149 deaths and 183,311 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 28, 2022.

Vaccine makers including Pfizer cannot be held liable for injuries and deaths following vaccination with EUA vaccines.

The letter to VRBPAC and health officials, including Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky and acting FDA Director Dr. Janet Woodcock, points out the following:

  • A large study conducted in Germany showed zero deaths for children under 5 and a case fatality rate of three out of a million in children without comorbidities.
  • A Johns Hopkins study monitoring 48,000 children diagnosed with COVID showed a zero mortality rate in children under 18 without comorbidities.
  • A study in Nature demonstrated that children under 18 with no comorbidities have virtually no risk of death.
  • Data from England and Wales, published by the UK Office of National Statistics on January 17, 2022, revealed that throughout 2020 and 2021, only one child under the age of 5, without comorbidities, died from COVID in the two countries, whose total population is 60 million.
  • Another study in Nature from April, suggests children’s bodies clear the virus more easily than adults.
  • A study published in December in Nature demonstrated how children efficiently mount effective, robust and sustained immune responses to COVID.

CHD this week asked the general public to also contact VRBPAC and public health officials with their concerns on granting EUA status for COVID vaccines targeting infants and young children.

“If the vaccine does attain EUA status, it will be an important milestone on the pharmaceutical industry’s path to the ultimate goal of getting COVID shots on the federally-recommended childhood schedule,” said Holland.

“This will then ensure immunity from liability for injuries and deaths in perpetuity to manufacturers and healthcare providers. Our children deserve better.”

*

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The waters are choppy at the point where the São Francisco River meets the Atlantic Ocean, but Jailton Souza, a fisherman since he was a boy, calmly guides the boat along. He’s used to taking tourists to the river’s mouth, which marks the border between the eastern Brazilian states of Sergipe and Alagoas.

Meandering 2,830 kilometers (1,760 miles), the São Francisco is the longest river that runs entirely through Brazil. And its mouth is a spot of extreme beauty — a dazzle of mangrove forests and white sandy beaches where turtles lay their eggs — but one where, increasingly, signs of degradation are evident. “The seawater killed off the coconut palm groves and the rice plantations,” Jailton says, pointing.

The impacts of oil exploration on the São Francisco River are already being felt by fishermen like Jailton Souza. Image by Ailton Rocha da Cruz/Agência Pública.

Velho Chico, or Old Francis, as the river is known by the locals, can no longer contain the sea’s advance inland. The strength of the river’s flow has declined in recent years, the result of hydroelectric dams being built upstream and the diversion of large volumes of water to supply communities affected by extreme drought.

The most recent threat comes from oil and gas exploration in the area surrounding the river’s mouth. U.S. oil giant ExxonMobil has plans to drill 11 oil wells in the area immediately surrounding the estuary, in the Sergipe-Alagoas Basin.

The area that would be affected directly and indirectly by Project SEAL, as it’s known, is vast, stretching some 2,000 km (1,240 mi) from Alagoas south through the states of Sergipe, Bahia, Espírito Santo, to Rio de Janeiro. In the event of an oil spill, at least 52 conservation areas would be directly affected, including the Costa dos Corais Environmental Protection Area, one of seven areas considered crucial for the protection of Brazil’s coral reefs.

ExxonMobil is still awaiting an environmental license from IBAMA, the Brazilian environmental regulator, before it can start drilling. However, the company has already started to train local communities on how to deal with possible oil spills.

Local fishers told Agência Pública how the company had paid daily fees of up to 2,500 reais ($480) per boat to teach them things such as how to contain an underwater oil spill. Agência Pública’s reporters traveled more than 400 km (250 mi) by land and sea through Alagoas and Sergipe to visit the communities that would be most affected but that continue to be excluded from discussions surrounding the project.

IBAMA told news site InfoSãoFrancisco that it had not authorized the training sessions on how to deal with oil spills. The agency didn’t respond to Agência Publica’s request for comment on whether carrying out such training is a necessary stage in the licensing process. ExxonMobil’s history of environmental disasters includes one of the biggest oil spills in history, the 1989 episode known as the “black tide,” when one of the company’s tankers, the Exxon Valdez, spilled 37,000 metric tons of oil in Alaska.

For its Project SEAL, training activities have reportedly already taken place in at least four municipalities across Alagoas — Piaçabuçu, Coruripe, Jequiá da Praia, and Barra de São Miguel — as well as in the village of Saramém in Sergipe. The training sessions in each place usually lasted around 10 days, and were often announced and publicized by the local councils. In a statement, the Piaçabuçu municipal authoritiestold local residents about the installation of a structure, next to the town hall, that would be used for “practical training for the protection of the coast.”

For Divaneide Sousa, a coordinator from the civil society group Articulação do São Francisco, the local authorities are being co-opted by the oil giant. “They have an eye on the royalties from the oil,” she said.

The training sessions were jointly run by U.S. emergency management consultancy Witt O’Brien’s and Brazilian company OceanPact, which specializes in contingency plans for the oil industry and in environmental disaster response efforts. The two companies teamed up in a joint venture in 2011.

Witt O’Brien’s also signed off on the impact assessment for ExxonMobil’s project in the São Francisco estuary. In October 2019, the company was subject to a number ofsearch and seizure warrants after being named as a “qualified individual” in the investigation into the Greek oil tanker Bouboulina, belonging to Delta Tankers Ltd., which was identified as being responsible for an oil spill along the Brazilian coast between 2019 and 2020.

At the time, nearly 5,000 metric tons of oil were removed from more than 1,000 sites across 11 states in Brazil, nine of them in the country’s northeast. Some 3,000 km (1,900 mi) of coastline were contaminated by oil, in what was the biggest environmental crime in Brazil’s history in terms of the total area affected.

The Federal Police only concluded their investigation into the disaster in December last year, in which it named a Greek oil tanker as the ship responsible for the spill, but stopped short of confirming whether it was the Bouboulina. They also didn’t disclose the name of the company at fault, or clarify whether Witt O’Brien’s had any links to the vessel.

Pools of oil on a beach show the extent of the 2019 spill along Brazil’s northeast coastline. Image by Brenda Alcântara/Agência Pública.

‘The end for the river’

In the event of an oil spill from ExxonMobil’s Project SEAL, the company’s own studies show that the town of Piaçabuçu would be one of the first places to be hit by such a disaster. The beach of Pontal do Peba, close to the town, is the last strip of sand at the point where the São Francisco River flows into the sea. Piaçabuçu, with just over 19,000 inhabitants, was once an important point of rice cultivation. But the increasing saltwater intrusion into the water table, caused by the weakening of the river’s flow, has effectively ended that industry.

With the loss of rice farming, fishing remains the major source of economic activity. The waters off Piaçabuçu are home to the largest shrimp population in northeastern Brazil, and the fourth largest in the whole country. Tourism is also a key revenue source for the municipality, but income from both industries has dwindled in recent years — first because of the 2019 oil spill, then followed by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Environmental Protection Area of Piaçabuçu, which protects threatened species such as sea turtles, is run on scarce resources. In September 2021, in response to ExxonMobil’s proposed project, the Federal Public Ministry in Alagoas quizzed protection areas across the region about their operating conditions in the event of an accident. The management of the Piaçabuçu Environmental Protection Area responded in an official letter, stating that the area has just “two employees and one vehicle,” and therefore doesn’t have the “operational capacity to neither protect against nor minimize the impacts that would result from an oil spill.”

At the end of 2021, representatives from ExxonMobil visited the fishing community in Piaçabuçu. “They asked us to nominate some fishermen for their training sessions,” says Antônio Amorim, president of the local fishing community, which has nearly 4,000 members. Sixty boats were chosen to take part in the training sessions, with the larger ones receiving 2,500 reais ($480) a day, and the smaller boats 2,000 reais ($380). “It was helpful for those who were out of work and relying upon Bolsa Família [a social welfare program] for their income,” Amorim says. He’s reluctant to criticize the project, but say another potential accident in a region that has already suffered an oil spill “is a massive worry.”

For Jasiel Martins, founder of the NGO Olha o Chico, the money from the training sessions was a means of “silencing people.” The organization is part of the managing council of the Piaçabuçu Environmental Protection Area, which was dismantled by the administration of President Jair Bolsonaro — one of a whole range of structures that fostered civil engagement and participation in public management that have been dissolved by the government. The NGO, along with more than 100 other organizations, has signed a public letter speaking out against the construction of the oil well in the river’s mouth. The letter raises concerns about flaws in the project’s environment impact assessment and calls for the communities threatened by the project to be consulted through in-person public hearings, which have not taken place due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

On the front line of the fight for the São Francisco River, Martins says he’s certain that “any accident would be the end for the river.” “It’s already a struggle to survive here. The aningas [freshwater plants] have disappeared, fish have migrated. Those of us living here on the banks of the São Francisco have it tough, we’re dependent on water trucks to bring us drinking water because the water supply here is too saline.”

Quilombos at the oil’s mercy

The only way to get from Piaçabuçu in Alagoas to Brejo Grande in Sergipe is across the São Francisco River. The small ferry takes about an hour to reach the outskirts of Brejo Grande, the closest point of the coastline to the project’s drilling site, just 50 km (30 mi) away. In the event of a serious oil spill, oil slicks would reach this point of the coast in about two days, according to ExxonMobil’s own estimations.

Four quilombos — communities formed by Quilombolas, or Afro-Brazilian descendants of runaway slaves — are found in the municipality: Brejo Grande, Santa Cruz, Resina and Carapitanga. For the 480 families who live here, mainly traditional fishers and farmers, life is uneasy.

Studies show that the municipality of Brejo Grande, in the state of Sergipe, would be one of the first places to be hit in the event of an oil spill in the São Francisco river estuary. Image by Ailton Rocha da Cruz/Agência Pública.

Running water is scarce in the homes in the quilombos, and an internet connection even scarcer. An invitation to a digital hearing about ExxonMobil’s project therefore makes little sense.

“They asked us to come and watch the hearing on a big screen in Aracaju [the Sergipe state capital], a four-hour drive from here,” says Domenicio dos Santos, one of the quilombola community leaders. “And that was just for us to watch the proceedings, not even to have our voices heard.”

“They [ExxonMobil] turned up and started bothering us, offering us money and training sessions,” says Enéas Rosa, a fisherman and leader of the Resina quilombo. “We didn’t get involved because we understood what was at stake.”

Tired from her daily chores, Maria Isaltina Silva, a leader of the Brejão dos Negros quilombo, leans on the window ledge of her house. From here, she can see the Sumidouro Lagoon, a place known for its tales of magic and witchcraft. Her family has lived in this area going back at least 300 years, fishing and harvesting crabs. “People talk about emancipation, but we weren’t emancipated. We’re still being persecuted, just in different ways,” she says. “If we want to preserve the marshes we have here, they turn up and destroy them. Our livelihood comes from the river and the marshes. We don’t know anything else.”

Online public hearings without internet

Jane Teresa and Jerônimo Basílio, environmental lawyers from the Canoa de Tolda Society in Sergipe, signed a public civil lawsuit seeking to stop the public hearing on the project from taking place online, InfoSãoFrancisco reported. They said the scheduling of the hearing, a vital stage in the process of attaining an environmental license, didn’t meet legal requirements, such as prior consultation of the traditional communities as stipulated in Convention 169 of the International Labour Organization, which Brazil has ratified.

The Federal Public Ministry in both Sergipe and Alagoas states tried to cancel the online public consultation, in an attempt to guarantee the local population a fair and in-person hearing that would also abide by pandemic-related health protocols. However, the request was rejected by the courts. On Sept. 14, 2021, environmental regulator IBAMA carried out an online public hearing, broadcast via YouTube, featuring representatives from ExxonMobil and Witt O’Brien’s. Although some people received a link to participate and speak during the event, connection issues and problems with audio and video were the subject of constant complaints.

Questions during the hearing were selected and read out by Jônatas Trindade, the director for environmental licensing at IBAMA. Trindade even interrupted a representative from the fishing community as he was reading out an open letter from the communities against the project, alleging that the fisherman had passed his allotted time limit.

According to lawyer Jane Teresa, there are at least 116 quilombola communities in the region that would be affected by the project. “Many of these communities don’t have internet access, so how were they even going to participate?” She adds that ExxonMobil had submitted its environmental impact assessment after the deadline had already passed, “thereby prejudicing the principle of transparency.”

He colleague, Jerônimo Basílio, says it’s necessary to carry out more than one online hearing, “as established by Resolution 9/87 from the Nation Council for the Environment (CONAMA), given the complexity of the impacts that project would have, involving at least five states and 76 municipalities in its zone of influence,” he says.

Juliana Câmara, a lawyer with the Federal Public Ministry, sought to cancel the online hearing because of the loss of any effective popular participation. She filed a public civil lawsuit with an immediate injunction to urgently request the scheduling of a new, in-person public hearing with the participation of the traditional fishing communities who were excluded from the initial debate because of a lack of internet access. The request also calls for multiple public hearings to take place, “given the geographic range of the environmental impacts,” and for “a 10,000 reais [$1,900] fine for each administrative act carried out without the scheduling of the new in-person public hearing with the participation of traditional communities.” The courts have not yet responded to the request.

Câmara is used to monitoring activities that have a large socioenvironmental impact. But some aspects of this case in particular have grabbed her attention, she says. First and foremost, she says, is the way the environmental licensing process was rushed through. “What is also interesting is the way IBAMA has behaved, highlighting issues with the project, but then quickly accepting the company’s justifications,” she says. She adds the ExxonMobil, which had hoped to start drilling in the second half of the year, has made clear its dissatisfaction with the inquiries coming from the Federal Public Ministry and the resistance from the communities. “They have said that the delay in acquiring the environmental license will impact business interest in their concession.”

Câmara says she sought out expert analysis of the environmental impact assessment. “The experts highlighted the use of obsolete data, which did not take into account the synergistic nature of the activities, which go beyond the drilling and extraction itself and also include the movement of ships transporting the oil, gas and waste products, which will be taken to be treated in Niterói [in Rio de Janeiro state],” she says.

‘The last thing you would do’

Emerson Soares, a professor at the Federal University of Alagoas (UFAL), recalls the moment he spotted the first signs of the oil as he walked along the beach in August 2019. “I came across some sand dollars” — an animal similar to a sea urchin “that had oil stains. I took them with me so I could analyze them later. A couple of weeks later, a turtle washed up that was also covered in oil.” A fishing engineer with a Ph.D. in biotechnology, Soares led the task force that responded to the oil spill in Alagoas and coordinated scientific expeditions along the São Francisco River, collecting data and promoting efforts to raise environmental awareness.

“If common sense was taken into account at all, drilling for oil at the mouth of the river would be the last thing you would do,” he says. He questions the modeling used for Project SEAL’s environment impact assessment and the studies on the spread of potential oil spills, saying they’re outdated. “They don’t take into account the most recently published research on the flow of the São Francisco River, which is constantly changing. Nor does it take into account the levels of heavy metals present in the water, which increased significantly since the 2019 oil spill, and which polluted the area around the mouth of the river.”

In the event of an oil spill, Brejo Grande would be at risk of being polluted within approximately two days, according to modeling carried out by ExxonMobil. The map on the left shows the extent of a spill during summer, and the one of the right during winter. Image by ExxonMobil.

Given that the true socioenvironmental impacts of the 2019 oil disaster were never truly measured, let alone dealt with, Soares says he’s concerned by the high risks associated with new activity on the river. Although experts from ExxonMobil have made assurances that the risk of a leak from the oil wells targeted for extraction is low — a one in 30,000 chance — the projections made by Soares are alarming.

Because of the weakened flow of the river, owing to the water crisis and the construction of dams along the river’s course, among other factors, the São Francisco River would not be able to contain the spread of any oil spill in the river’s estuary. The whole region surrounding the river’s mouth would be severely contaminated by such a spill. In the worst-case scenario, Soares says, the oil would reach municipalities across the northern coast of Sergipe and the southern coast of Alagoas.

The severity of such an oil spill would depend entirely upon the extent of the leak, the response time, the time of year during which it occurred, and the currents. However, even in the most modest of scenarios, the municipalities surrounding the mouth of the São Francisco River would be the most vulnerable to contamination. What this would mean in effect is that all of the Environmental Protection Areas, the local communities and highly important economic activities for the region, such as tourism, fishing, and shrimp, oyster and clam harvesting, could be affected by such a disaster.

“That’s without even taking into account the São Francisco mangrove forests, which are home to nearly 50% of the region’s species,” Soares says. “And it’s not just about accidents, as the act of drilling for oil in and of itself has an impact in terms of the release of toxic waste materials and the increase in the number of vessels on the waterways that are involved in the extraction process, which would completely change the local dynamics and also bring invasive species to the region on the hulls of the ships.”

In response to questions from Agência Pública, ExxonMobil gave the following statement:

“With regard to the maritime oil wells in the Sergipe-Alagoas basin, ExxonMobil is following every recommendation and protocol coming from the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Natural Resources (IBAMA). Our priority is to preserve the health and security of the community and the environment. We would like to reinforce that numerous meetings took place with representatives from the communities in the project’s area of influence, as well as an online public hearing, led by IBAMA, which took place on September 14, 2021. The hearing was open to the public and was transmitted via Zoom, YouTube, and local radio stations, and is available for access via the following link: www.audienciapublicaExxonMobil.com.br/seal.”

In a statement, Witt O’Brien’s said that the consultancy was “not involved in any way in the oil disaster on the Brazilian coast” in 2019, nor did it have “any type of relationship with Delta Tankers.” The company also stated that “it was not named in the police inquiry,” as was suggested by the document released by the Federal Police in November 2019, but rather that it was contacted by the Federal Police in the course of investigations in order to “supply further information needed that could help with investigations.”

*

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

This article was first published here in Portuguese by Agência Pública and translated into English by Matty Rose from the Latin America Bureau.

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.

***

Never before have Americans foisted the fear of sickness in adults onto children and traded the risk to adults for risk to children. Clearly, some in the US think it’s okay to inject fear of harming others into the hearts and minds of children for the sake of adults. This, to me, reveals the selfishness inherent in individuals who have a self-aggrandized sense of entitlement. Adults who have not cared well for themselves have placed themselves at risk of severe COVID-19 are now expecting to use children as a buffer for their own health

Granted, some of them have not had the chance to learn of effective means of reducing their personal risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus, nor of means to reduce their risk of serious COVID-19 due to censorship and disinformation by LMOs (legacy media outlets). In projecting fear of COVID-19 onto children, adults have mandated futile public health measures, such as masking in school – a mistake based on a fallacy propagated by Fauci and CDC that many states are now waking up to as complete a waste of time as lockdowns.

On Tuesday, February 15, VRBPAC, the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, will be meeting to consider an application from Pfizer for an EUA for kids 6-months to 4-years old.

The likelihood that the vaccine will prevent a single case of COVID-19 in adults is nearly zero.

The fact is, there is no emergency in this age group. Even NIAID Director Anthony Fauci doubts the number of hospitalizations attributed to COVID-19 in children is actually due to COVID-19.

From Newsweek (12/31/2021):

“Speaking to MSNBC’s Ayman Mohyeldin, who was filling in for Rachel Maddow on Wednesday night, Fauci suggested that some of the children currently being treated at medical facilities were hospitalized with COVID as opposed to ‘because of COVID.’

He added that some children who are currently listed as being in hospital with COVID may actually be receiving treatment for ‘a broken leg or appendicitis,’ rather than for a severe reactions (sic) to the virus.”

This means there are a number of important breaches of ethical and legal standards involved in the activities undertaken to render the data to be considered by FDA.

(1) Under the US Code of Federal Regulations, it is illegal to conduct medical experiments on a person and enroll them in a clinical trial unless there is a direct potential personal benefit to them via their participation. Since there is no COVID-19 emergency in this age group, the studies conducted by Pfizer may well have been illegal – and are certainly immoral.

(2) Post-EDU Vaccine adverse event surveillance is a form of clinical research, and parents will not be provided, as required under the Common Rule and the rest of US 45-CFR-46, the opportunity to decline on the basis of refusal to participate in medical experimentation on their children.

(3) The EUA sought will be based on data from a scant 2 months of follow-up on safety. If the EUA is sought, millions of children will be vaccinated based on 2 months’ data for a biologic known to cause harm in adults; this is utterly unacceptable.

(4) Post-EUA vaccine adverse event surveillance studies will involve reports of vaccine-related injuries and deaths to VAERS. Causality will be denied due to the design of the VAERS reporting system. These include that not all events must be reported; contract to testimony by CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, events following vaccines do not have to be reported. There are no penalties for doctors who fail to report, and many physicians will lie to the parents of their patients and state, without any scientific evidence, that the adverse event or death could not have been caused by the COVID-19 vaccine.

(5) In the studies that led to the EUA for COVID-19 vaccines for adults, vaccine manufacturers skipped Phase 2 by conducting Phase 1 trials followed by combined Phase 2/3 trials. In this study leading up to their bid for EUA for children, Pfizer combined Phases 1, 2 and 3 into a Phase 1/2/3 trial. This prevents the generation of data confirming prior adverse events found in separate Phase 1 and 2 trials. This is utterly reprehensible.

(6) The causality of injuries and deaths following COVID-19 vaccines in this age group will not be able to file for compensation via the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s “Vaccine Court,”, in which the Health and Human Services (HHS) is both the defendant and the administrator. Parents who file vaccine injury claims for their children in the NVICP have to seek experts for testimony linking, at the cellular and molecular level, the constituent parts of COVID-19 vaccines and the specific physiological basis of injuries or deaths in specific patients. Arguing causality using a single patient is the status quo of the culture of the Vaccine Court, which any scientist worth their salt will tell you is next to impossible. HHS medical experts will provide testimony arguing against each and every single death or injury following COVID-19, and no participants in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program will be able to access the testimony from other cases – including rulings, nor will they be able to cite precedent.

The rules in the NVICP abrogate a number of important fundamental precepts of Western Law. The HHS, which falls in the Executive Branch of US Government, is both the defendant and the administrator of the NVICP, which is (ostensibly) part of the US Judiciary branch of government, a clear violation of the separation of powers doctrine of the US Constitution.

From Cornell.Edu:

“Separation of powers is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) are kept separate. … Each branch has separate powers, and generally each branch is not allowed to exercise the powers of the other branches.”

How do we know all of this? We know this because these facts have been established for a long time as the status quo for all other pediatric vaccines on the CDC’s recommended vaccine schedule.

However, for COVID-19 vaccine-related injuries and deaths, parents will have to file in a program called the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). The CICP has been in play since 2013, long before COVID-19. Parents will have to file a “request for benefits” package. Unlike the NVICP, in which one can file up to three years following initial symptoms linked to the vaccine, CICP requires that parents file within one year.

Parents have twelve months to link their children’s death or injury to COVID-19 vaccines based on 2 months of follow-up for safety. And, of course, Pfizer will not be liable for any damages.

Some Predictions Based on Leaked Data

We’ve had a peek at the data that will be reviewed by VRBAC – and we need to insist that they consider absolute risk reduction, as opposed to relative risk reduction. From the New York Times:

“One person familiar with the data, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said children 2 to 4 years old who were given two shots were infected at a rate 57 percent lower than the children in the placebo group. Children 6 months to 2 years old who got shots were infected at a rate 50 percent lower than the placebo group. There were fewer than 100 cases of symptomatic infection — a small fraction of the participants overall.”

Here, we see a leak from Pfizer, designed to inspire confidence in their stocks, offered without any caveat as a forward-looking statement (alert Security Exchange Commission). I can tell from the language, however, that the data are representing rates of diagnosis (not reductions in hospitalizations), and that they are prepared as relative risk reduction. That’s the thing about percentages: a 57 percent reduction in diagnosis can involve a handful of children (1% is 50% of 2%, after all), and this practice of reporting only relative risk is par for the course for VRBPAC and other committees, such as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) committee.

The futile continued use of vaccines that target extinct variants, however, may make VRBPAC’s job of cheerleading difficult: the data appear to not support protection against Omicron (Source: New York Times).

The results are also likely to be arbitrarily subdivided into subjective age groups (“6 mos-2 years” and “over 2 years old”) because the results may not have been impressive using all of the data from all children in the study in a single analysis.

The evidence of “immunity” will also likely be restricted to antibody production, and we know that high antibody production is (1) not indicative of long-term immunity and (2) desirable given the possibility of pathogenic priming.

The FDA Committee will not be told by Pfizer that the scientific evidence is mounting that the use of vaccines designed for extinct COVID-19 variants is linked to the easier spread of the virus from cell to cell in infected individuals. You can read my article on Dr. Fantini and colleagues’ findings on this here, published Dec 26, 2021.

How to Contact VRBPAC and Urge Them to Deny the EUA

You can participate with the VRBPAC meeting, scheduled for Feb 15th, 2022, here

  1. Take some time and draft, in your own words, a message outlining your concerns.
  2. Be sure to reference that you are addressing the Pending FDA EUA Consideration of the Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Use in Children Ages 6 months through four years of age, Docket FDA-2022-N-0082.
  3. Pfizer’s Press release is here.
  4. The New York Times Article with the evidence of the data leak is here(subscription required).
  5. Also send your message as email to SEC Chair, Gary Gensler [email protected] and remind him that earlier press releases related to COVID-19 vaccines did not include the required “Forward-Looking Statements” and that you are concerned that the data leak violates SEC requirements.

The Roster for the VRBPAC Committee is here.

Address your message as follows:

To: Hana El Sahly, M.D., Chair and the entire VRBPAC Committee

Subject: Pending EUA Meeting, Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine in Young Children

Feel free to use any or all of the text of my articles as inspiration, but please try to make your message your own.

And, as always, you can help defeat censorship and share this article with your family, friends and your neighbors.

*

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

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

On Saturday 5 February 2022 lawyers gave their opening statements at the Grand Jury Proceeding by the Peoples’ Court of Public Opinion, an international natural law court.  Attorney at Law Dr. Reiner Fuellmich from Germany gave his opening statement which included an overview of the expert witnesses that will testify before the court. 

Below is the video of Dr. Fuellmich’s opening statement and the transcript.

Good aftenoon.

My name is Reiner Fuellmich and it is my pleasure to serve as one member of a group of distinguished international attorneys and lawyers who have been collaborating on this very important case for many months now.

This case involving the most heinous crimes against humanity committed under the guise of a “corona pandemic” on a global scale looks complicated only at first glance. But when you put together all those pieces – all those little pieces of the puzzle, as we will do this for you with the help of many renowned experts and other witnesses during this proceeding – you will see four sets of facts.

One, there is no corona pandemic but only a PCR test plandemic fuelled by an elaborate psychological operation designed to create a constant state of panic among the world’s population. This agenda has been long planned – its ultimately unsuccessful precursor was the swine flu some 12 years ago – and it was cooked up by a group of super rich psychopathic and sociopathic people who hate and fear people at the same time, have no empathy, and are driven by the desire to gain full control over all of us, the people of the world. They are using our governments and the mainstream media, both of which they literally own, to convey their panic propaganda 24/7.

Two, the virus itself can be treated safely and effectively with vitamin C, D, zinc etc and also with off-label use of ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine etc. But all these, not alternative methods of treatment but, real methods of treatment were banned by those who are using the guise of this plandemic to push their ultimate goal which is to get everyone to receive the, as we will show in this proceeding, not only ineffective but highly dangerous – yes lethal – experimental injections.

Three, the same people who made the swine flu, which ultimately turned out to be a mild flu, into a pandemic 12 years ago – by first changing the definition of what a pandemic is and then, creating panic – created this corona pandemic.

The swine flu was their first real attempt at creating a pandemic. And just as one of its purposes then was to divert our attention from the blatantly fraudulent activities of their financial industry – more aptly to be called a financial mafia which had become visible through the Lehman crisis – this is also one of their major purposes of this corona pandemic now.

Had we taken a closer look then, during the Lehman crisis, instead of blindly believing our government’s promises that the perpetrators of those financial crimes will be held liable, we would have seen then that they had been looting and plundering our public coffers for decades. And we would have seen that our governments are not our governments anymore, rather, they have been taken over by the other side through their main platform the World Economic Forum which had started to create their own global leaders through their Young Global Leaders program as early as 1992. Two of the first graduates being Angela Merkel and Bill Gates. And we would have understood, already then, what we will show you now through this proceeding – these financial crimes went unchallenged by our politicians because they are aiding and abetting those who commit them and profiting from these crimes.

Four, ultimately however, we will show to you – the jury – that the other side’s main purpose is to gain full and complete control over all of us. This involves the finalisation of their looting and plundering by deliberately destroying our small and medium-sized businesses, retail businesses, hotel and restaurants so that platforms such as Amazon can take over.

And this involves population control which, in their view, requires both a massive reduction of the population and manipulating the DNA of the remaining population with the help, for example, of mRNA experimental injections.

But it also requires, in their view, the deliberate destruction of democracy, of the rule of law and of our constitutions through chaos so that ultimately we will agree to losing our national and cultural identities and instead will accept: a one world government – under the UN [United Nations] which is now under the full control of them and their World Economic Forum – a digital passport through which each and every move is monitored and controlled and one digital currency which we will only be able to receive from one world bank, theirs of course.

At the conclusion of the case and after you have heard all the evidence, we are confident that you will recommend indictments against all six putative figurehead defendants: Christian Drosten of Germany; Anthony Fauci of the United States; Tedros of the World Health Organisation; Bill Gates; BlackRock and Pfizer.

Ladies and gentlemen, this case is about a long-planned agenda of a group of ultra-rich people and their financial mafia based in the City of London and on Wall Street, to use a pseudo-pandemic as the guise behind which – while our attention is on the pandemic – they want to complete their decades-long efforts to gain full and complete control over all of us.

There are numerous platforms on which this group has been meeting and discussing this agenda. But the most important one is that of the World Economic Forum which was invented in 1971 by, a then 33-year-old, Klaus Schwab. Its members are: a thousand global corporations with at least 5 billion US dollars in annual sales; politicians; media representatives; scientists; and, other so-called high-profile personalities. They meet once a year in Davos but there are other such meetings for example, in China.

And since 1992 they have created and presented to us their own group of political leaders for the world. Among the first graduates, as I mentioned before, are Angela Merkel and Bill Gates in 1992. Others are: Sebastian Kurz, up until recently chancellor of Austria; Justin Trudeau, prime minister of Canada; Jacinda Ardern, prime minister of New Zealand; Francois [Emmanuel] Macron, president of France; and, many, many more.

This group, which is now called the “Davos Clique,” is openly – the publication ‘The Great Reset’ by Klaus schwab is one of the most important sources for this information – promoting the shifting of the world’s assets to this group of super-rich people so that in 2030 ordinary people “will own nothing and be happy” as it explicitly states there, under their one world government with a digital currency given to us by their one world bank and they’re also openly promoting – in close cooperation with people like the putative defendant Bill Gates, the Rockefellers and others – the drastic reduction of the world’s population and the manipulation of the remaining population’s DNA all the way into transhumanism.

Their most important goal is, however, the controlled, by them of course, implosion of the completely looted financial system and simultaneous introduction of a digital currency issued by one world bank, controlled by them, and, just as important, the introduction of a world government under the UN, which has come under their full control in 2019. For this purpose, they have made concrete plans for this corona plandemic since at least the spring of 2001, operation “Dark Winter,” followed by:

  • Another such rehearsal the “Lockstep” exercise by the Rockefeller foundation in 2010; and finally,
  • Event 201” in October of 2019 in New York sponsored by the Johns Hopkins Centre for Health Security, the Rockefeller Foundation, the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Members of the jury, we will call a number of different highly renowned expert witnesses from all walks of science, but also witnesses who will testify to the damage that they suffered as a result of getting the experimental injections, in this trial.

After our opening statements we will start off, in a week from now, by calling:

  • a former member of the US military, James Bush, who participated in operation Dark Winter in 2001;
  • former members of the British intelligence services Brian Gerrish and Alex Thomson; and
  • investigative journalists Whitney Web and Matthew Ehret;
  • former World Health Organisation employees and advisors Dr. Sylvia Behrend and Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger.

They will explain to us the historical and geopolitical background of what we are confronted with. And they will show to us how this agenda has been planned for at least 20 years start starting with operation Dark Winter in 2001 and, some 10 years later, the Lockstep Scenario by the Rockefeller Foundation, ending with the dress rehearsal Event 201 in October of 2019. In the end they will explain how, when there were no cases which they needed to declare a public health emergency of international concern, they created them by having defendant Drosten invent the story of asymptomatic infections, which don’t exist, and how this PCR test can detect, through mass screening of perfectly healthy people, those who are infected is a lie, as we will show.

We will continue with the next group of witnesses:

  • Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, an experienced lung specialist and former member of the German Bundestag and the Council of Europe, who managed to expose the other side’s first attempt at a pandemic, the swine flu of 12 years ago, as a mild flu;
  • Professor Ulrike Kämmerer, biologist from Würzburg University;
  • Dr Mike Yeadon former Vice President of Pfizer;
  • Dr Sylvia Behrend; Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger; Professor Dolores Cahill of Dublin University; Professor Antonia Gatti from Italy; Professor Berkholtz from Germany.

These experts will explain to us what is behind the legend of the Wuhan wet market outbreak. They will show that: the virus is no more dangerous than the common flu; the PCR test cannot tell us anything about infections but is the only basis for all anti-corona measures including the ultimate measure the so-called “vaccines”; and, the so-called “vaccines” are not only ineffective but extremely dangerous.

Regardless of the natural or man-made origin of the virus, our immune system is perfectly well capable of dealing with the virus as evidenced by an infection fatality rate of between 0.14 and 0.15, or even less, percent. There was no excess mortality anywhere until the experimental injections started. There were not even any cases in early 2020, however they needed cases in order to declare a public health emergency of international concern as this was the only basis on which it would be possible, according to their own made-up rules which all governments of the member states of the world health organization had agreed to, to use untested new drugs – the experimental injections – on people.

After a first failed attempt at announcing this public health emergency of international concern because there were no cases, they tried again in late January of 2020 – after they had created cases with the help of that now infamous Drosten PCR test – and announced this public health emergency of international concern two weeks later. We will hear from these experts that these cases were almost all false positive test results, nothing else.

The next group of experts are:

  • Dr Thomas Binder from Switzerland;
  • Dr Bryan Ardis from Texas;
  • Dr. Shankara Chetty from South Africa
  • Dr Wolfgang Wodarg from Germany; and,
  • John O’Looney undertaker from England.

These experts will tell us how right from the start we were witnessing a deliberate, completely senseless banning of normal, effective and safe methods of treatment of respiratory diseases. And instead, a mandate of treatments that must now be considered serious medical malpractice – intubation, remdesivir, midazolam. John O’Looney will explain how he first, believing the other side’s allegations about a pandemic, even helped the BBC in pushing their panic propaganda until he realised how under the guise of the pandemic people were intentionally being killed.

We will then call the next group of experts including:

  • Professor Alexandra Henrion-Caude from France;
  • Dr Mike Yeadon;
  • Professor Sucharit Bhakdi from Germany;
  • Professor Luc Montagnier from France;
  • Dr. Vanessa Schmidt-Kruger from Germany;
  • Dr Robert Malone inventor of the mRNA vaccine technique from the US; and,
  • Professor Arne Burkhardt pathologist from Germany.

They will show us that: while the virus did not cause any excess mortality it has a survival rate of 99.97 percent; the shots are now killing people and have been causing excess mortality of up to 40, since September, as a result of a poisoning with the spike protein and of shutting off our immune system. Dr. Mike Yeadon will tell us how a group of scientists has even found concrete evidence that the makers of the vaccines are experimenting with lethal dosages to see how the lethal side-effects can be manipulated in such a way that the population will not immediately understand what is happening.

The next group of experts will explain to us how it could have come to this. This group includes:

  • Professor Mattias Desmet from Belgium;
  • Dr. Ariane Bilheran from France;
  • Dr Merideth Miller from the US;
  • Professor Harald Walach from Germany; and,
  • Stefan Cohen employee of the German Department of the Interior.

These experts will walk us through how the other side, after having established the public health emergency of international concern, in quick succession introduced us to the lockdown, the nonsensical and dangerous mask mandates, and the very harmful, both physically and psychologically, social distancing until they arrived at their ultimate goal – the ineffective and dangerous even lethal injections. And they will explain to us in detail how our acquiescence to all this was made possible through a gigantic psychological operation whose panic message we kept receiving through the mainstream media and our politicians’, both owned by the other side, relentless propaganda.

The next group of experts includes:

  • Leslie Manukian a former investment banker from the US;
  • Naomi Wolfe, journalist and author from the US;
  • Ernst Wolff a German economist;
  • Professor Christian Kreiss German economist;
  • Professor Holger Reichel a German economist; and,
  • Marcus Kroll a German economist.

This part of the proceeding will have these experts explain to us in great detail about the intentional destruction of our economies and how the other side is working on a controlled crash of the financial system to both: get away with the crimes that they have already committed over the past decades – looting and plundering our public coffers until there’s nothing left – and, to introduce a one world bank and digital currency plus digital passport.

The final group of experts include:

  • Matthew Ehret an investigative journalist from Canada;
  • Vera Sharav a holocaust survivor;
  • Ilana Rachel Daniel from Israel;
  • Rabbi Smith from New York;
  • Patrick Wood an expert on technocracy from the US;
  • Avital Livny from Israel.

This final part of the investigation will have these experts tell us how an important part of the other side’s agenda has to do with population control, or rather eugenics. After World War II eugenics had a bad name – Julian Huxley who founded the UNESCO set. But he and the very large group of people who supported the idea of eugenics would soon be able to continue with their efforts in this direction he openly explained. The parallels between what happened then 80 years ago and what is happening now shall not be ignored. Vera Sharav will remind us of this.

After you have heard all the evidence, we have no doubt that you will recommend indictments against all our putative defendants for crimes against humanity.

Thank you.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Submitted February 10, 2022 to the Federal Register.

Regarding February 15 FDA meeting.

*

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

Featured image is from Immunization.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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The British government is spending tens of millions on media projects in Eastern Europe which are often presented as fighting “Russian disinformation”, but which may involve the UK’s own information operations.

The British government ploughed at least £82.7m of public money into media projects in countries bordering or near Russia in the four years to 2021.

The projects, which take place across 20 countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, are run through the Conflict, Stability and Security Fund (CSSF), a cross-government pot of money with the stated aim of preventing “instability and conflicts that threaten UK interests”.

The National Security Council, which is chaired by the prime minister, sets the fund’s strategic direction. But a parliamentary committee found the CSSF was “being used as a ‘slush fund’ for projects” which “do not meet the needs of UK national security.”

The findings come as tensions between Britain and Russia are high over Ukraine. The UK has accused Russia of planning to invade or launch a coup in Ukraine to install a pro-Moscow government.

Last month Britain began supplying the eastern European country with new anti-tank weapons. Some of the UK-funded media projects appear focused on Ukraine.

Britain is funding media projects in 20 countries (orange) bordering or near Russia (black). (Image: Datawrapper/DCUK)

Britain is funding media projects in 20 countries (orange) bordering or near Russia (black). (Image: Datawrapper/DCUK)

‘Counter-disinformation’ 

The project most clearly directed at Russia is the Counter Disinformation and Media Development programme. It is run around Russia’s western border, from the Baltic States to Central and Eastern Europe, although project documents do not disclose specific countries.

It cost £60.4m in the four years to 2021.

The programme ”supports [the government’s] Russia Strategy’s objective to protect UK national security by reducing the harm to democracy and the rules-based international order caused by Russia’s information operations”.

It also “complements” the UK’s Ukraine Strategy – and appears to be focused on the country.

The project is likely part of the ongoing information war between Russia and Nato. The funds, UK documents note, aim to “understand and expose disinformation across the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) space.”

The project was launched in 2016 and initially called the Russian Language programme. It sees the UK “work with a range of partners to enhance the quality of public and independent Russian language media”. It later expanded to include non-Russian language media.

The support to grantees includes “mentoring with UK media organisations”, “consultancy on programming” and “funded coproductions”. The UK is also supporting media outlets with “the collection of open-source information”.
The Foreign Office, which runs the programme, refused to give Declassified the names of media outlets that have received UK funds.

It also refused to name the UK media organisations that have been “mentoring” through the programme.

*

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

Featured image: Communication towers in Ukraine. Britain financed the installation of 16 radio transmitters in eastern Ukraine to broadcast to Russia-backed rebel regions. (Photo: Anton Petrus / Moment)

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.

***

The computation is based on the Ukrainian government stating the U.S. had delivered 500,000 tons of military assistance as of February 1. There have been four more deliveries since then, at 80 tons per consignment.

*

Tenth plane with ammo arrives in Ukraine from USA – Reznikov

By Interfax-Ukraine

February 10, 2022

The tenth plane has delivered a batch of ammunition to Ukraine as part of the United States’ military-technical assistance, Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksiy Reznikov has said.

“Today is an ‘open day’ at Boryspil airport! Right behind after the ninth bird from the United States, the tenth bird flew. More than 80 tonnes of ammo for the Ukrainian Armed Forces yet,” Reznikov said on Twitter on Wednesday evening.

*

Tenth plane carrying U.S. military aid arrives in Ukraine

By Ukrinform

February 10, 2022

Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov welcomed to Ukraine the tenth plane carrying military assistance from the United States.

“Today is a ‘open doors day’ at the Boryspil Airport! The 10th bird arrived from the United States immediately after the 9th bird. More than 80 tonnes of ammunition for the Armed Forces of Ukraine from our partners! Welcome to Kyiv,” the minister posted on Facebook on the evening of February 9.

As reported, the ninth plane carrying U.S. military aid arrived in Ukraine on February 9.

*

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

Rick Rozoff, renowned author and geopolitical analyst, actively involved in opposing war, militarism and interventionism for over fifty years. He manages the Anti-Bellum and For peace, against war website.

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

Featured image is from Donbass Insider

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.

***

On Feb. 5, more than 55 cities and towns rallied with the message: “Disband NATO! No War on Russia!” The day of action was sponsored by the ANSWER Coalition, Code Pink, Black Alliance for Peace, Peace Action, Maryland Peace Action, Popular Resistance and others. 

From Huntsville, Alabama, to Providence, Rhode Island, from Dallas to Milwaukee to Seattle — people nationwide are standing up against war with Russia. Biden has escalated an already tense conflict with Russia, despite Ukrainian President Zelensky telling Biden that Russia is not about to invade and that Biden’s escalations are causing “panic” in Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital.

In Washington, D.C., protesters spoke at the White House and demanded Biden and the U.S. foreign policy elites stop their threats against Russia. While Biden has already sent U.S. troops to countries surrounding Ukraine, people made their demands heard to stop this war in its tracks.

ANSWER Coalition Director Brian Becker was among those who spoke to the crowd. He explained how the United States gets away with their insatiable war drive, saying:

“The only way to get the American people to say ‘yes’ to spending a trillion of their dollars every year is to fear or hate others. So we’re told to fear the Russians. Hate them. Fear the Chinese. Hate them. Fear the Cubans and the Venezuelans. Fear the Palestinians. And as long as you hate and fear them, you can say maybe the government has a point in spending a trillion dollars of our money every year for death and destruction. Because fear and hatred are a form of collective deflection away from what people know to be the real problem.”

People mobilized and came from around the area to protest in front of the White House and show their support for ending this war on Russia before it’s too late.

Other cities with demonstrations that day included New York City, Seattle and Boston.

In Boston, braving the wind and cold, 75 anti-war activists assembled at Park Street Station in Downtown Boston on February 5. The protesters came from local groups including the Green-Rainbow Party, Veterans For Peace, Committee for Peace and Human Rights, the Massachusetts People’s Party, United Against War and Militarism, Boston May Day Coalition, the ANSWER coalition and others.

Jackie King from Massachusetts Peace Action spoke to the heart of the matter: “We are here today to tell our government, both Democrats and Republicans, that the dangerous actions and words must stop. Step back from the brink! Instead of ratcheting up the tension, the U.S. should deescalate and pursue a path of vigorous and sincere diplomacy.”

ANSWER organizer Nino Brown spoke to the clear U.S. aggression: “The United States has installed bases in Romania, in Latvia, in Poland, all pointing to Russia. [Now] you have U.S. troops in over 800 military bases all over the world. There’s not even 800 countries all over the world!”

By coming together, anti-war activists in Boston exposed the cracks in this foundation of U.S. hegemony. Cracks through which flowers of hope bloom, in the form of multinational working-class unity, organized around one simple slogan: “They say more war. We say no war!”

*

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

Featured image: Boston, Feb. 5. Liberation Photo.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Protest Outside White House Joins 55+ Cities Demanding ‘No War on Russia! Disband NATO!’
  • Tags: , ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Just one day following Kennedy’s Presidential Proclamation formalizing the economic blockade of Cuba, on February 4, 1962, in José Martí Plaza de la Revolución, more than a million people ratified what became known as the Second Declaration of Havana, an emphatic response to the aggression, sabotage and crimes against our country, financed by the United States.

“We will resist in all arenas… the homeland does not work for today, the homeland works for tomorrow. And no one will be able to steal from us a tomorrow so full of promises, no one will be able to prevent it, because with the fortitude of our people… with the courage and heroism of our people, we are going to conquer it,” Fidel insisted at the time.

He condemned U.S. maneuvers to isolate Cuba on the very day that, in Punta del Este, Uruguay, the Organization of American States expelled our nation from the organization, with the votes, under pressure, of the continent’s countries, with the honorable exception of Mexico.

The Second Declaration of Havana reaffirmed the socialist and internationalist character of the Cuban Revolution, with emphasis on its significance for Latin American, examining the historical roots of the continent’s peoples, constantly facing imperialist intervention.

Precisely “to the peoples of America and the world” Fidel addresses the ideas that would be approved by that massive national general assembly, and pointed out that the U.S. did not fear the Cuban Revolution, but rather the Latin American Revolution.
“By crushing the Cuban Revolution, they believe they can dispel the fear that torments them, the ghost of the revolution that threatens them.  By liquidating the Cuban Revolution, they believe they are liquidating the revolutionary spirit of the peoples.

They allege, in their delirium, that Cuba is an exporter of revolutions,” adding, “In response to the accusation that Cuba wants to export its Revolution, we reply: revolutions are not exported, they are made by the peoples. What Cuba can give the peoples, and has given, is its example.”

Fidel concluded with the phrase that Che would later quote at the United Nations:

“This great humanity has said: Enough, and has begun to move. And this march of giants will not stop until true independence is won, for which they have already died, more than once, in vain.”

This had been Cuba’s fate, but the nascent Revolution ended the era of useless sacrifice and consummated our emancipation. True to this inspiring example, Fidel asserted:

“Now, in any case, those who die, will die like those of Cuba, those of Playa Girón, they will die for their definitive, true, irrevocable independence!”

*

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

Featured image: Finlay Vaccine Institute (Photo: Granma Archives)

US-Denmark Military Deal Affects Danish National Sovereignty

February 11th, 2022 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Recently, Copenhagen and Washington announced they are about to conclude a new defense pact, integrating the European country into the American government’s plans in light of the general security crisis on the continent. The deal, in short, allows Denmark to receive American troops in its territory without any control of quantity, which has generated contrary opinions, criticism and controversy, as it directly affects the sovereignty of the Danish state.

Pressured by tensions in Ukraine and by NATO’s narrative about an imminent risk of war, Denmark is deciding to completely abdicate its military sovereignty, allowing American troops to occupy all of its national territory, using local military bases, allocating new equipment, and carrying out all type of activity deemed necessary by the US, without any request for authorization or any prior notice to the Danish authorities. The only limit to American activities is the installation of nuclear weapons on Danish soil, which remains prohibited.

The deal is similar to the pact previously signed between the US and Norway last year, basically consisting of an abdication by the receiver country of the command of its own military forces, which will be at the service of US troops. In fact, these are not “cooperation” agreements since a relevant role is not established for the armed forces of the receiving countries. What happens is simply the total and unrestricted surrender by Norway and Denmark of their territories, military bases, soldiers, weapons and equipment to the US, in exchange for a supposed “protection” from Russia.

Although the agreement is considered strategic, appropriate and necessary by the Danish government, many critical opinions have been generated due to the truly humiliating aspect of this type of situation. Obviously, all Danish public opinion is in favor of the country having its defense capabilities improved and becoming strong in the face of any threat, guaranteeing protection to its people and territory.

The Socialist Party, for example, despite its opposition to the government, maintains a moderate stance, considering ties with NATO to be important, but severely condemns such a deal as it violates Danish sovereignty, intensifying polarizations within the alliance itself. In this regard, these were the words of Karsten Hønge, spokesperson for the Socialist Party, on a social network: “Thanks, but no thanks to American wishes for troops and materiel in Denmark. The NATO countries are being played off against each other, and Danish sovereignty is being pressured. The US is our ally, but cooperation should be kept within NATO”.

This differentiation between “cooperation” and “violation of sovereignty” has been strongly emphasized by critics of the agreement, who consider it insulting to Denmark, not beneficial to national defense. In the same vein, Red-Green Alliance’s spokeswoman Eva Flyvholm said:

“It’s fine enough with collaboration, but you don’t have to sell out completely the basic sovereignty over your own land and legal control over it”.

The agreement is not yet in force, although negotiations are being concluded quickly. The only challenge faced by the government at the moment is to form a parliamentary majority that supports the measure, but, interestingly, the case seems to be resolving. Through an alliance between conservatives and liberals, the government has had a positive dialogue with Venstre, the largest opposition party, gaining support for a possible approval of the deal.

This has been possible because the rightist orientation of Venstre, despite condemning a major part of the current government’s policies, tends to support any measure to integrate of Denmark to NATO and the US. In short, it is a party that supports the anti-Russian discourse and sees Moscow as a threat to the country. In this regard, Venstre’s spokesperson Michael Aastrup Jensen said the following: “We are clearly positive about it. It is important that we work as closely together across the Atlantic as possible. It is necessary in light of the fact that we have unfortunately got this Cold War 2.0, going on where we have a Russia that is doing some violent sabre-rattling”.

In fact, while government and opposition dialogue, time passes and the existence of a supposed Russian invasion plan seems less and less credible. NATO’s pressure to deploy American troops in as many countries as possible grows day after day, while, on the other hand, Moscow remains inert, without showing any kind of aggression, despite the insults and maneuvers of the West. That says a lot about which side really shows an interest in fomenting conflict in Europe.

Considering that such an invasion plan does not exist and the possibility of a war in Europe is practically zero, the European countries that are rushing and desperately accepting to hand over their territories to Washington in exchange for a supposed “protection” are making a big mistake. Soon, the tensions will calm down and public opinion will stop believing in the supposed Russian plan and so Denmark will understand that it has destroyed its own sovereignty for nothing.

*

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

Lucas Leiroz is a research fellow in international law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

In the heyday of the Cold War during the seventies and eighties, Western corporate media insidiously mounted a smear campaign against communists, maliciously branding them “infidels and heathens” having the nefarious agenda of forcibly converting pious Muslims to “Satanic atheism” in order to create a rift between devoutly religious and traditionalist Islamic World and the progressive communist bloc, despite being aware of the clear distinction that Marxism is simply an egalitarian economic theory having nothing, whatsoever, to do with religio-cultural affairs.

Then Western security establishments alongside their Middle Eastern client regimes nurtured Islamic fundamentalists as regional proxies, generously providing funds, training and weapons to Islamic jihadists while internationally legitimizing them as “freedom fighters” battling Soviet hegemony, and encouraged them to mount a holy jihad against “Godless communists” all the way from Afghanistan in the Central Asia to Chechnya in the North Caucasus and Bosnia and Kosovo in the Balkans.

Similarly, following the rise of China as a major economic power in the 21st century, the mainstream media has once again been tasked by the security establishments to demonize the global rival by blowing out of proportions the sheer fabrication of alleged “genocide and ethnic cleansing” of Uyghur Muslim’s in China’s western Xinjiang province in order to drive a wedge between the rising industrial power and the Islamic World.

Unlike several hapless Islamic countries in the Middle East, such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, that went through US military occupation or intervention through regional proxies and where countless large-scale massacres have taken place creating millions of refugees, no such massacre or forced displacement of ethnic Uyghurs has ever been recorded in China’s Xinjiang, not even by the corporate media, the foremost purveyor of presumed Uyghur persecution in China.

After the deadly Urumqi riots in July 2009 between the Han and Uyghur ethnic groups in Xinjiang’s provincial capital in which scores of rioters on both sides were killed, China went through a series of violent terror attacks that rocked Xinjiang and the rest of China in the following years.

Dozens of civilians were hacked to death at a busy train station in China’s south. A Uyghur drove a car into crowds at Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. Forty-three died when militants threw bombs from two sports utility vehicles plowing through a busy market street in Urumqi. When Chinese President Xi Jinping visited Xinjiang in 2014, bombs tore through an Urumqi train station, killing three and injuring 79.

After experiencing the spate of Islamist-inspired terror attacks, Chinese authorities initiated de-radicalization programs in Xinjiang in which Uyghurs were encouraged to participate, as in the Western countries where Muslim immigrants were kept under surveillance and suspects with history of violent crimes were asked to attend de-radicalization programs in the aftermath of the 9/11 terror attack when anti-Muslim paranoia was at the peak.

Most of the aforementioned terror attacks in China were claimed by East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), a formidable transnational terrorist organization of Uyghurs that has taken part in Islamist insurgencies as far away as Afghanistan and Syria. The militant group has been declared a proscribed terrorist outfit by China, the United Nations and many regional countries, though the Trump administration removed its terrorist designation in 2020.

Much like the Uyghur diaspora in the Western countries being patronized by the security agencies and the corporate media to malign a global rival, there is another clandestine organization of Chinese dissidents based in the US that until the November 2020 presidential election enjoyed the protection of the US security establishment and was used as a trump card to mount psychological warfare against the Chinese government.

Image on the right: Portrait of Li Hongzhi (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

Li in a suit

Falun Gong was founded by its leader Li Hongzhi in China in the early 1990s. Today, Falun Gong maintains an informal headquarters, Dragon Springs, a 400-acre compound in upstate New York, located near the current residence of Li Hongzhi. Falun Gong’s performance arts extension, Shen Yun, and two closely connected schools, Fei Tian College and Fei Tian Academy of the Arts, also operate in and around Dragon Springs.

Since 1998, Li Hongzhi has settled as a permanent resident in the United States and maintains high-level contacts not only in the governments of the US and China but also enjoys immense political clout among Chinese diaspora across the world, thanks to the deep pockets of several billionaire Chinese oligarchs that Falun Gong boasts in its ranks, who generously contribute to finance the clandestine organization’s anti-China propaganda operations.

Forget about criticizing the secretive society, up until the elections it wasn’t even permitted to mention the name of Falun Gong on mainstream news outlets. It was simply described as “a religious and spiritual movement” that teaches “meditation techniques” to its members in all the information available in the public domain about the objectives and activities of the religio-political cult.

But in an explosive article [1] for the New York Times in October 2020 to dispel a flurry of reports about the “Chinagate scandal” implicating the Biden campaign in the run-up to the US presidential election, Kevin Roose blew the lid off on the subversive organization and its media outlet The Epoch Times, widely followed by Trump supporters, and alleged:

“For years, The Epoch Times was a small, low-budget newspaper with an anti-China slant that was handed out free on New York street corners. But in 2016 and 2017, the paper made two changes that transformed it into one of the country’s most powerful digital publishers.

“The changes also paved the way for the publication, which is affiliated with the secretive and relatively obscure Chinese spiritual movement Falun Gong, to become a leading purveyor of right-wing misinformation.

“First, it embraced President Trump, treating him as an ally in Falun Gong’s scorched-earth fight against China’s ruling Communist Party, which banned the group two decades ago and has persecuted its members ever since. Its relatively staid coverage of U.S. politics became more partisan, with more articles explicitly supporting Mr. Trump and criticizing his opponents.

“As the 2016 election neared, reporters noticed that the paper’s political coverage took on a more partisan tone. ‘They seemed to have this almost messianic way of viewing Trump as the anti-communist leader who would bring about the end of the Chinese Communist Party,’ Steve Klett, who covered the 2016 campaign for the paper, said.

“Where the paper’s money comes from is something of a mystery. Former employees said they had been told that The Epoch Times was financed by a combination of subscriptions, ads and donations from wealthy Falun Gong practitioners.

“Steve Bannon, the former chief strategist of the White House, is among those who have noticed The Epoch Times’s deep pockets. Last year, he produced a documentary about China with NTD. When he talked with the outlet about other projects, he said, money never seemed to be an issue. ‘I’d give them a number,’ Mr. Bannon said. ‘And they’d come back and say, We’re good for that number.’”

The Times report wasn’t the first instance of the mainstream media implicating Chinese dissidents in the electoral politics of the US. In a tit-for-tat response to the pro-Trump New York Post’s bombshell report exposing Hunter Biden’s murky financial dealings with Ukrainian and Chinese oligarchs in the run-up to the US presidential elections, the Daily Beast came up with a scoop [2] in October 2020 that the hard disks on which Hunter’s emails were found were provided to Rudy Giuliani by a Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui on behalf of dissident members of the Chinese Communist Party.

According to the report:

“Weeks before the New York Post began publishing what it claimed were the contents of Hunter Biden’s hard drive, a Sept. 25 segment on a YouTube channel run by a Chinese dissident streamer, who is linked to billionaire and Steve Bannon-backer Guo Wengui, broadcast a bizarre conspiracy theory.

“According to the streamer, Chinese politburo officials had ‘sent three hard disks of evidence’ to the Justice Department and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi containing damaging information about Joe Biden as well as the origins of the coronavirus in a bid to undermine the rule of Chinese President Xi Jinping …

“While Guo’s ties to Steve Bannon have long been known—Bannon was arrested for defrauding donors in August on a 152-foot-long yacht reportedly owned by Guo—the billionaire appears to have also joined forces with Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani in the former New York mayor’s relentless anti-Biden dirt-digging crusade.

“Guo Wengui has been in the Trumpworld orbit pretty much from the beginning, paying the $200,000 initiation fee to become a member of the president’s Florida golf resort Mar-a-Lago, which Trump has dubbed the ‘Southern White House.’ But Guo’s membership soon became a headache for the administration in the run-up to Trump’s first summit meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2017, due to Guo’s fugitive status in China.

“At one point, Trump had reportedly considered deporting Guo after the Chinese government called for his extradition in a letter delivered to Trump by casino mogul Steve Wynn in 2017. After presenting the letter during a policy meeting, the president reportedly said, ‘We need to get this criminal out of the country,’ only for aides to remind him that Guo was a Mar-a-Lago member, eventually talking him out of the decision and ensuring the deportation was scuttled …

“Guo has framed himself as a stalwart critic of the CCP and China’s corrupt elite, but his efforts have divided China’s exile community. Guo has enthusiastically attacked other critics of Beijing as jealous poseurs, including most recently a Texas Christian pastor and Tiananmen protester named Bob Fu—who was imprisoned in China for his faith before escaping to the U.S.—whom Guo accuses of being a secret agent for the CCP. Fu has lobbed the same charge back at Guo and his followers.”

Although the Daily Beast article didn’t even once mention the name of the clandestine organization Falun Gong, Guo Wengui is known to be a trusted associate of Li Hongzhi, the founder and veritable prophet of the religio-political cult presumed to be having “supernatural powers” by brainwashed followers.

Regardless, it’s noteworthy that it wasn’t just financial inducements offered by billionaire Chinese oligarchs that lured the Trump campaign into the Falun Gong orbit, but also the political mileage that could be obtained by initiating a trade war against China.

In order to understand the real and perceived grievances of Donald Trump’s “alt-right” electoral base, it would be pertinent to point out that during the last decade, all the manufacturing has outsourced to China. Although the bankers and executives of multinational corporations are the beneficiaries of outsourcing, the middle and working classes that constituted Trump’s electoral base are finding it hard to make ends meet.

Besides the Trump supporters in the United States, the far-right populist leaders in Europe are also exploiting popular resentment against market fundamentalism. The Brexiteers in the United Kingdom, the Yellow Vest protesters in France and the “right wing” movements across Europe are manifestations of a paradigm shift in the global economic order in which nationalist and protectionist slogans have replaced the free trade and globalization mantra of the nineties.

Trump withdrawing the United States from multilateral treaties, restructuring trade agreements, bringing investments and employments back to the US and initiating a trade war against China were some of the salient features of the “alt-right” economic reforms agenda that appealed to the working class constituency he represented, and won over 74 million popular votes, likely the largest number of votes won in the US history by a losing presidential candidate.

*

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

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

Notes

[1] How The Epoch Times Created a Giant Influence Machine

[2] Chinese Billionaire’s Network Hyped Hunter Biden Dirt Weeks Before Rudy

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.

***

On February 8, 2022, Nobel Prize winning virologist Dr Luc Montagnier passed away.

Since the earliest moments of COVID-19’s appearance, Montagnier was slandered and ridiculed for his challenges to the underlying assumptions of the disease’s causes and remedies despite the constant slings and arrows of the deep state which sought to shut the door on all such dangerous discussion.

More important than Montagnier’s claims of laboratory origins of a disease (which appears to have more to do with bacteriological than viral causes), are found in an overlooked domain of optical biophysics which the good scientist completely revolutionized during the last 15 years of his fruitful life.

It is this lesser understood, yet infinitely more important aspect of Montagnier’s contribution to human knowledge which have fallen under the radar of too many analysts and citizens, which I believe he would want to be remembered by.

What is Optical Biophysics and What did Montagnier Discover?

Optical biophysics is the study of the electromagnetic properties of the physics of life. This means paying attention to the light emissions and absorption frequencies from cells, DNA, and molecules of organic matter, how these interface with water (making up over 75% of a human body) and moderated by the nested array of magnetic fields located on the quantum level and stretching up to the galactic level.

Not to discount the bio-chemical nature of life which is hegemonic in the health science realm, the optical biophysician asks: which of these is PRIMARY in growth, replication, and division of labor of individual cells or entire species of organisms? Is it the chemical attributes of living matter or the electromagnetic properties?

Let me explain the paradox a bit more.

There are approximately 40 trillion highly differentiated cells in the average human body, each performing very specific functions and requiring an immense field of coherence and intercommunication. Every second approximately 10 million of those cells die, to be replaced by 10 million new cells being born. Many of those cells are made up of bacteria, and much of the DNA and RNA within those cells is made up of viruses (mostly dormant), but which can be activated/deactivated by a variety of methods both chemical and electromagnetic.

Here’s the big question:

HOW might this complex system be maintained by chemical processes alone- either over the course of a day, month or an entire lifetime?

The simple physics of motion of enzymes which carry information in the body from one location to another simply doesn’t come close to accounting for the information coordination required among all parts. This is where Montagnier’s research comes in.

After winning the 2008 Nobel Prize, Dr. Montagnier published a revolutionary yet heretical 2010 paper called “DNA Waves and Water” which took the medical community by storm. In this paper, Montagnier demonstrated how low frequency electromagnetic radiation within the radio wave part of the spectrum was emitted from bacterial and viral DNA and how said light was able to both organize water and transmit information! The results of his experiments were showcased wonderfully in this 8 min video:

Using a photo-amplifying device invented by Dr. Jacques Benveniste in the 1980s to capture the ultra low light emissions from cells, Montagnier filtered out all particles of bacterial DNA from a tube of water and discovered that the post-filtered solutions containing no material particles continued to emit ultra low frequency waves! This became more fascinating when Montagnier showed that under specific conditions of a 7 Hz background field (the same as the Schumann resonance which naturally occurs between the earth’s surface and the ionosphere), the non-emitting tube of water that had never received organic material could be induced to emit frequencies when placed in close proximity with the emitting tube! Even more interesting is that when base proteins, nucleotides and polymers (building blocks of DNA) were put into the pure water, near perfect clones of the original DNA were formed!

Dr. Montagnier and his team hypothesized that the only way for this to happen was if the DNA’s blueprint was somehow imprinted into the very structure of water itself resulting in a form of “water memory” that had earlier been pioneered by immunologist Jacques Benveniste (1935-2004), the results of which are showcased in this incredible 2014 documentary “Water Memory”.

Just as Benveniste suffered one of the most ugly witch hunts in modern times (led in large measure by Nature Magazine in 1988), Montagnier’s Nobel prize did not protect him from a similar fate as an international slander campaign has followed him over the past 10 years of his life. Nearly 40 Nobel prize winners have signed a petition denouncing Montagnier for his heresy and the great scientist was forced to even flee Europe to escape what he described as a culture of “intellectual terror”. In response to this slander, Montagnier stated to LaCroix magazine:

“I’m used to attacks from these academics who are just retired bureaucrats, closed off from all innovation. I have the scientific proofs of what I say”.

Describing the greatest challenges to advancing this research, Montagnier stated:

“We have chosen to work with the private sector because no funds could come from public institutions. The Benveniste case has made it so that anyone who takes an interest in the memory of water is considered… I mean it smells of sulphur. It’s Hell.”

The Long Wave of Discovery (and the Clash of Two Sciences)

Montagnier’s fight is merely a shadow of a much larger clash within western science itself. While many people think simplistically that there is one singular branch of science from Galileo to Descartes to Newton to the present, the reality upon closer inspection shows us that there are actually two opposing paradigms- one of which has been obscured systematically by politically-motivated witch hunts since even before the days of Huxley’s X Club and the 1869 founding of Nature Magazine.

Since this fight is so often overlooked, a few words should be said here and now.

In opposition to the materialist tradition which has attempted to impose “material causes” onto natural phenomena, the more potent school of optical biophysics embodied by Montagnier was set into motion by none other than Louis Pasteur. Long before the Beschamp-Pasteur controversy arose, and long before conducting work on pasteurization, Pasteur’s early scientific work was shaped by discoveries into the optical properties of living matter and the handedness phenomena of life. In short, during his early creatively potent period, Pasteur discovered that solutions which had organic material dissolved within them had the incredible property of rotating polarized light to the “left” while liquid solutions devoid of organic material did not hold that capability.

In an 1870 letter, Pasteur described his cosmological insight into the dissymmetrical property of life to a friend Jules Raulin stating:

“You know that I believe that there is a cosmic dissymmetric influence which presides constantly and naturally over the molecular organization of principles immediately essential to life; and that, in consequence of this, the species of the three kingdoms, by their structure, by their form, by the disposition of their tissues, have a definite relation to the movements of the universe. For many of those species, if not for all, the Sun is the primum movens of nutrition; but I believe in another influence which would affect the whole organization [geometry], for it would be the cause of the molecular dissymmetry proper to the chemical components of life. I want by experiment to grasp a few indications as to the nature of this great cosmic dissymmetrical influence. It must, it may be electricity, magnetism…”

This left handed property to life still confounds astrobiologists over a century later.

With the mysterious 1906 death of Pierre Curie whom had advanced upon Pasteur’s research, and as World War I derailed this course of investigation (many of the brightest young minds of Europe were sent into a four year meat grinder of trench warfare), the baton was dropped in Europe, only to be taken up again by two Russian-Ukrainian scientists who worked together closely at the University of Crimea: Vladimir Vernadsky  (father of Russian atomic science and the founder of the school of biogeochemistry 1863-1945) and his friend Alexander Gurwitsch (1874-1954).

Vernadsky Revives Pasteur’s Insight

Vernadsky used Pasteur’s work extensively in his own construction of the biosphere and always made a point that the electromagnetic properties of life were the driving force of biochemistry. Going further than anyone alive to define the mechanisms of the biosphere, Vernadsky explained that the true scientist must not start with individual organisms and “work from the bottom up” as too many radical Darwinians were apt to do, but rather start, as Louis Pasteur had beforehand, with the galaxy and an awareness of the driving force of electromagnetic/cosmic radiations which shape the directed flow of biospheric evolution.

In his 1926 book the Biosphere, Vernadsky began his description of the biosphere with the following remarks:

“The biosphere may be regarded as a region of transformers that convert cosmic radiations into active energy in electrical, chemical, mechanical, thermal, and other forms. Radiations from all stars enter the biosphere, but we catch and perceive only an insignificant part of the total. The existence of radiation originating in the most distant regions of the cosmos cannot be doubted. Stars and nebulae are constantly emitting specific radiations, and everything suggests that the penetrating radiation discovered in the upper regions of the atmosphere by Hess originates beyond the limits of the solar system, perhaps in the Milky Way, in nebulae, or in stars.”

While Vernadsky spent his life focusing upon the macro-states of the biosphere, and how it interacted with the lithosphere and noosphere (the nested domains of non-life, life and creative reason) organized within arrays of magnetic fields moderating the flux of cosmic radiation through the universe, his colleague Gurwitsch focused upon the intersection of light and magnetic fields within the micro-states of living cells.

Alexander Gurwitsch’s Mitogenic Radiation

Vernadsky used Pasteur’s work extensively in his own construction of the biosphere and always made a point that the electromagnetic properties of life were the driving force of biochemistry. While Vernadsky spent his life focusing upon the macro-states of the biosphere, and how it interacted with the lithosphere and noosphere (the nested domains of non-life, life and creative reason) within nested arrays of magnetic fields moderating the flux of cosmic radiation through the universe, his colleague Gurwitsch focused upon the intersection of light and magnetic fields within the micro-states of living cells.

Describing his discovery in a 2011 study on Cosmic Bio-Radiation, researcher Cody Jones described Gurwitsch’s basic insight:

“Gurwitsch developed three nested levels of field structures, arranged according to complexity and spatial extent, ranging from the molecular (molecular constellations), to the cellular (relations among cells), to the organismic levels (the different organs and systems that constitute a single organism). Each nested field could be described in terms of different mechanisms as to how the morphology advanced for any particular structure, yet they were all unified towards the realization of a definite future state of existence.”

Gurwitsch first revolutionized life sciences by shaping an elegant experiment which demonstrated that cells emit weak bursts of ultraviolet light as they went through mitosis. To prove his theory, Gurwitsch set up two onion roots growing in perpendicular directions and found that the higher rates of light emissions which occurred on the newer tip of the roots induced cell growth of 30-40% when brought into proximity of an older onion root. Although no instruments sensitive enough to pick up these ultra-weak frequencies existed during his lifetime, Gurwitsch demonstrated that light from the ultraviolet spectrum must be generated from new cells by separating the old and new onion roots by various types of lenses which blocked out different parts of the spectrum and found that only when UV light was blocked did the effect of 30% cell growth increase come to an end. Gurwitsch called this “Mitogenic Radiation”.

Alexander Gurwitsch and his original onion root experiment. Two onions (Z1 and Z2) grow perpendicularly with point W representing the point of intersection of the younger root emitted from Z1 and the older root of Z2 separated by a quartz lens blocking the emissions of ultra violet emissions from Z1 to Z2.

While Gurwitsch was ostracised by the scientific establishment during his life, technologies arose among the astrophysics community in the 1950s which permitted scientists to measure extremely weak light frequencies in the range of Gurwitsch’s mitogenic radiation (obviously useful for picking up faint signals from other galaxies in deep space). When teams of Italian astronomers applied their equipment to organic material, Gurwitsch’s discovery was verified experimentally for the first time.

One would have thought such a discovery would have revolutionised all of biology, medicine and life sciences on the spot- however after a brief spike in interest, the discovery was soon forgotten and relegated to a “negligible” secondary feature of life which had no causal role to play in any of the mechanics or behaviour of organic activity. The materialists and reductionists who wished to maintain that all life was merely the sum of parts won the day.

Then another biophysicist named Fritz-Albert Popp arose onto the scene.

Fritz Popp’s Biophotonic Discoveries

During the 1970s, Popp was a cancer researcher trying to figure out why only one of the two isomers of Benzpyrene caused cancer. An isomer is sometimes known as a mirror image configuration of a molecule which are chemically identical, yet whose properties can differ vastly. Under the materialist/reductionist’s logic, there was no reason why one isomer (Benzpyrene 3,4) which is found in cigarettes and tar would induce cancer growth in lung tissue while another isomer (Benzpyrene 1,2) would be completely benign.

After discovering the work of Gurwitsch, Dr. Popp began measuring the ultra-weak light emissions from the Benzpyrene molecules and their effects upon cell growth in liver tissues and found that the extremely high light absorption/emission properties of Benzpyrene 3,4 were the cause of the disharmony of cell regulation. Measuring the photon activity from cancerous vs healthy liver cell growth is a striking way to clearly see that cancerous growth coincides with exponential photon emissions while healthy liver photon emissions are very stable.

Over the course of his highly productive lifetime, Dr. Popp discovered that these light emissions occurred at different wavelengths according to the cell types, function and species.  When Popp brought two biological samples into proximity, things became additionally interesting as the “rhythm” of their photon emissions synchronized beautifully when close together and fell out of sync when separated. This was outlined in his paper On the Coherence of Biophotons.

Describing the clinical application of these discoveries, Dr. Popp stated:

“Light can initiate, or arrest, cascade-like reactions in the cells, and that genetic cellular damage can be virtually repaired, within hours, by faint beams of light. We are still on the threshold of fully understanding the complex relationship between light and life, but we can now say, emphatically that the function of our entire metabolism is dependent on light.”

Popp’s discoveries amplify those of the great Russian scientist A.B. Burlakov who found that the ultra weak light emissions emanating from two sets of fertilised fish eggs separated by a glass demonstrated a powerful harmonizing effect. If one set of eggs were older, then the younger eggs would mature and develop much faster if brought into proximity. However if the age difference between the two sets were too great, then the scientist found that the younger set would see a higher rate of death, deformities and retardation of development.

This mode of thinking about life has the mind of the scientist approach life in a manner more in common with a musician tuning his instrument to an orchestra or a conductor holding multiple sound waves in his mind simultaneously as a whole musical idea which is greater than simply the sum of its parts. It is a much more natural and effective mode of thinking than the materialist/reductionist approach today dominant across most western universities that treats the organism like a machine and the whole as a sum of chemical parts.

A fuller sweep of these discoveries was presented in a 2020 lecture presented by this author, which can be viewed in full here:

Casting Montagnier’s Research in a New Light

Returning once more to Luc Montagnier with a renewed appreciation for the longer wave of scientific tradition which he is a part of amplifying, we may appreciate some of the conclusions which he has drawn from often ignored yet completely verifiable properties of light waves, structured water, bacteria and DNA which may cause us to redefine our understanding of “life”, “disease” and “medicine” forever. This exercise will possibly cause us to appreciate the importance of an international crash program in optical biophysics research and light wave/interference therapy to treat diseases plaguing humanity including COVID-19.

In a 2011 interview, Dr. Montagnier recapitulated the consequences of his discoveries:

“The existence of a harmonic signal emanating from DNA can help to resolve long-standing questions about cell development, for example how the embryo is able to make its manifold transformations, as if guided by an external field. If DNA can communicate its essential information to water by radio frequency, then non-material structures will exist within the watery environment of the living organism, some of them hiding disease signals and others involved in the healthy development of the organism.”

With these insights in mind, Montagnier has discovered that many of the frequencies of EM emissions from a wide variety of microbial DNA is also found in the blood plasmas of patients suffering from influenza A, Hepatitis C, and even many neurological diseases not commonly thought of as bacteria-influenced such as Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis and Alzheimers. In recent years, Montagnier’s teams even found certain signals in the blood plasmas of people with autism and several varieties of cancers!

Over a dozen French doctors have taken Montagnier’s ideas seriously enough to prescribe antibiotics to treat autism over the course of six years and in opposition to conventional theories, have found that amidst 240 patients treated, 4 out of 5 saw their symptoms either dramatically regress or disappear completely!

These results imply again that certain hard-to-detect species of light emitting microbes are closer to the cause of these ills than the modern pharmaceutical industry would like to admit.

A New Domain of Thinking: Why Big Pharma Should Be Afraid

As the filmed 2014 experiment demonstrated, Montagnier went even further to demonstrate that the frequencies of wave emissions within a filtrate located in a French laboratory can be recorded and emailed to another laboratory in Italy where that same harmonic recording was infused into tubes of non-emitting water causing the Italian tubes to slowly begin emitting signals! These DNA frequencies were then able to structure the Italian water tubes from the parent source a thousand miles away resulting in a 98% exact DNA replica!

Standing as we are, on the cusp of so many exciting breakthroughs in medical science, we should ask: what could these results mean for the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industrial complex which relies on keeping the world locked into a practice of chemical drugs and vaccines?

Speaking to this point, Montagnier stated:

“The day that we admit that signals can have tangible effects, we will use them. From that moment on we will be able to treat patients with waves. Therefore it’s a new domain of medicine that people fear of course. Especially the pharmaceutical industry… one day we will be able to treat cancers using frequency waves.”

Montagnier’s friend and collaborator Marc Henry a professor of Chemistry and Quantum Mechanics at the University of Strasbourg stated:

“If we treat with frequencies and not with medicines it becomes extremely cost effective regarding the amount of money spent. We spend a lot of money to find the frequencies, but once they have been found, it costs nothing to treat.”

Whether produced in a lab as Montagnier asserts or having appeared naturally as Nature Magazine, Bill Gates and Dr. Fauci assert, the fact remains that the current coronavirus pandemic has accelerated a collapse of the world financial system and forced the leaders of the world to discuss the reality of a needed new paradigm and new world economic order. Whether that new system will be driven by Pharmaceutical cartels, and financiers running global health policy or whether it will be driven by nation states shaping the terms of that new system around human needs, remains to be seen.

If nation states manage to stay in the driver’s seat of this new system, then it will have to be driven by certain fundamental principles of healthcare for all, science practice reform and broader political/economic reform whereby the sacredness of human life is placed above all considerations of monetary profit. In this light, such crash programs into long term projects in space science, asteroid defense, and Lunar/Mars development will be as necessary in the astrophysical domain as crash programs in fusion energy will be in the atomic domain. Uniting both worlds, is the domain of life sciences that intersects the electromagnetic properties of atoms, cells and DNA with the large scale electromagnetic properties of the Earth, Sun and galaxy as a whole.

*

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

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation .

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Turkish-Held Areas in Syria Become Asylum for ISIS

February 11th, 2022 by Armen Tigranakert

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.

***

The news of an ISIS leader elimination, Abu Ibrahim al-Quraishi, by the US forces in Syria’s Idlib went around the whole world last week. On the night between Wednesday to Thursday, American commandos had airdropped from helicopters in the town of Atmeh that located near the Turkish border, and then they stormed a house, where allegedly the Daesh’s boss was hiding. Al-Quraishi blew himself up during the erupted clashes. According to the White Helmets, 13 people were also killed in the explosion, including 4 children and 3 women.

It is worth noting that this operation has become the most successful for the US special forces in two years. The previous “Caliph”, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was also eliminated by Americans in the same area on October, 2019. Most notably, both leaders of one of the most dangerous terrorist organizations were hiding in northwestern Syria near the border with Turkey.

The incident of al-Quraishi elimination triggered a lot of questions from military analytics. The main of them is – how did the Turkish special services allow a presence of such high-ranking terrorist in the area of their influence. Many experts agree that Ankara is directly involved in harbouring ISIS militants, because Turkey has dozens of observation posts in the province of Idlib, which has already become a “Turkish patch.”

No less important are long-standing ties of al-Quraishi with Turkey. He ran negotiations between the ISIS and Ankara in relation to the Turkish consulate in Iraqi Mosul in June, 2014. At that time al-Quraishi personally moved a staff of embassy in a safe area, from which they were transferred to Turkey. Moreover, according to available information, the “second ISIS Caliph” had Turkoman origin, which demonstrates a sympathy for him from the Turkish leadership.

In turn, locals are also concerned about such close proximity with ISIS militants. A resident of Afrin city, who called himself Nizar, pointed out the people’s fear related to their security. “A lot of questions come to our minds, the first of them is – how could such a high-ranking terrorist get territories that are fully controlled by the Turkish side and its intelligence, which claims that it is struggling against terrorism, including the ISIS,” Nizar said.

Other citizen of Afrin, who hided his name, also expressed his concern after the recent events. “How could al-Quraishi residence be situated in a few kilometers from the Turkish border? Moreover, this area has always been considered safe, especially since a Turkish military facility and HTS checkpoint are located from several meters of it,” – he said.

And besides, a part of Daesh terrorists, who had previously escaped from Hasakah’s al-Sina’a prison, fled to Turkey. Moreover, according to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, two runaway ISIS “Emirs” with their supporters are currently in Jarabulus city of northern Aleppo, which is held by Turkish-backed groups.

It becomes obvious that Ankara continues to support terrorist factions in Syria despite its statements of fighting international terrorism. ISIS militants are living in peace in Turkish-controlled areas side by side with civilians, who do not even know it. Thus, a logical question arises – either the Turkish special services are incompetent or involved in harbouring ISIS terrorists.

*

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

Armen Tigranakert is a freelance journalist based in the city of Aleppo.

Video: Did NATO Betray Russia? Palki Sharma on Ukraine

February 11th, 2022 by wionews.com

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

In 1990, NATO promised to never enter Russia’s sphere of influence in eastern Europe. Since then, the alliance has expanded to include 14 European nations, including Russia’s neighbours.

Palki Sharma tells you about NATO’s betrayal.

*

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

Video: Israel Bombs Syria Again

February 11th, 2022 by South Front

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

As of February 10, several military events took place in Syria, the most notable of which was a major Israeli air attack targeting the outskirts of the capital Damascus.

The attack, which took place in the early hours of February 9, consisted of two waves of strikes:

The first one was carried out by fighter jets of the Israeli Air Force. The fighter jets launched a number of air-to-ground missiles at military targets around Damascus while flying inside the airspace of Lebanon, specifically to the southwest of Beirut.

The second wave of strikes was carried out by the Israeli Defense Forces, which fired a salvo of ground-to-ground missiles from the occupied Golan Heights at air defense sites near Damascus.

The Syrian Air Defense Forces intercepted several Israeli missiles. However, they were not able to prevent losses. The strikes claimed the life of a Syrian service member and wounded five others. Material losses were also reported.

The IDF ignored the first wave of strikes on Syria. However, it said that the second wave was a response to Syria’s air defense fire, in particular to an anti-aircraft missile that penetrated Israel’s airspace before exploding over the northern town of Umm al-Fahm.

The attack on Damascus was likely a part of Israel’s “War-Between-Wars” military campaign, which is meant to push Iran and its allies out of Syria.

The Israeli attack was not Syria’s only problem. The country’s northern and northeastern regions are still experiencing unrest as a result of a conflict between Turkish forces and the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has been getting more involved in this conflict as a result of Turkey’s never-ending attacks on Kurdish-held areas.

On February 9, a Turkish-backed militant was killed and three others were wounded when the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) targeted the Abu al-Zandin crossing in the northern countryside of Aleppo with guided munitions. Two truck-mounted heavy machine guns were also destroyed.

The strike was likely a response to recent Turkish attacks on Kurdish-held areas that wounded a number of Syrian soldiers.

The attack didn’t deter Turkey, who hit back in northeastern Syria on the very same day. Turkish combat drones targeted two vehicles on Amuda-al-Darbasiyah road and near the town of Bherah in the northern countryside of al-Hasakah. The Turkish strikes killed a child and wounded three other civilians.

Despite the unrest in Syria’s north and northeast, the situation in the northwestern region, known as Greater Idlib, is still surprisingly calm. As of February 10, no major ceasefire violations were reported in the region.

The situation in Syria’s central region is also still under control, mainly thanks to the efforts of the Russian Aerospace Forces. Between February 6 and 8, more than 80 Russian airstrikes hit ISIS hideouts in the region, especially near the town of al-Resafa in the southern Raqqa countryside. The intense airstrikes prevented the terrorists from launching any attack.

Meanwhile, in Syria’s southern region, the situation appears to be deteriorating, once again. At least two serious attacks were reported in Daraa.

On February 9, Shadi Bajbuj, a local commander who is reportedly close to the Syrian Military Intelligence Directorate, was killed when an improvised explosive device struck his vehicle in Daraa city.

On the same day, Abdel Ilah al-Masri, near the town of Sahem al-Golan in the western Daraa countryside. However, he survived the attack.

The surprise escalation in the southern region reflects the unstable nature of the conflict in Syria, which will not likely end anytime soon.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

PayPal: [email protected], http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront


Voices from Syria

Author: Mark Taliano

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-9-1

Year: 2017

Product Type: PDF File

List Price: $6.50

Special Offer: $5.00 

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

February 11th, 2022 by Global Research News

World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders” Revealed

Jacob Nordangard, February 9, 2022

The Vaccine Death Report: Evidence of Millions of Deaths and Serious Adverse Events Resulting from the Experimental COVID-19 Injections

David John Sorensen, February 6, 2022

Video: Trudeau’s Brother Kyle Kemper takes Firm Stance against the Vaccine Mandate and “The Great Reset”

Kyle Kemper, February 7, 2022

Reaching COVID-19 “Turning Point of Critical Mass”: Is Nuremberg 2 Next? London Metropolitan Police Criminal Investigation

Joachim Hagopian, February 3, 2022

Before the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Corona Virus “Vaccines”. Nuremberg Code, Crimes against humanity, War Crimes and Crimes of Aggression”

Hannah Rose, February 5, 2022

The Collapse of the COVID Narrative: A Brief Strategic Window to Regain Our Democracies

Elizabeth Woodworth, February 7, 2022

J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve

Doctors for COVID Ethics, February 8, 2022

U.K. Vaccine Crime Investigation. Metropolitan Police and International Criminal Court (ICC)

Global Research News, February 8, 2022

British Children Up to 52 Times More Likely to Die Following a COVID Shot: Government Report

David McLoone, February 7, 2022

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

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 10, 2022

Vaccine Researcher Admits ‘Big Mistake,’ Says Spike Protein Is Dangerous ‘Toxin’

Celeste McGovern, February 6, 2022

Life Insurance Payouts Skyrocket 258% as Post-Vaccine Deaths Rapidly Accelerate

Mike Adams, February 7, 2022

A List of People Who Had Their Leg Amputated Shortly after Receiving COVID-19 Vaccine

The COVID World, February 5, 2022

Stunning German Analysis Finds that COVID-19 Vaccine Death Rates Are Far Higher than Previously Reported

J. D. Heyes, February 4, 2022

Beware of the QR Code, Remember Agenda ID2020?

Peter Koenig, February 4, 2022

Klaus Schwab’s WEF “School for Covid Dictators”, a Plan for the “Great Reset”

Michael Lord, February 5, 2022

COVID-19 Vaccines: Proof of Lethality. Over One Thousand Scientific Studies

SUN, February 5, 2022

Embalmers Discover Strange, Rubbery ‘Worms’ in Bodies of the Jabbed

Free West Media, February 3, 2022

Video: Freedom Convoy Address to the Nation. “State of Emergency Update”. Movement Spreads Across Canada

Marcel Irnie, February 7, 2022

Video: Prove It’s Misinformation: Dr. Peter McCullough after the Joe Rogan Show on Covid

Dr. Peter McCullough, February 7, 2022

“Do You Want a War Between Russia and NATO?” Macron Meets Putin

By Pepe Escobar, February 10, 2022

Macron for his part stressed, “new mechanisms are needed to ensure stability in Europe, but not by revising existing agreements, perhaps new security solutions would be innovative.” So nothing that Moscow had not stressed before. He added, “France and Russia have agreed to work together on security guarantees.” The operative term is “France”. Not the non-agreement capable United States government.

MintPress Study: NY Times, Washington Post Driving US to War with Russia Over Ukraine

By Alan MacLeod, February 10, 2022

This MintPress study reveals that ninety percent of recent opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal have taken a hawkish view on the Ukraine conflict written by pundits tied to the national security state promoting NATO as a defender of the free world & describe Putin as Hitler incarnate.

Video: Warning: ‘Vaccine Is Worse than We Feared, Could be Looking at Hundreds of Thousands More Dead’

By RAIR Foundation USA, February 10, 2022

As reported by the Daily Expose, “286% more deaths from COVID among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated.”

DHS: Here Is a List of Top COVID Misinformation Spreaders You Should Investigate ASAP

By Steve Kirsch, February 10, 2022

DHS is getting tough on COVID misinformation spreaders, i.e., people who spread information that “undermines public trust in government institutions.” Since DHS has finite resources to pursue all these perpetrators, as a public service, I have created a list of what I believe are some of the country’s top misinformation spreaders.

Boris Johnson Lays Out UK Military Offensive Against Russia

By Chris Marsden, February 10, 2022

The February 7 Times featured an opinion column by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, laying out Britain’s plans for a military escalation in Eastern Europe and Ukraine, targeting Russia.

Institutionalised Discrimination: Amnesty International Report on Israel’s Treatment of Palestinians

By Michael Jansen, February 10, 2022

The February 1st Amnesty International report on Israel’s treatment of Palestinians broke a new ground. Amnesty became the first major international human rights organisation to state explicitly that since its establishment in 1948, Israel has always practiced apartheid against Palestinians living under its rule.

Global Trucker Convoys Protest Mandates

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, February 10, 2022

Did you know there’s a massive trucker convoy protesting COVID jab mandates in Ottawa, Canada? You’re forgiven if you missed it, because this gigantic movement received very minimal coverage in the conventional press for the first week or so. Ditto for similar trucker protests forming in other countries, such as Australia and Germany.

How Did We Get Here? The Strategic Blunder of the 1990s that Set the Stage for Today’s Ukrainian Crisis

By Prof. Rajan Menon, February 10, 2022

Understandably enough, commentaries on the crisis between Russia and the West tend to dwell on Ukraine. After all, more than 100,000 Russian soldiers and a fearsome array of weaponry have now been emplaced around the Ukrainian border. Still, such a narrow perspective deflects attention from an American strategic blunder that dates to the 1990s and is still reverberating.

Video: Anna De Buisseret: It’s Our Legal Right to Close These ‘Vaccine Clinics’ Down

By Anna De Buisseret, February 10, 2022

Anna De Buisseret talks about trying to help a community shut down a ‘vaccine clinic’, and how shocking it was to realise that nurses were still injecting people – despite the criminal investigation into the COVID injections which is currently underway in the UK.

NHS England Deletes Misleading COVID Stats Video

By Dr. Robert Hughes, February 10, 2022

Earlier this month, NHS England tweeted out a video to its half million followers to try to promote the Covid vaccine among children. The video cited a series of worrying, but inaccurate, statistics about the risks that Covid apparently represents to children; one in a hundred children will get sick enough with Covid to be admitted to hospital; 136 children in the UK have died of Covid-19, and 117,000 children are suffering from long covid.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: “Do You Want a War Between Russia and NATO?” Macron Meets Putin

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.

***

This MintPress study reveals that ninety percent of recent opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal have taken a hawkish view on the Ukraine conflict written by pundits tied to the national security state promoting NATO as a defender of the free world & describe Putin as Hitler incarnate.

Amid tough talk from European and American leaders, a new MintPress study of our nation’s most influential media outlets reveals that it is the press that is driving the charge towards war with Russia over Ukraine. Ninety percent of recent opinion articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal have taken a hawkish view on conflict, with anti-war voices few and far between. Opinion columns have overwhelmingly expressed support for sending U.S. weapons and troops to the region. Russia has universally been presented as the aggressor in this dispute, with media glossing over NATO’s role in amping tensions while barely mentioning the U.S. collaboration with Neo-Nazi elements within the Ukrainian ruling coalition.

Periodic hysteria

Western media and governments have expressed alarm over a suspected buildup of Russian military forces close to its over-1200-mile border with Ukraine. There are reportedly almost 100,000 troops in that vicinity, causing President Joe Biden to warn that this is “the most consequential thing that’s happened in the world in terms of war and peace since World War II.”

Yet this is far from the first media panic over a supposedly imminent Russian invasion. In fact, warning of a hot war in Europe is a near yearly occurrence at this point. In 2015, outlets such as Reuters and The New York Times claimed that Russia was massing troops and heavy firepower, including tanks, artillery and rocket launchers right on the border, while normally sleepy frontier towns were abuzz with activity.

In 2016 there was an even bigger meltdown, with media across the board predicting that war was around the corner. Indeed, The Guardian reported that Russia would soon have 330,000 soldiers on the border. Yet nothing came to pass and the story was quietly dropped.

With the next spring came renewed warnings of conflict. The Wall Street Journal claimed that “tens of thousands” of soldiers were being deployed to the border. The New York Times upped that figure to “as many as 100,000.” A few months later, U.S. News said that thousands of tanks were joining them.

In late 2018, The New York Times and other media outlets were again up in arms over a fresh Russian buildup, this time of 80,000 military units. And in the spring of last year, it was widely reported (for instance, by Reuters and The New York Times) that Russia had amassed armies totaling well over 100,000 units on Ukraine’s border, signaling that war was imminent.

Therefore, there are actually considerably fewer Russian units on Ukraine’s border than there were even 11 months ago, according to Western numbers. Furthermore, they are matched by a force of a quarter-million Ukrainian troops on the other side.

Thus, many readers will be forgiven for thinking it is Groundhog Day again. Yet there is something different about this time: coverage over the conflict has been enormous and has come to dominate the news cycle for weeks now, in a way it simply did not previously. The possibility of war has scared Americans and provoked calls for a far higher military budget and a redesign of American foreign policy to counter this supposed threat.

Russia, for its part, has repeatedly rejected all allegations that it plans to attack Ukraine, describing them as “fiction.” “Talks about the coming war are provocative by themselves. [The U.S.] seems to be calling for this, wanting and waiting for [war] to happen, as if you want to make your speculations come true,” said Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia.

Perhaps more surprisingly, the Ukrainian government appears to agree, recognizing that any conflict would prove devastating to both the Russian and Ukrainian economies and that even the saber-rattling and prospect of such conflict is already having an impact on business and investment. “[W]e don’t see any grounds for statements about a full-scale offensive on our country,” said Oleksiy Danilov, the chief secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council. In an interview with the BBC, Danilov also revealed his exasperation with the media for unreasonably ginning up fears and tensions.

Searching NYT, WSJ, and WaPo

To test Danilov’s claim that Western media have been among the loudest voices cheering for war, MintPress conducted a study of three of the most prominent and influential American outlets: The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal. Together, these three outlets often set the agenda for the rest of the media system, and could be said to be a reasonable representation of the corporate media spectrum as a whole. Using the search term “Ukraine” in the Factiva global news database, all opinion pieces on the conflict published in the previous three weeks (Jan. 7 – Jan. 28) were read and studied. This gave a sample of 91 articles in total; 15 in the Times, 49 in the Post and 27 in the Journal. For full information and coding, see the attached viewable spreadsheet.

Overall, the tone from the three newspapers studied was exceedingly hawkish, with around 90% of the columns expressing a “get tough” message. There was little to no variation among the outlets in their tone. “[Russian President Vladimir] Putin aims beyond Ukraine. Checking him right now is crucial,” ran the headline of former general Wesley Clark’s Washington Post article. Columnist Max Boot claimed that Putin “definitely wants to resurrect the Soviet empire.” Boot’s colleague at the Post, Henry Olsen, launched a bitter attack on Biden for not being hawkish enough, describing the president as a weakling who is unfit to lead. Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal took the opportunity to denounce the American left for focusing on non-existent U.S. imperialism when it should be uniting with Washington to combat imperialism in the only places it exists any more: Russia and China. The little pushback to the incessant drum beats for war came from voices such as Peter Beinart in the Times, Katrina vanden Heuvel in the Post, or from more isolationist conservative voices. However, these were few and far between.

There was essentially complete unanimity in presenting Russia (and not NATO) as the aggressor, with 87 of the 91 articles presenting the issue as such (four articles did not identify any entity as the aggressor). There was overwhelming support for sending in both huge quantities of what the Biden administration has termed “lethal aid” (i.e., weapons), and also deploying American troops in the region – a move that would rapidly escalate the threat of terminal nuclear war. As Bret Stephens wrote in the Times:

The best short-term response to Putin’s threats is the one the Biden administration is at last beginning to consider: The permanent deployment, in large numbers, of U.S. forces to frontline NATO states, from Estonia to Romania. Arms shipments to Kyiv, which so far are being measured in pounds, not tons, need to become a full-scale airlift.

The Post went much further, however, with one column demanding that the U.S. send around 85,000 soldiers to the region immediately, a figure that it said must be matched by other NATO members as well.

However, the Journal went furthest of all, calling for the U.S. to be turned into a global military state in order to fight two world wars at once. With more than a hint of delight, columnist Walter Russell Mead claimed:

Military budgets will have to grow as the U.S. increases its capacity against both Russia and China. The fantasies of withdrawing from some regions to focus on others will have to be set aside; Europe, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America all require more American and allied focus and attention, even as we continue to gear up in the Indo-Pacific. The U.S. will have to spend less time inspecting the moral shortcomings of potential allies and more time thinking about how it can deepen its relationships with them.

A long history and a broken promise

Context, it is said, is everything. The U.S. government’s view of the situation is that Russia is a perennially destabilizing influence. Putin, who has previously stated that Ukraine is “not a country,” has funded separatist groups in the Donbass region, illegally annexed Crimea, and bombards Ukraine with propaganda on a daily basis. From a war in Georgia to sending troops into Kazakhstan to quell a recent uprising, Russia is fighting a rearguard action to prevent the spread of democracy. It has also taken a confrontational stance to the U.S., hacking the 2016 and 2020 elections to help its preferred candidate.

However, many Russians would dispute these claims and begin the story in the ninth century with the Kievan Rus Federation, a nation whose capital was Kiev and from where the word “Russia” comes from. Fast forward a thousand years, and the broken promises made by the U.S. government to the U.S.S.R. also figure prominently. The first Bush administration, as well as the governments of West Germany and Great Britain, all assured Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would never expand “one inch” to the east of Germany. This, of course, proved a promise made to be broken, and the anti-Russian military alliance has advanced across Eastern Europe, now including three former Soviet Republics that border Russia.

The U.S. has been extremely active in Ukraine’s domestic affairs, as Russian-American journalist Yasha Levine has highlighted, forcing the government to hike gas prices and raise taxes on alcohol and cigarettes. It has also bankrolled NGOs and local media outlets and threatened to jail Ukrainian oligarchs if further American demands were not met.

Washington’s role in the 2013-2014 Maidan Revolution, however, is the clearest example of American interference. Trying to play the two blocs off against each other, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych negotiated with both the European Union and with Russia on trade deals at the same time. In the end, he chose the superior Russian offer. Instead of accepting defeat, however, the West immediately began organizing a coup, funding and supporting street protests across the country. Senior U.S. officials like Senator John McCain and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland flew to Ukraine to lead the demonstrations, the latter even famously handing out cookies to protestors in Independence Square in Kiev. Yanukovych was eventually overthrown in February 2014.

That the Maidan affair was organized, at least in part, by the U.S. is not in doubt. Indeed, leaked audio of Nuland talking with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt showed that Washington effectively hand-picked Ukraine’s next government. “I don’t think Klitch should go into the government. I don’t think it is necessary. I don’t think it is a good idea,” Nuland can be heard saying, referring to the boxer-turned-politician Vitali Klitschko. “I think Yats [Arseniy Yatsenyuk] is the guy who has got the economic experience, the governing experience,” she continued. The two also discussed plans for implementing the new administration. Sure enough, less than one month after the audio leaked, Yatsenyuk became the next prime minister.

Since 2014, the Ukrainian government has pursued a campaign of privatization, as well as entering into deals with the E.U. that Yanukovych previously rejected. It has also aggressively purged the Russian language from schools and media, jailed opposition politicians, and shut down media outlets opposing it. Around one-third of Ukrainians speak Russian as their first language.

This context was barely referenced in the three newspapers; but, when it was, it was usually described in glowing terms. The Washington Post claimed that the Ukraine-Russia trade deal amounted to a Russian “invasion of Ukraine” and was simply Putin’s effort to “bribe Ukraine with an offer of $15 billion in loans and lower prices for gas.” The Wall Street Journal defamed Yanukovych as merely “Mr. Putin’s puppet.” Meanwhile, The New York Times cheered on what it approvingly called “the process of Ukrainization” as “the Russian language is being pushed out of schools and Russian television out of the media space.” The Times currently accuses China of doing something very similar in its western province of Xinjiang, denouncing the process as a “genocide.”

Not seeing fascism where it is – and seeing it where it’s not 

The Maidan Revolution’s muscle was provided by far-right paramilitaries like the infamous Azov Battalion, a Neo-Nazi militia that has now been incorporated into the Ukrainian military. The U.S. government channeled huge amounts of money and resources to these groups, with fascist leaders like Oleh Tyahnybok sharing a stage with McCain and Nuland. Nuland’s leaked audio makes clear that she held some influence over Tyahnybok and his forces. Since at least 2015, the CIA has been directly training fascist militias inside the country.

Today, Ukraine has openly Nazi elements within its government, which has passed laws designating World War II-era fascist Ukrainian death squads that perpetrated the Holocaust as heroes and freedom fighters. Every January 1 in Kiev there is a large torchlight march to honor the Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera, with chants of “Jews out” being very common. There are now hundreds of monuments to fascist collaborators all over the country.

For two years in a row now, Ukraine and the United States have been the only countries to vote against resolutions “combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism.” The U.S. government calls the resolutions “Russian disinformation.”

The three newspapers studied solved the problem of Ukraine’s troubling fascist links by simply not mentioning them – even in articles where reporters appeared to be embedded with the Ukrainian military, a hotbed of far-right organizing. Only in one article in the sample of 91 – a calm and thoughtful Washington Post op-ed by alternative-media journalist Branko Marcetic – was it mentioned at all. And judging by the comments section underneath it, his thoughts were received with little short of rage from the Post’s readership.

Boot, an infamously hawkish columnist, might have obliquely referenced these bothersome facts when he wrote that “In [Putin’s] telling, nefarious foreign powers, ‘radicals’ and ‘neo-Nazis’ pursuing an ‘anti-Russia project’ have sought to lure Ukrainians from their rightful place under Moscow’s wing,” but immediately brushed this off as “incessant regime propaganda.” Apart from that, there was no mention of the far-right. On the contrary, the Ukrainian government was largely portrayed as a laudable, fledgling democracy fighting for survival.

This is not to say that there were no mentions of Nazis. In fact, the press is full of them. Over 10% of the articles studied directly or indirectly compared Vladimir Putin to Hitler. For example, The Washington Post’s editorial board began their January 8 editorial on Ukraine thus:

A brutal dictator, having staked a claim to power based on conspiracy theories and promises of imperial restoration, rebuilds his military. He begins threatening to seize his neighbors’ territory, blames democracies for the crisis and demands that, to solve it, they must rewrite the rules of international politics — and redraw the map — to suit him. The democracies agree to peace talks, hoping, as they must, to avoid war without unduly rewarding aggression.

What happened next at Munich in 1938 is a matter of history: Britain and France traded a piece of Czechoslovakia to Adolf Hitler’s Germany in return for his false pledge not to make war.

It continued throughout to hammer home the idea that Putin = Hitler. Editorials are supposed to represent the collective wisdom of the senior staff, and set the tone for the rest of the reporting team and across the wider media landscape. Thus, the editorial board were making their feelings about what sort of coverage was required very clear.

The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal both regularly warned against the “appeasement” of Putin – a term usually reserved for the period of Western soft collaboration with Hitler’s regime before they changed track and opposed it. Earlier this week, the Times claimed that the world was “holding its breath waiting for Vladimir Putin to bite off a slice of Ukraine the way another revanchist European dictator once took a slice of Czechoslovakia” – another reference to Hitler. The message conveyed was simple: this is a repeat of World War II.

While Vladimir Putin could reasonably be called many things, Hitler-incarnate is stretching credulity. Unable to introduce relevant context that would deviate from this line, however, the armchair generals demanding war took to psychoanalyzing the Russian leader, as well as throwing all manner of insults his way. In just this three-week sample, Putin was declared an “evil dictator,” a “thug,” a “KGB sociopath,” and a “pathetic throwback.” Longtime Timescolumnist Thomas Friedman, in his unique style, described him as “America’s ex-boyfriend-from-hell,” continuing:

Putin is a one-man psychodrama, with a giant inferiority complex toward America that leaves him always stalking the world with a chip on his shoulder so big it’s amazing he can fit through any door.

Yet for all the psychoanalysis, it was Western pundits who appeared to be in their own heads, and were obsessed with the supposed need to look tough in front of Putin. Citing South Carolina congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC), the Post declared that “weakness is provocative.” “Vladimir Putin does not think like we do,” warned hawkish former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, going on to assert that Putin saw destroying America and the global order as his “sacred destiny.”

Putin’s allegation that Ukraine was being groomed to join a hostile military alliance was met with contempt and derision in Western media. “None of the fears the Kremlin’s propaganda play (sic) on have any foundation in reality… No one was seriously contemplating NATO membership for Ukraine or Georgia. Plans for U.S. missiles in eastern Ukraine targeting Russia are pure fantasy,” a Post opinion piece informed its readers last week, its editorial board then adding:

This entire crisis has been manufactured by Mr. Putin as part of his long-range effort to thwart the democratic development and growing Western orientation of Ukraine and restore Russian hegemony over the former Soviet empire. It has nothing to do with expansion by NATO, whose founding treaty authorizes only defensive military action.

Readers in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Somalia or Libya might have differing ideas about whether NATO has been used purely defensively.

Yet, at the same time as categorically denying Ukraine would join NATO, the articles studied dismissed Putin’s core request that the alliance simply put that in writing as “silly” “extravagant” “unrealistic” and a “nonstater”  – something that is hard to understand if this was all that was needed to avert World War III. In reality, NATO is indeed looking to admit both Ukraine and Georgia, having promised to both countries that they would do so as far back as 2008.

Pipeline politics and cracks in the NATO alliance

Last week, Washington Post columnist Daniel Drezner proclaimed that “Putin has succeeded in creating his worst strategic outcome: unifying NATO.” Yet this seems wishful thinking. Germany and France, the most powerful nations in Western Europe, have both openly expressed reluctance to escalate the situation. The German government did not allow British warplanes carrying weapons to Ukraine to pass over its airspace, and it blocked shipments of German-made arms from the Baltic States to Ukraine. Even more significantly, Kay-Achim Schönbach, vice-admiral of the German Navy, publicly condemned what he saw as a reckless buildup of tensions. Schönbach stated that the West was refusing to give Putin even a modicum of respect and that we should accept the Crimea annexation as a fait accompli. For this outburst, he was forced to resign.

Across the border in France, President Emmanuel Macron is so alarmed by the U.S./U.K. push to escalate tensions that he has called on the EU to start its own negotiations with Russia – negotiations that exclude the U.S. and U.K. Germany and France were written off as “appeasers” of a dictator by The Washington Post, and as puppets of Putin and of Chinese premier Xi Jinping by The Wall Street Journal.

Much of the EU’s reluctance to get behind an American-led war on Russia is attributable to their energy dependence on Moscow. Currently, Russia supplies nearly half of the EU’s gas and around one-quarter of its oil. This is likely only to increase with the imminent completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which runs undersea from Russia’s Baltic coast directly to northern Germany. The United States has repeatedly demanded Europe cancel this project, insisting that Europe service its energy needs from Middle Eastern dictatorships under U.S. control or directly from the U.S., at around four times the price of Russian gas. The U.S. is currently considering placing sanctions on German companies involved in Nord Stream 2.

“If Biden can’t stand up to Germany, how can he stand up to Putin?,” asked one Washington Post columnist last week, the same article demanding that Germany be “punished” with the removal of U.S. troops from its territories. “Why should Germany…continue to be rewarded with the economic benefit of U.S. bases?” the writer asked, framing the American occupation in a light that some readers might not share.

Meanwhile, the climate change skeptic board of The Wall Street Journal took the opportunity to assert that Russia had infiltrated the European environmental movement, convicing the movement to take up stupid positions like being against fracking or coal plants. This was, they claimed, all part of a successful effort to keep Europe dependent on Russian gas.

The war machine’s checklist

If Russian troop movements are mostly ordinary and not dissimilar to those that have happened almost every year since 2014, what explains the media circus?

To answer this question, we must examine a policy report prepared for Biden in March by NATO think tank The Atlantic Council. Titled “Biden and Ukraine: A strategy for the new administration,” it lays out a set of goals for the new president to achieve; under its “key recommendations” headline, it outlines a number of actions the Biden government should take. Among them are included: “Work[ing] with Congress to increase military assistance to Ukraine to $500 million per year;” “Deepen Ukraine’s integration with NATO” by potentially “establishing a permanent U.S. military presence” in the country; and “launching a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) for Ukraine,” if Russia remains “intransigent.” “Stay the course on Nord Stream 2” and a “Strategic approach to sanctions” are also included on the list of key bullet points, as well as supporting a host of free-market privatization drives inside Ukraine.

Compiled by former U.S. ambassadors to Ukraine, Poland and Russia, as well as the ex-deputy secretary general of NATO, the report’s recommendations serve almost as a checklist of everything the U.S. is currently trying to push through. Last week, Congress began rushing through an emergency $500 million weapons bill that would make Ukraine the world’s third highest recipient of U.S. arms, rivaled only by Egypt and Israel. The U.S. is sending thousands of troops to Eastern Europe; its Nord Stream 2 opposition remains as loud as ever; while the Ukrainian government under President Volodymyr Zelensky is indeed moving towards the sort of economic shock therapy the Atlantic Council wants to see. All this might lead a cynic to see the current crisis as little more than an excuse to force through long-held U.S. establishment goals.

“We don’t need this panic”

None of this helps ordinary people living in the country White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki has termed “our Eastern flank.” Ukrainians are concerned with the dire economic situation, which has plunged over half the country into poverty – the highest rate anywhere in Europe. Inflation and the rising cost of heating and electricity are the highest concerns among citizens, according to a poll conducted by the U.S. government-sponsored International Republican Institute. The same poll found the country was split on where it wants to head politically, with 54% wishing to join NATO and 58% the European Union, but significant minorities preferring more integration with Russia. Ukrainians perceive both Russia (63% of the population) and the United States (51%) to be a threat, according to a recent report from a NATO-aligned think tank.

Meanwhile in the United States, despite the media saber-rattling, there is limited public appetite for any conflict with Russia. Last week, a Rasmussen poll found only 31% of Americans think U.S. troops should be sent to Ukraine, even if Russia launches an invasion. President Biden himself has even tried to pour cold water on the flames of war, claiming that the U.S. would not react to a “minor incursion” by Russia – a statement that outraged hawks in Washington.

War profiteers are clearly expecting increased orders. Last week, Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes confidently said, “I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from [the Ukraine crisis].” Raytheon and Northrop Grumman stocks are currently approaching all-time highs. Weapons industry-funded media like Politico publish content wondering whether the U.S. should “rattle Putin’s cage,” and journalists at White House press conferences continue to goad the administration into more aggressive posturing.

President Zelensky himself has chastised Western press for their hyperbolic coverage of the situation. “The image that mass media creates is that we have troops on the roads, we have mobilization, people are leaving for places. That’s not the case. We don’t need this panic,” he said. Studying the opinion pages of America’s three most prestigious outlets suggests that Zelensky is right: nobody wants war, except for hawkish elements in the national security state and among the press that increasingly does its bidding.

*

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

Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.orgThe GuardianSalonThe GrayzoneJacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

Video: At the Outset of the Freedom Convoy on January 29, 2022

February 10th, 2022 by Jean-François Girard

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.

***

Short Video: January 29, 2022. When It Commenced. Commentary in French by Jean Francois Girard

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Anna De Buisseret talks about trying to help a community shut down a ‘vaccine clinic’, and how shocking it was to realise that nurses were still injecting people – despite the criminal investigation into the COVID injections which is currently underway in the UK. When the clinic was informed that a live criminal investigation was underway, the nurses had patients leave the building only to line up again outside. She reports that none of the staff at the clinic had any interest in what she was saying, and only wanted to continue injecting people.

She talks about how injecting people with an experiment without necessity and before obtaining valid consent is a violation of the Nuremburg code, the rulings of the Geneva convention, and basic human rights. She ends her first speech of the day by talking about how dangerous it is that state schooling fails to teach children about the law, and questions whether or not government and state leaders even care about the laws they breaking.

*

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

Our thanks to Mark Taliano (CRG Research Associate) for bringing this to our attention.

NHS England Deletes Misleading COVID Stats Video

February 10th, 2022 by Dr. Robert Hughes

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.

***

Earlier this month, NHS England tweeted out a video to its half million followers to try to promote the Covid vaccine among children. The video cited a series of worrying, but inaccurate, statistics about the risks that Covid apparently represents to children; one in a hundred children will get sick enough with Covid to be admitted to hospital; 136 children in the UK have died of Covid-19, and 117,000 children are suffering from long covid.

The response duly ‘went viral’, attracting re-tweets from some of the biggest public health influencers online, who shared the report with their hundreds of thousands of followers, endorsing it as “an important message”, “an excellent piece”, “a great video”, and using it to lobby JCVI “when will be able to protect our children?”, and alerting people to “the misinformation out there”, no doubt with good intentions.

But when I watched the video I was left quite concerned and confused. As both a parent and scientist who has been involved in research on symptom duration and severity of covid in children, the cited statistics didn’t make sense to me. The idea that 1% of children with Covid are hospitalised for it didn’t pass the ‘sniff test’. I know how contentious the debates about prolonged symptoms after covid infection have been, and likewise the challenges of estimating covid mortality among children. So the idea of broadcasting confident numbers on this seemed odd, especially from NHS England.

What’s more, the powerful — and important — sharing of a story about “long covid” in a 11-year-old seemed at odds with current UK vaccination guidance, which does not currently advise vaccination of this age group. As a parent of an 8- and 6-year-old, I didn’t know what I was supposed to do with this ‘information’. Even more so when I was aware that there is not currently evidence to show that vaccination prevents “long Covid” in children.

What was even more surprising to me was the reaction from both NHS England and many commentators when I raised these points on Twitter and with NHS England directly. I previously worked in government, where every statistic that made it into official comms or a Ministerial speech came with a ‘method note’ to explain it if asked. Yet there was a deafening silence from @NHSEngland when I, and others, asked.

Several people agreed with me, sharing their working for why these numbers are at best long outdated, may be orders of magnitude out, and risk undermining confidence in vaccine communications and uptake.

But others seemed to dig in, praising both the content and tone of the messaging when challenged, and directing the discussion into an important, but different, one about the merits of extending Covid vaccination to children rather than the need for accurate and honest communication about vaccination.

My impression was that some, including influential ‘experts’, felt that the accuracy of the numbers used was secondary to advocacy objectives, i.e. the ends (promoting vaccine uptake) justified the means (using inaccurate, and emotive, statistics and powerful stories). This feels like extremely dangerous ground to me, especially given what we know about the importance of trust in vaccine confidence and uptake, and the recent worrying falls in childhood vaccination.

Having raised this with the Statistics Regulator, I was relieved to have today received the following message:

It is important that figures provided by NHSE&I are accurate and reliable. In this case the claim made in the video fell short of these expectations – we contacted NHSE&I and it acknowledged that the data were historic and had methodological shortcomings. We are therefore glad that the content has now been removed from Twitter.

– OFFICE FOR STATISTICS REGULATOR

It took four days, 150,000+ views, and many hundreds of thousands of shares and impressions before NHS England finally deleted the tweet. I hope in due course these investigations will lead to improvements in the process through which statistics, especially on such an important issue as childhood vaccination, are vetted, ideally before, rather than after, publication/broadcast.

*

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

Dr Robert Hughes is a clinical research fellow at Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. He tweets at @R_Hughes1

Featured image: Screengrab from the NHS England video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Emmanuel Macron is no Talleyrand. Self-promoted as “Jupiterian”, he may have finally got down to earth for a proper realpolitik insight while ruminating one of the former French Minister of Foreign Affairs key bon mots: “A diplomat who says ‘yes’ means ‘maybe’, a diplomat who says ‘maybe’ means ‘no’, and a diplomat who says ‘no’ is no diplomat.”

Mr. Macron went to Moscow to see Mr. Putin with a simple 4-stage plan in mind.

1. Clinch a wide-ranging deal with Putin on Ukraine, thus stopping  “Russian aggression”.

2. Bask in the glow as the West’s Peacemaker.

3. Raise the EU’s tawdry profile, as he’s the current president of the EU Council.

4. Collect all the spoils then bag the April presidential election in France.

Considering he all but begged for an audience in a flurry of phone calls, Macron was received by Putin with no special honors. Comic relief was provided by French mainstream media hysterics, “military strategists” included, evoking the “French castle” sketch in Monty Python’s Holy Grail while reaffirming every stereotype available about  “cowardly frogs”. Their “analysis”: Putin is “isolated” and wants “the military option”. Their top intel source: Bezos-owned CIA rag The Washington Post.

Still, it was fascinating to watch – oh, that loooooong table in the Kremlin: the only EU leader who took the trouble to actually listen to Putin was the one who, months ago, pronounced NATO as “brain-dead”. So the ghosts of Charles de Gaulle and Talleyrand did seem to have engaged in a lively chat, framed by raw economics, finally imprinting on the “Jupiterian” that the imperial obsession on preventing Europe by all means from profiting from wider trade with Eurasia is a losing game.

After a strenuous six hours of discussions Putin, predictably, monopolized the eminently quotable department, starting with one that will be reverberating all across the Global South for a long time: “Citizens of Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia have seen how peaceful is NATO.”

There’s more. The already iconic Do you want a war between Russia and NATO? – followed by the ominous  “there will be no winners”. Or take this one, on Maidan: “Since February 2014, Russia has considered a coup d’état to be the source of power in Ukraine. This is a bad sandbox, we don’t like this kind of game.”

On the Minsk agreements, the message was blunt: “The President of Ukraine has said that he does not like any of the clauses of the Minsk agreements. Like it, or not – be patient, my beauty. They must be fulfilled.”

The “real issue behind the present crisis”

Macron for his part stressed, “new mechanisms are needed to ensure stability in Europe, but not by revising existing agreements, perhaps new security solutions would be innovative.” So nothing that Moscow had not stressed before. He added, “France and Russia have agreed to work together on security guarantees.” The operative term is “France”. Not the non-agreement capable United States government.

Anglo-American spin insisted that Putin had agreed not to launch new “military initiatives” – while keeping mum on what Macron promised in return. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov did not confirm any agreement. He only said that the Kremlin will engage with Macron’s dialogue proposals, “provided that the United States also agrees with them.” And for that, as everyone knows, there’s no guarantee.

The Kremlin has been stressing for months that Russia has no interest whatsoever in invading de facto black hole Ukraine. And Russian troops will return to their bases after exercises are over. None of this has anything to do with “concessions” by Putin.

And then came the bombshell: French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire – the inspiration for one of the main characters in Michel Houellebecq’s cracking new book, Anéantir – said that the launch of Nord Stream 2 “is one of the main components of de-escalating tensions on the Russian-Ukrainian border.” Gallic flair formulated out loud what no German had the balls to say.

In Kiev, after his stint in Moscow, it looks like Macron properly told Zelensky which way the wind blows now. Zelensky hastily confirmed Ukraine is ready to implement the Minsk agreements; it never was, for seven long years. He also said he expects to hold a summit in the Normandy format – Kiev, the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, Germany and France – “in the near future”. A meeting of Normandy format political advisers will happen in Berlin on Thursday.

Way back in August 2020, I was already pointing to which way we were heading in the master chessboard. A few sharp minds in the Beltway, emailing their networks, did notice in my column how “the goal of Russian and Chinese policy is to recruit Germany into a triple alliance locking together the Eurasian land mass a la Mackinder into the greatest geopolitical alliance in history, switching world power in favor of these three great powers against Anglo-Saxon sea power.”

Now, a very high-level Deep State intel source, retired, comes down to the nitty gritty, pointing out how “the secret negotiations between Russia and the US center around missiles going into Eastern Europe, as the US frantically drives for completing its development of hypersonic missiles.”

The main point is that if the US places such hypersonic missiles in Romania and Poland, as planned, the time for them to reach Moscow would be 1/10 the time of a Tomahawk. It’s even worse for Russia if they are placed in the Baltics. The source notes, “the US plan is to neutralize the more advanced defensive missile systems that seal Russia’s airspace. This is why the US has offered to allow Russia to inspect these missile sites in the future, to prove that there are no hypersonic nuclear missiles. Yet that’s not a solution, as the Raytheon missile launchers can handle both offensive and defensive missiles, so it’s possible to sneak in the offensive missiles at night. Thus everything requires continuous observation.”

The bottom line is stark: “This is the real issue behind the present crisis. The only solution is no missile sites allowed in Eastern Europe.” That happens to be an essential part of Russia’s demands for security guarantees.

Sailing to Byzantium

Alastair Crooke has demonstrated how “the West slowly is discovering that that it has no pressure point versus Russia (its economy being relatively sanctions-proof), and its military is no match for that of Russia’s.”

In parallel, Michael Hudson has conclusively shown how “the threat to US dominance is that China, Russia and Mackinder’s Eurasian World Island heartland are offering better trade and investment opportunities than are available from the United States with its increasingly desperate demand for sacrifices from its NATO and other allies.”

Quite a few of us, independent analysts from both the Global North and South, have been stressing non-stop for years that the pop Gotterdammerung in progress hinges on the end of American geopolitical control over Eurasia. Occupied Germany and Japan enforcing the strategic submission of Eurasia from the west down to the east; the ever-expanding NATO; the ever de-multiplied Empire of Bases, all the lineaments of the 75-year-plus free lunch are collapsing.

The new groove is set to the tune of the New Silk Roads, or BRI; Russia’s unmatched hypersonic power – and now the non-negotiable demands for security guarantees; the advent of RCEP – the largest free trade deal on the planet uniting East Asia; the Empire all but expelled from Central Asia after the Afghan humiliation; and sooner rather than later its expulsion from the first island chain in the Western Pacific, complete with a starring role for the Chinese DF-21D “carrier killer” missiles.

The Ray McGovern-coined MICIMATT (military-industrial-congressional-intelligence-media-academia-think tank complex) was not capable to muster the collective IQ to even begin to understand the terms of the Russia-China joint statement issued on an already historic February 4, 2022. Some in Europe actually did – arguably located in the Elysée Palace.

This enlightened unpacking focuses on the interconnection of some key formulations, such as “relations between Russia and China superior to political and military alliances of the Cold War era” and “friendship which shows no limits”: the strategic partnership, for all its challenges ahead, is way more complex than a mere “treaty” or “agreement”. Without deeper understanding of Chinese and Russian civilizations, and their way of thinking, Westerners simply are not equipped to get it.

In the end, if we manage to escape so much Western doom and gloom, we might end up navigating a warped remix of Yeats’ Sailing to Byzantium. We may always dream of the best and the brightest in Europe finally sailing away from the iron grip of tawdry imperial Exceptionalistan:

“Once out of nature I shall never take / My bodily form from any natural thing, / But such a form as Grecian goldsmiths make / Of hammered gold and gold enameling / To keep a drowsy Emperor awake; / Or set upon a golden bough to sing /To lords and ladies of Byzantium / Of what is past, or passing, or to come.”

*

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

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is licensed under the public domain

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.

***

As Canadian police forces continue to cut off protesting truckers’ food and fuel supplies, Ottawa police said they are “having discussions” with the Children’s Aid Society about how to protect an estimated 100 children living in trucks.

As protests against Canada’s COVID vaccine mandates entered their 12th day, Ottawa police continued to cut off food and fuel supplies for hundreds of truckers.

Police Tuesday told reporters they are “having discussions with the Children’s Aid Society about what steps to take” to protect children living in what they estimated to be about 100 of the 400 trucks parked in the city.

The Freedom Convoy left Canada’s westernmost province, British Columbia, on Jan. 23 and arrived Jan. 29 in Ottawa.

It has inspired protests around the world, including in 27 European countries which are planning their own convoys.

Here’s the latest news on the Freedom Convoy:

  • Police said discussions are underway with the Children’s Aid Society for the possible removal of the children from their protesting parents. Ottawa’s Deputy Police Chief Steve Bell cited noise, carbon monoxide fumes, lack of sanitation and noise levels as possible safety hazards. “We’re not at the stage of looking to do any sort of enforcement activity around that,” Bell told CTV News. “We’ll rely on the Children’s Aid Society to give us guidance.”
  • In a news release, groups of retired and active-duty police officers from across Canada, along with members of parliament and other advocacy groups, expressed support for the truckers: “The government’s decision to block refueling of the trucks puts fellow Canadians and their families including their young children in danger due to the extreme cold temperatures currently occurring in Ottawa. Regardless of where one stands on this topic, these actions are inhumane and do not align with Canadian principles,” the release stated.
  • Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s bodyguard resigned stating that he could not abide by the government’s dictates which he felt contravened the human rights enshrined in the Canadian Constitution.
  • Nick Motichka, a 10-year veteran of the Calgary Police Service, delivered a strong message on Facebook to his fellow regulation enforcement officers: “Police are here to help and protect people” not “to do the politicians’ dirty work… What is happening in Ottawa, with the clear political influence on the police, to physically exert political will on peaceful protesters for nothing more than possible political gain is so very wrong, on so many levels.”
  • Alberta Premier Jason Kenny dropped his province’s vaccine passport program at midnight, promising to lift other public health restrictions by March 1, depending on the number of hospital admissions.
  • Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe announced Tuesday he will end his province’s vaccine passport policy by Monday, Feb. 14. Other public health policies, such as masking, will remain in effect until the end of the month.
  • Provincial Parliament Member Randy Hillier is organizing another “Blue-collar Convoy” of tractors to join the truckers in Ottawa this weekend, as he did last week. The proposed routes are listed on the Facebook page.
  • Freedom Convoy truckers and Canadian doctors sent a message that vaccine mandates must be removed and they pleaded for a meeting with Trudeau.

Beyond Canada’s borders:

  • The current blockade by truckers of the bridge from Windsor, Ontario to Detroit is preventing much of the daily “$300 million in car and truck parts, agricultural products, steel and other raw materials” to reach its destinations, according to the Financial Post. “Almost 20% of all Canada-U.S. trade moves across the Ambassador Bridge, and 30% of cross-border freight moved by truck uses that route.”
  • According to Politico, convoys are now being organized across the U.S. and “regional protests have been planned in states from Alabama to Wyoming, based on Politico’s review of social media activity.”
  • “Anti-mandate protesters in France, inspired by the ‘Freedom Convoy’ in Canada, plan to make their way to Paris, then Brussels, to demand an end to vaccine passports,” according to the Financial Post. “Around 200 protesters gathered in a parking lot in Nice today, waving Canadian flags in solidarity with protesters in Canada. Their convoy is made up of motorcycles and cars, but no trucks.”

Similar protests erupted in the last few days in Australia and New Zealand, the Washington Post reported. The “Convoy to Canberra” involves only a couple of 18-wheelers as few Australian truckers own their own vehicles. Protestors brought camping gear — setting up an occupation which has been compared to “Occupation Wall Street.” According to CNN, a convoy of trucks and camper vans has blocked the streets near New Zealand’s Parliament in Wellington.

*

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Summary

DHS is getting tough on COVID misinformation spreaders, i.e., people who spread information that “undermines public trust in government institutions.”

Since DHS has finite resources to pursue all these perpetrators, as a public service, I have created a list of what I believe are some of the country’s top misinformation spreaders.

I sincerely hope that the DHS will focus their efforts on these individuals since they have made statements and/or taken actions (or refused to take action) that result in the undermining of public trust in US government institutions.

It is extremely easy to tell who is telling the truth here: it’s the people who are not afraid of debate. The one thing everyone on our list has in common is that they will never agree to debate anyone with opposing views.

These people need to be stopped now and I’m grateful that DHS is finally taking this seriously as innocent lives are being lost.

The DHS memo

Read this memo issued yesterday, Feb 7, entitled Summary of Terrorism Threat to the U.S. Homeland.

In particular, check this out this section:

Hmmm…I couldn’t come up with any “violent extremist attacks during 2021” that were inspired by this alleged COVID-19 misinformation. Can you?

To make their job easier to pursue these spreaders of COVID-19 misinformation, I’ve compiled a list of the Disinformation Dozen, the top spreaders of COVID disinformation that are literally killing people through spreading misinformation about COVID.

My Disinformation Dozen list

I believe that all of these people are involved in “The proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions” and have collectively led to the tragic death of over 1M Americans.

All of these people should be detained for questioning.

I’ve also provided a handy list of questions that none of them will be able to answer with satisfactory answers.

Note that the list is subjective. Different people will likely have different lists but most people would agree on the top five.

  1. President Joe Biden
    Told the public the vaccines were safe and effective even though the data said the opposite. Wore ineffective face masks in order to mislead the public into thinking these masks could protect them. Refused to meet with any qualified scientist or doctor with opposing viewpoints before and after mandating the vaccines. Deliberately refuses to meet with scientists with opposing viewpoints so continues to spread misinformation today. He tried to scare the unvaccinated by claiming the unvaccinated would experience a winter of severe illness and death. Continues to erode public trust in the office of the President with approval ratings that are at all time lows:Chart shows Biden’s job rating continues to slide among Democrats, Democratic leaners
  2. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky
    Told people the vaccines are safe and effective and that masks work. Withheld information about early treatment protocols.
  3. NIAID Director Anthony Fauci
    Funded the virus, covered it up, knowingly spread misinformation about the source of the virus, lied about it all in Congress when questioned by Senator Rand Paul, and told Cliff Lane to not approve any early treatments in the Guidelines.
  4. US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy
    Told people the vaccines are safe and effective and that masks work and said nothing about effective early treatment protocols. Compounded the error by labeling people trying to spread life-saving information as “disinformation” spreaders.
  5. Bill Gates
    Funded the misinformation campaigns (the fact checkers) including GAVI.
  6. FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock
    Said she would investigate the Maddie de Garay case that proved fraud in the Pfizer trial and then did nothing. The FDA also denied the EUA application on fluvoxamine, a drug later proven to reduce mortality by 12X in a large Phase 3 trial.
  7. COVID-19 Guidelines Chairman Cliff Lane
    Discredited every single working COVID early treatment including fluvoxamine which has a 12X reduction in fatalities. Ignored all COVID-19 early treatments that work.
  8. Tom Shimabukuro (CDC vaccine expert)
    Never mentioned the VAERS URF which underplayed the danger of the vaccines by at least 41x and deliberately misled people about causality and VAERS by claiming you can’t determine causality. Ignored all the safety signals in VAERS on all but a few symptoms. Ignored the death safety signal. Ignored every safety signal in DMED.
  9. John Su (CDC, VAERS expert)
    See Tom Shimabukuro
  10. Steven A. Anderson (FDA), the top vaccine safety official at the FDA
    Deliberately ignored all the VAERS and DMED safety signals and ignored all attempts to meet about the safety signals.
  11. Gavin Newsom, Governor of California
    Mandated vaccination in California even though he was injured by the COVID vaccine. Will not vaccinate his own kids. He knows the vaccines are dangerous from first-hand experience and deliberately misleads the people of California by claiming they are safe.
  12. Richard Pan, California State Senator
    Introduced legislation in the California legislature to close the Personal Exemption Loophole for COVID-19 School Vaccinations which will lead to the death of an unknown number of children. All done with no scientific evidence.

Top corporate spreaders of misinformation

These companies refuse to censor doctors and scientists who claim that the vaccines are safe and effective and masks work. Instead they actually compound the problem censor people who are telling the truth. Net result: hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by censoring the wrong people.

  1. YouTube
  2. Facebook
  3. Twitter
  4. LinkedIn
  5. Medium
  6. Nextdoor
  7. Wikipedia (they mislabel people telling the truth as misinformation spreaders and people believe it)
  8. All “fact checker” organizations

The actions of the Disinformation Dozen cost lives

Collectively, these people are responsible for the deaths of over 1M Americans.

For example, they have done things such as:

  1. Encouraging and/or mandating people to take “vaccines” that data shows are more likely to kill them than to save them. And even when people aren’t killed, the scientific evidence shows that these vaccines are making people more likely to be infected from the latest variant. This has led to the untimely death of an estimated 400,000 Americans and to the permanent disablement of a roughly equivalent number.
  2. Telling people to wear masks when they know full well that all of the randomized trials showed that masks were ineffective. By misleading people to think they were protected, people then ventured into dangerous situations believing they were protected when they were in fact not protected at all. Masks are not harmless interventions. IQ has dropped dramatically (22 points) due to this “harmless” intervention. DHS needs to stop these terrorists now inside the CDC who are promoting this.
  3. Ignoring all attempts to challenge them on their views by refusing to debate qualified scientists and doctors
  4. Spreading misinformation about the VAERS system by deliberately not calculating the underreporting factor using their own methodology and then not applying that in public statements, thus misleading the CDC and FDA outside committees into making erroneous decisions. Also ignoring all the safety data in the VAERS database and refusing to take any meetings to discuss it.
  5. Deliberately trying to censor doctors and scientists from spreading the truth that will save lives through intimidation tactics and directing social networks to cancel their accounts
  6. Sandbagging early treatment drugs that have been shown in clinical trials to save lives. They literally told people not to use these life-saving protocols leading to the unnecessary death of close to 900,000 people.

See Incriminating Evidence for details on all of the above points.

I believe they need to be silenced immediately before more harm is done.

See this article for more details but here’s the summary:

Toby’s list

This list was created by Dr. Toby Rogers.

The corporate kingpins trial docket

  1. Bill Gates (Gates Foundation)
  2. Julie Gerberding (Merck)
  3. Albert Bourla (Pfizer)
  4. Alex Gorsky (J&J)
  5. Stéphane Bancel (Moderna)
  6. Pascal Soriot (AstraZeneca)
  7. Kenneth Frazier (Merck)
  8. Emma Walmsley (GSK)
  9. Paul Hudson (Sanofi)

The institutional trial docket

  1. Tony Fauci (NIAID)
  2. Francis Collins (NIH)
  3. Peter Hotez (Baylor)
  4. Paul Offit (UPenn)
  5. Tedros Adhanom (WHO)
  6. Rochelle Walensky (CDC)
  7. Frank DeStefano (CDC)
  8. Tom Shimabukuro (CDC)
  9. Ezekiel Emanuel (UPenn)
  10. Michael Osterholm (Univ. MN)
  11. Neil Ferguson (Imperial College London)
  12. Dorit Reiss (UC)

The political trial docket

  1. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY)
  2. Phil Murphy (D-NJ)
  3. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI)
  4. Ned Lamont (D-CT)
  5. Gavin Newsom (D-CA)
  6. Thomas Frieden (D-NY)
  7. Tom Wolf (D-PA)
  8. Jay Inslee (D-WA)
  9. Kate Brown (D-OR)
  10. Janet Mills (D-ME)
  11. Tim Walz (D-MN)
  12. Ralph Northam (D-VA)
  13. Jared Polis (D-CO)
  14. Richard Pan (D-CA)
  15. Lorena Gonzales (D-CA)
  16. Brad Hoylman (D-NY)
  17. Kyle Mullica (D-CO)
  18. Justin Trudeau (Liberal Party, Canada)

The media trial docket

  1. Susan Wojcicki (YouTube)
  2. Sundar Pichai (Google)
  3. Mark Zuckerberg (Meta, Facebook, Instagram)
  4. Jack Dorsey (Twitter)
  5. Lisa Sherman (The Ad Council)
  6. Sanjay Gupta (CNN)
  7. Anderson Cooper (D-CNN)
  8. Rachel Maddow (MSNBC)
  9. Leana Wen (Wapo/CNN)
  10. Imran Ahmed (CCDH)
  11. Joe Smyser (Project VCTR)
  12. Brandy Zadrozny (NBC)

Honorable mention (inside US)

Not included in the lists above, but worthy of investigation. Not in any particular order.

  1. All state medical boards who investigated any physician for issuing waivers, speaking out against the vaccines or masks, or mandates, or prescribing live-saving drugs
  2. AMA
  3. IDSA
  4. Biden White House coronavirus response coordinator Jeff Zients and Biden’s Chief of Staff Ron Klain
  5. Rick Bright, former head of BARDA who didn’t fund early treatment and sabotaged HCQ
  6. Robert Redfield, former CDC director
  7. Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough
  8. Chris Cuomo, Jeff Zucker and everyone else at CNN, ESPN, MSNBC
  9. CNN’s Jake Tapper who accuses RFK Jr of being a grifter, but will not accept an open debate. Seriously?
  10. Jen Psaki
  11. Sonia Sotomayor, US Supreme Court
  12. Kathy Hochul, Governor of NY
  13. Eric Topol (Scripps)
  14. Zubin Damania (aka Zdoggmd)
  15. Monica Gandhi (UCSF)
  16. “Ed” (if you read the comments to my posts, you’ll know who I’m talking about)
  17. Donald Trump (although he’s more recently spoken out against mandates, he has not spoken out against the vaccines themselves)
  18. Mike Pence
  19. Deborah Brix
  20. Vinay Prasad (even though he’s right on masks and calling out the misinformation on myocarditis, he’s wrong on vaccines and is costing lives)
  21. Nancy Pelosi
  22. Anna Eshoo
  23. Big Bird
  24. Other members of Congress (with the notable exception of Senator Ron Johnson who is heroic)
  25. Ralph Baric, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
  26. Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance, without whom we wouldn’t have a pandemic
  27. Jens Kuhn and Sina Bavari
  28. Most local officials within our towns/cities/municipalities who supported vaccine/mask mandates
  29. School Boards who supported vaccine/mask mandates
  30. Teachers unions
  31. Medical doctors who recommended the vaccines/masks, especially for kids and who ignored early treatment for their patients
  32. Hospitals who took the grift and complied with CDC directives and forbade the use of ivermectin and other life saving treatments
  33. Businesses who fired people who didn’t comply with vaccine mandates
  34. Churches who tell people to get vaccinated
  35. Governor Eric Holcomb (Indiana) as well as other governors pushing the narrative (Notable exception: Ron DeSantis)
  36. Mike DeWine (R – governor of Ohio). Multiple times said that vaccines were “100% effective.” His current health director minion has flat out lied multiple times about the safety and efficacy of vaccines, particularly their safety data in kids.
  37. JB Pritzker, Governor of Illinois and Mayor Lori E. Lightfoot (Chicago)
  38. The Economist, Forbes, Reuters, Kamala Harris, NPR
  39. All legacy media (previously known as “mainstream media”)
  40. London Breed, Mayor of San Francisco
  41. Eric Feigl-Ding aka Dr. Dingleberry
  42. Federation of State Medical Boards who wrote to state medical boards and physicians saying that doctors who spread misinformation should have action taken against their licenses.
  43. Every hospital corporation CEO, COO, CFO and Administrator in the US and anywhere that there is $ incentive to eliminate patients for profit bonuses. Any doctors, nurses , and technicians who also gain under the table by murdering patients.
  44. American Academy of Pediatrics. They lobbied DC Council members to pass the DC Minor Consent Bill – before Covid so that 11 year olds could get GARDASIL without parental knowledge or permission – and are pushing Covid vaccines for kids
  45. Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, and Sharon Stone for spreading misinformation about vaccine safety, choosing censorship over scientific debate, and attempting to use intimidation tactics to silence Joe Rogan’s guests
  46. Spotify’s new “fact-based” COVID-19 hub
  47. Sara Cody and Bonnie Maldonado, Teachers’ Union in California, Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors who let Dr. Cody act dictatorially,
  48. All FDA and CDC outside committee members
  49. Admiral Rachel L. Levine, MD, Assistant Secretary for Health (ASH)
  50. LA Mayor Eric Garcetti
  51. The medical licensing board of Maine, who declared that Meryl Nass must undergo a psychiatric evaluation for prescribing IVM and HCQ, and if she doesn’t it’s “an admission of guilt.” This is so fascistic and out of control it is jaw dropping.
  52. Joy Reid MSNBC & the “ladies” of the View
  53. Jerome Adams, former US Surgeon General
  54. Rob Davis, the current CEO of Merck
  55. Google (for skewing the search results, especially on “mass formation psychosis” which I caught on video)
  56. Fact checkers who work for legacy media company or standalone fact checker organizations (pretty much without exception. I have yet to run across an honest fact checker that works for legacy media.)
  57. All Hollywood types that did vaccine and booster commercials.
  58. Chelsea Clinton (who is on a mission to stamp out correct information about COVID-19). Here’s an excerpt from the article: Clinton emphasizes that parents who are wondering if they should vaccinate their kids need to be “trusting science and scientists and listening to your local pediatrician.” Wow. Forget about the evidence. Do whatever the “experts” say. Chelsea is a huge part of the problem.
  59. All the people mentioned in RFK’s book who helped Fauci
  60. Katelyn Jetelina aka Your Local Epidemiologist
  61. Jessica Malaty Rivera (who claims to want to stop COVID misinformation but refuses to debate them)
  62. Rockefeller Foundation (for supporting people like Jessica Malaty Rivera who spread misinformation)
  63. Oregon Health Authority…and all hospital administrators

Honorable mention (outside US)

  1. Klaus Schwab
  2. Pope Francis (who called for wide scale vaccination)
  3. Canada
    • Theresa Tam, Canada’s Chief Medical officer
    • Bonny Henry, British Columbia’s “Top Doc”,
    • Eileen DeVilla, Medical Officer of Health for the City of Toronto
    • All the public health officers in the provincial and municipal governments, plus all the federal and provincial ministers of health in Canada
    • All of the Canadian legacy media, especially CBC
    • All lawmakers wearing masks
  1. Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand
  2. Germany
    • Angela Merkel,
    • Olaf Scholz,
    • Karl Lauterbach,
    • Christian Drosten
  3. Zhengli Shi
  4. New Zealand
    • Ashley Bloomfield (Director General of Health – NZ),
    • Chris Hipkins (Covid Response Minister – NZ Labour Party)
  5. Sebastian Kurz, former Chancellor of Austria
  6. People in Australia:
    • Scott Morrison (PM)
    • Daniel Andrews (Victoria Premier)
    • Annastacia Pałaszczuk (QLD Premier)
    • Gladys Berejiklian (former NSW Premier)
    • Kerry Chant (NSW Chief Health Officer)
    • Brad Hazzard (NSW Minister of Health)
    • Mark McGowan (WA Premier) [check out West Australia Nazi-Like Police State Run By A Thug Named Mark McGowan]
    • Michael Gunner (Chief Minister of the Northern Territory)
  7. WHO doctors who approved the vaccines

*

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

All images in this article are from the author

Know Your Truth and Stand for It. Let Global Research Help You.

February 10th, 2022 by The Global Research Team

The COVID-19 crisis has tightened the noose on truth-tellers. Ongoing developments on COVID mandates reinforce the interplay between the Deep State and the Global Elite which dictates the global COVID narrative under the guise of fact-checking. 

Independent voices are the object of censorship, shadowban and smear campaigns. While these important voices are silenced, the truth becomes buried until it is already impossible to expose it. 

As George Orwell said, “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Help Global Research help you uncover the lies and expose the truth.

 

Click to view our membership plans

 

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation

 

We are deeply indebted to a myriad of courageous authors, scholars and investigative journalists for their indefatigable undertakings. By doing any of the actions below, you are helping us spread the word:

  • Establish an email list of some friends and family and forward the daily Global Research Newsletter and/or your favourite Global Research articles to this list on a daily basis.
  • Invite friends and family to subscribe to our daily newsletter.
  • Challenge the censorship procedures conducted by the search engines.
  • Use the various instruments of online posting and social media creatively. Click the “like” and “share” buttons on our article pages for starters.
  • Post one or more Global Research article/s on partner websites, internet discussion groups and blogs to build a dialogue around our coverage.

 


Know your truth and stand for it. Let Global Research help you.

Thank you very much for supporting independent media!

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Know Your Truth and Stand for It. Let Global Research Help You.

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.

***

 

The February 7 Times featured an opinion column by Prime Minister Boris Johnson, laying out Britain’s plans for a military escalation in Eastern Europe and Ukraine, targeting Russia.

The Times led with the headline, “Britain will not flinch over Ukraine, says PM. Defiant message to Putin as Marines and Typhoon jets prepared for deployment.”

Times front page article: “Britain will not flinch over Ukraine, says PM” (Credit: screenshot/Times)

Johnson was cited saying UK support to Europe and Nato will remain “unconditional and immovable.” The Times lists as immediate measures sending 350 Royal Marines to Poland, adding that “Johnson says that he is prepared to go further and is considering sending Typhoons [fighter jets] and warships to southeastern Europe. Plans have been drawn up to deploy jets to Romania and Bulgaria and send warships to the Black Sea.”

The troops bound for Poland from 45 Commando were being diverted from cold weather exercises in Norway. They will join 100 Royal Engineers already in Poland, where they will carry out contingency planning, including “working up responses to threats they could face” and joint exercises.

Johnson’s opinion piece, misleadingly titled, “Diplomacy can prevail”, threatens, “British sanctions and other measures will be ready for any renewed Russian attack.” He stresses that “Nato allies are agreed that we are willing to send more forces to guarantee the security of our allies on the eastern flank. The foreign ministers of Latvia and Estonia have called for extra support due to the Russian military build-up in Belarus. We stand ready to provide it”.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky hold a press conference at the Mariyinsky Palace in Kiev, Ukraine. 01/02/2022. (Picture by Andrew Parsons /No 10 Downing Street/Flickr)

As well as preparing to “reinforce the British-led Nato battlegroup in Estonia”, he lists the possibility of “deploying RAF Typhoon fighters and Royal Navy warships to protect southeastern Europe. And HMS Prince of Wales, our newest aircraft carrier, is now the command ship of Nato’s Maritime High Readiness Force.”

Turning directly to Ukraine, Johnson boasts,

“Since 2015, the UK’s Operation Orbital has trained 22,000 Ukrainian troops. Last month we sent 2,000 anti-tank missiles, causing God Save the Queen to trend on Ukrainian twitter, and placing Britain among the handful of countries to have supplied lethal aid. When I met [Ukrainian] President Zelenskyy last week, I announced another £88 million of UK aid to strengthen Ukraine’s energy independence.”

Addressing Russian President Vladimir Putin, Johnson warns,

“If he launches another invasion, he will force the West to bring about much of what he seeks to prevent. In fact, this is already happening. Because of his build-up, America, France, Italy and other allies are deploying forces to Nato’s southeastern flank, just as the UK reinforces the northeast.”

Johnson fails to list the most provocative move yet carried out during the military build-up against Russia. Last week the UK sent more than 100 special forces (Special Air Service, Special Boat Service, Special Reconnaissance Regiment and Special Forces Support Group) to Ukraine to train its armed forces, focusing on counter-insurgency tactics, sniping and sabotage. ‘They have a wide skill set which will no doubt be very useful to the Ukrainian forces,’ a military source told the Sun, February 6. The United States already has a force of 200 Rangers stationed in Ukraine, which is still not a NATO member.

Just how deliberately inflammatory the UK’s moves are was underscored by the Mirror reporting February 7 that the planned deployment of troops to Poland is part of a joint operation with the US. It writes that “defence chiefs are thrashing out plans for a dramatic UK-US parachute jump into Poland as a massive show of force against Moscow.

“UK military chiefs at Permanent Joint HQ in Middlesex have been going over plans to project British military strength as a gesture of solidarity with Ukrainian forces. One plan under discussion is to parachute members of 2 Para and 82nd Airborne into Poland as a dramatic signal of defiance towards Russian President Vladimir Putin.

It adds, “It is believed members of 2 Para will be asked to join US airborne troops in demonstrating what the Army calls a Joint Forcible Entry, dramatically dropping into Poland. They are part of 16 Air Assault Brigade—the UK’s high readiness troops mostly made up of Paratroopers, with signallers, medics and engineers attached.

“After jointly parachuting into Poland they would then launch a 14-day wargaming exercise—as a huge two-finger gesture to the Kremlin, whose troops are currently exercising in Belarus.”

The Mirror continues,

“The plan is to jump with the 82nd Airborne who have already arrived, but there is concern and confusion at senior level that any drop will be seen as aggressive and we are waiting for a decision.”

This is not an improvised move. The Mirror reports,

“The Paras are listed as the UK’s Global Response Force, are already part of an operational readiness capability which was formed with US forces in 2015. More than 200 British Paras dropped into Ukraine in September 2020, in a joint exercise with local forces and witnessed by the Daily Mirror.”

The newspaper also notes,

“More than 120 members of 2 Para’s B Company are already in Estonia on winter warfare exercises with NATO units including soldiers from the Yorkshire Regiment.”

Johnson’s actions point to the right-wing forces being unleashed by the crisis of British imperialism, with his factional opponents no less committed than he to military aggression and warmongering. One of the first Tory MPs to publicly call for Johnson’s resignation was Tobias Ellwood, chairman of the defence committee and a former captain in the Royal Green Jackets.

In a February 5 interview with the Times, Ellwood complained that on Ukraine, Johnson could not provide “the statecraft that’s necessary for Britain to make its mark and bring together a very timid, risk-averse West.” His task was to rally “other nations to stand up to Putin, to stand firm in Ukraine and make this our Cuban missile crisis moment.” This would mean emulating Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan. The sanctions discussed by Johnson with President Zelensky of Ukraine “is no threat,” said Ellwood. He wanted NATO to put a division of 15,000 troops into Ukraine—“That would be ample to make Putin think twice” with a four-star general “put in charge of the Downing Street operation.”

For its part Labour is intent on positioning itself to the right of Johnson. Welcoming the dispatch of troops to Poland, it complained again that he “has been preoccupied by protecting himself rather than protecting our national security”. Shadow Defence Secretary John Healey added, “With threats increasing and growing Russian aggression, ministers must halt their plans to cut the Army by another 10,000 troops in the next three years.”

As the Socialist Equality Party explained in its statement, “The working class must mobilise to bring down the Johnson government!”, the policies of austerity, militarism and war pursued by the ruling elite and all its parties and factions are dictated by an escalating global crisis of the profit system, characterised above all by an unprecedented polarisation between the broad mass of the working class and a super-rich and socially criminal oligarchy.

“Like the Biden administration, [Johnson] is responding to a desperate domestic crisis by seeking to channel discontent outwards, against an external threat, with Putin’s regime a convenient scapegoat. Johnson’s diversion has assumed the most dangerous form imaginable—a provocation against a military power with close to 4,500 nuclear warheads.

“The war drive is fully supported by the Labour Party, which combines declarations of common purpose with the Tories with an attack on Johnson’s ability to lead an anti-Russian offensive.”

Opposing this drive to war demands the independent political mobilisation of the working class on an anti-capitalist, internationalist, anti-imperialist and socialist perspective.

*

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

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The February 1st Amnesty International report on Israel’s treatment of Palestinians broke a new ground. Amnesty became the first major international human rights organisationto state explicitly that since its establishment in 1948, Israel has always practiced apartheid against Palestinians living under its rule.

In the 211-page document entitled, Israel’s Apartheid against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime against Humanity”, Amnesty provided the historical context  and documented “Israel’s institutionalised and systematic discrimination against Palestinians”  and its use of “attack” to maintain this system which “amounts to the crime against humanity of  apartheid”.

Amnesty pointed out that the Zionists who established Israel found that before 1948 Palestinians constituted  70 per cent of the population of the country and possessed 90 per cent of privately owned land while Jews were 30 per cent and owned only 6.5 per cent. Therefore, the Zionists transformed the situation in 1947-48 by displacing “in what amounted to ethnic cleansing” 800,000 of the 1.2 million indigenous Palestinians. The 150,000 who remained were granted citizenship but were placed under military rule until 1966 and have faced discrimination, dispossession and deprivation of the same rights accorded to Israeli Jews.

Since then, Amnesty stated, “Israel has pursued an explicit policy of establishing and maintaining Jewish demographic hegemony and maximising its control over land to benefit Jewish Israelis while minimising the number of Palestinians and restricting their rights and obstructing  their ability to challenge” this policy. After Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem, the West  Bank and Gaza in 1967, Israel drove another 350,000 Palestinians into Jordan and extended apartheid to the newly conquered territories.

Israel employs both its military and settlements to dominate the Palestinians, Amnesty argued, adding,

“All Israeli settlements in the [occupied Palestinian territories] are illegal under international law, regardless of their status under Israeli law.”

Amnesty summed up by saying that, while Palestinians “overwhelmingly regard themselves as Palestinian and have deep and shared political, ethnic, social and cultural ties” wherever they reside,  Israel “considers and treats Palestinians as an inferior non-Jewish racial group.”

During the four years Amnesty was assembling its well documented case, the Israeli human rights organisation, B’Tselem reported that Israel has imposed “Jewish supremacy” through apartheid in “all the territory it controls” the from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River.  B’Tslem wrote on January 12, 2021, “The key tool Israel uses to implement the principle of Jewish supremacy is engineering space geographically, demographically and politically. Jews go about their lives in a single, contiguous space where they enjoy full rights and self-determination. In contrast, Palestinians live in a space that is fragmented into several units, each with a different set of rights — given or denied by Israel, but always inferior to the rights accorded to Jews.”

Human Rights Watch followed B’Tselem with a report, “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution”,  which contended that in the land inhabited by 6.8 million Jewish Israelis and 6.8 million Palestinians, “Israeli authorities methodically privilege Jewish Israelis and discriminate against Palestinians. Laws, policies and statements by leading

Israeli officials make plain that the objective of maintaining Jewish Israeli control over demographics, political power, and land has long guided government policy. In pursuit of this goal, authorities have dispossessed, confined, forcibly separated and subjugated Palestinians by virtue of their identity to varying degrees of intensity. In certain areas, as described in this report, these deprivations are so severe that they amount to the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.”  This conclusion is a bit less forthright than that reached by B’Tselem andAmnesty.

All three reports have been roundly condemned by Israel and its loyal friends in high places and the organisations which published them stand accused of anti-Jewish racism.  But, this does not deflect from the gravamen of the charge of apartheid, which the state of Israel adopted  at its founding in 1948, the sameyear it was enforced in South Africa to formally separate whites and blacks.

It is significant that due to these three reports the word “apartheid” has finally gained respectable currency among organisations and individuals characterising the situation in Israel and the occupied territories although it has applied for nearly 74 years to the state of Israel.

While the Hebrew word, “hafrada”, meaning “separation”, is used to describe the policy adopted by the Israeli government towards the Palestinians, Israel objects to the application of the word “apartheid” which means “aparthood” because of its South African origin.  The cruel policy towards black Africans was designated as a crime under the 1973 Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid adopted by the UN General Assembly.

Apartheid has been applied to Israel but ignored for decades. Asa Winstanley, writing in Middle East Monitor on February 6th, revealed this designation was put forward as early as 1965 by Palestinian diplomat Fayez Sayegh who represented Kuwait at the UN. He wrote, “Whereas the Afrikaner apostles of apartheid in South Africa… brazenly proclaim their sin, the Zionist practitioners of apartheid in Palestine beguilingly protest their innocence.”   Sayegh’s reference to “Zionists” is appropriate because their colonists practiced apartheid long before the state emerged.

In a 2007 report, UN Special Rapporteur for Palestine John Dugard, a South African, stated, “elements of the Israeli occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law”. His successor Richard Falk also used apartheid to describe the situation in a 2014 document.

Rima Khalaf, executive director of the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia  and under secretary general said a 2017 report drawn up by the Commission “clearly and frankly concludes that Israel is a racist state that has established an apartheid system that persecutes the Palestinian people.”

In 2020, Yesh Din, another Israeli human rights organisation, said that Israeli treatment  of the West Bank Palestinian population amounts to apartheid as defined by international statutes.

More timid organisations and personalities dared to use this characterisation in 2021 after the Human Rights Watch report appeared.  An opinion poll released in August 2021 found that 65 per cent of academic experts on the Middle East described Israel as a “one-state reality akin to apartheid”. Seven months earlier, the figure was 59 per cent.

At the launch of this month’s Amnesty report, Secretary General Agnes Callamard stated,

“Governments who continue to supply Israel with arms and shield it from accountability at the UN are supporting a system of apartheid, undermining the international legal order and exacerbating the suffering of the Palestinian people. The international community must face up to the reality of Israel’s apartheid, and pursue the many avenues to justice which remain shamefully unexplored.”

*

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

Moscow Confronts ‘Good Cop, Bad Cop’

February 10th, 2022 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Americans use the slang “lockstep” recalling a characteristic trait of their prisons of the 19th century when inmates had to shuffle step due to the chain that linked their legs. But the US President Joe Biden used that powerful evocative metaphor to convey on Monday that his country and Germany are aligned on fighting any Russian aggression in Ukraine. 

“Germany is one of America’s closest allies,” he said, adding the two nations were “working lockstep” to address the alleged Russian aggression. Biden was speaking ahead of his bilateral meeting with new German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the White House. 

For Russia, “lockstep” is a horrific 20th century metaphor that harks back to Nazi Germany. Disregarding the pejorative tone, Biden casually tossed it around to drive home German-American solidarity and discipline. Scholz simply responded, “I’m looking forward to working closely together with you.” Scholz said the US is one of Germany’s “closest allies.” 

Much has been made out of Scholz’s reluctance to mention the Nord Steam 2 project at this joint press conference with Biden. But did it really matter? Biden spoke for him, suggesting firmly that the Nord Stream 2 issue should not get in the way of ties with Germany. 

Indeed, Biden, who’s been a leading figure in American foreign policy for nearly half a century, recognises the delicate politics Scholz is facing with the project. He also knows Scholz is new to his job and is unable to unite the transatlantic alliance in a response to Russia, as his predecessor Angela Merkel would have. 

Overall, Biden has reason to feel pleased that the relations between the US and its European allies are strong despite apparent  disagreements on certain aspects of a response to Russia. Fundamentally, the alliance agrees that a Russian military intervention in Ukraine cannot go unchecked. 

Washington is also not losing sleep over the French-led talks with Russia and sees President Emmanuel Macron’s efforts to engage with the Kremlin as a way to amplify France — and therefore himself — as a more influential player than Biden or Boris Johnson. Macron is only two months away from the presidential election where he seeks a second term. 

After the visit to Moscow, Macron traveled to Kyiv on Tuesday. He told reporters that “the next few days will be decisive and will require intensive discussions which we will pursue together.” But Moscow cannot be in two minds that when the chips are down, the US’ allies will inevitably line up behind Biden, as history testifies. 

The unknown unknown, if at all, is how the allies might react if the Russian intervention were to fall short of a large scale military move and is limited to, say, an operation confined to the Donbass region of Ukraine. This probably explains why Scholz would not publicly commit on the future of Nord Stream 2 pipeline.  

The CNN speculated that Scholz would have reached some sort of understanding with Biden. The point is, German economy is closely tied to Russia’s, and scrapping the Nord Steam 2 could hit it hard as well as Scholz’s political standing.

At such a sensitive juncture, it is also part of Washington’s tool box to confuse Moscow by playing the good cop, bad cop. The so-called Berlin Declaration of the Weimar Triangle between Germany, France and Poland on Tuesday called on Russia “to de–escalate the situation at the Ukrainian border and engage in a meaningful dialogue on security on the European continent.” 

It said,

“France, Poland and Germany express willingness to engage constructively in meaningful and result–oriented discussions on security issues of mutual concern.” Yet, it added, “In line with the Alliance’s dual–track approach the leaders agreed that the Alliance needs to continuously keep its deterrence and defence posture under review and be ready to adapt as necessary to a further deterioration of the security environment, including in the framework of NATO’s enhanced forward presence.” 

The moribund Weimar Triangle’s sudden appearance can only confirm Moscow’s suspicion that Washington is playing games. While Germany and France have so far opted for a more diplomatic approach towards Russia and continuously emphasised the need to resume dialogue with Moscow, Poland has taken a tougher stance. The trilateral format is a clumsy attempt to recalibrate Europe’s approach to the Kremlin. 

Clearly, Russia is being wooed by such diverse quarters in the West, in different permutations and combinations. British Foreign Secretary Elizabeth Truss is landing in Moscow on Thursday and Scholz himself next Tuesday. But on the core issues as such, namely, NATO’s rollback and Russia’s security demands, there is no movement.

In fact, none of these countries — UK, France, Germany or Poland — is even qualified to negotiate the core issues with Russia. At best, they can provide an “exit route” for Russia to “de-escalate” by withdrawing troops far away from the Ukraine border, without loss of face. 

Frustration is building up in Moscow. The Foreign Ministry lashed out at Germany today calling it an “occupied state” where American ambassadors “are giving orders to German officials” and are “backed up by 30,000 American boots on the ground.” 

The Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova implied that Scholz caved in under US pressure. She said,

“Germany needs this gas not because they like Russia or want to please us – they just need it, it’s what feeds their economy, it’s a resource their industrial development hinges on, it’s what they need to live, basically… a vital issue.” 

Zakharova lamented that not only with Germany but with the rest of Europe too, it’s the same case. “There’s been no talk of any sovereign interests for a long time now,” as she put it. 

The timing of this outburst cannot be accidental. Certainly, it deliberately scattered the “feel-good” lingering in the air following Macron’s visit. Russia is not impressed that European leaders are making a beeline for Moscow. It sees a strategy to wear it down in inconsequential diplomatic gyrations. 

And, all this is while NATO is substantially building up its forces on Russia’s borders and continues to develop military infrastructure on adjacent territories. Also, the Russia-Ukraine relations are deteriorating with both sides massing large numbers of military personnel and equipment along their borders. 

*

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

Featured image: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (L), French President Emmanuel Macron (C) and Polish President Andrzej Duda (R) met in Berlin on February 8, 2022 in the format of the so-called Weimar Triangle.  (Source: Jakub Szymczuk/KPRP)

Global Trucker Convoys Protest Mandates

February 10th, 2022 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The Canadian “Freedom Convoy” started pulling into Ottawa January 29, 2022, gathering in front of the Parliament building. They have vowed to stay put until the Canadian government agrees to roll back all federal mandates, including the vaccine mandate and the vaccine passport

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has tried to downplay the protest, referring to it as a “small fringe minority” of people “who hold unacceptable views” and don’t represent the views of Canadians

As the convoy descended on Ottawa, Trudeau moved out of his residence and then claimed to have contracted COVID and that he would remain in isolation for a week

Inspired and encouraged by the Canadian trucker movement, truckers in other countries are now organizing their own Freedom Convoys. In Europe, a European Freedom Convoy will meet up in Brussels, February 14, 2022, and remain there “until vaccination passports and associated restrictions are abolished” across the European Union

Australia also organized a Freedom Convoy to gather outside the Parliament House in Canberra, starting January 31, 2022, and in the U.S., American truckers are planning a DC Freedom Convoy

*

Did you know there’s a massive trucker convoy protesting COVID jab mandates in Ottawa, Canada? You’re forgiven if you missed it, because this gigantic movement received very minimal coverage in the conventional press for the first week or so. Ditto for similar trucker protests forming in other countries, such as Australia and Germany.

The Canadian Freedom Convoy

The Canadian “Freedom Convoy” started pulling into Ottawa January 29, 2022, gathering in front of the Parliament building. According to The New York Times:1

“The convoy was organized in response to a regulation, implemented this month, that requires truckers returning from the United States to show proof of vaccination. But it recent days, it has broadened to include Canadians critical of pandemic restrictions in general, and of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau …

Private cars and pickup trucks greatly outnumbered the heavy trucks that made up the convoy in its first days. Throughout Saturday, the vehicles clogged the streets in and around Parliament, most of them bearing flags or signs denouncing public health measures related to the pandemic.

Thousands of protesters on foot, many carrying handmade signs on hockey sticks, wandered through the parked vehicles and the slow-moving traffic or gathered on the lawn in front of Parliament … Few people appeared to be following Ontario’s rules requiring social distancing and masks at crowded, outdoor gatherings …

Several Canadian news outlets reported that Mr. Trudeau and his family had been moved out of their official residence by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as a precaution.”

Trudeau Shows His True Colors

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau initially tried to downplay the protest, referring to it as a “small fringe minority” of people “who hold unacceptable views” and don’t represent the views of Canadians. It boggles the mind to think how rapidly our countries have spiraled into authoritarianism where the very idea of freedom is now “unacceptable.”

We can’t be surprised, however. It’s no secret that the World Economic Forum, which is leading the technocratic takeover of the whole world, has penetrated the cabinet of Trudeau and many other countries. WEF head and founder Klaus Schwab admitted it in 2017.2

Once this “fringe minority” descended on Ottawa, however, Trudeau ran. Not only was he escorted out of his official residence, as reported by The New York Times, he’s also said to have tested positive for COVID and will be in isolation for a week.3

Countless videos illustrate just how out of touch Trudeau’s comments are, and that’s putting it kindly. Along highways and overpasses, in the city and outside of it, Canadians have gathered in astounding numbers to cheer the truckers on, everywhere thanking them for taking up this peaceful fight for freedom.

While the actual number of trucks involved is still unknown, it seems reasonable to assume it’s in the thousands. According to Local 12 News,4 the convoy could be a “world-record setter” in terms of its size — an estimated 70 kilometers or some 43.5 miles.

The truckers have vowed to stay put until the Canadian government agrees to roll back all federal mandates, including the vaccine mandate and the vaccine passport.5

Covert Surveillance Is Here

In the video above, Jimmy Dore plays an interview with Benjamin Dichter, one of the organizers of the Freedom Convoy, who describes how Canada has already rolled out previously unknown technology that scans and reads a trucker’s passport and vaccine status on approach, without them actually having to show any papers or display their vaccine QR code on their phone.

Their cell phones pop up automatically on the border agent’s screen as they approach the station, and the cell phone is automatically linked to the driver’s passport and vaccine card, which are also displayed automatically.

So much for right to medical privacy! The secret surveillance and tracking we’ve been warning about is here, or at the least at the Canadian border. The question is, where else it might be deployed without our knowledge?

Google Runs Is Part and Parcel of the Surveillance State

For years, I’ve warned people about the creeping surveillance state, of which Google is a significant part. If you still haven’t ditched Google products from your life (which include Android), now’s a good time to start. In early 2020, I interviewed Robert Epstein, Ph.D., who for the last decade has helped expose Google’s manipulative and deceptive practices. As noted by Epstein, Google’s powers pose three very specific threats to society:

1. They’re a surveillance agency with significant yet hidden surveillance powers — The Google search engine, Google Wallet, Google Docs, Google Drive, Gmail, Google Chrome browser, YouTube, Android phones, Google home devices like Nest and Google wearables like Fitbit are all surveillance platforms that work together.

Android cell phones, for example, which are a Google-owned operating system, can track you even when you’re not connected to the internet, whether you have geo tracking enabled or not, and even if your phone is turned off.

As soon as you reconnect to the internet, all that information stored in your phone is sent to Google. So, even though you may think you’ve just spent the day incognito, the moment you reconnect, every step you’ve made is shared (provided you had your phone with you).

Google is also tracking your movements online even if you’re not using their products, because most websites use Google Analytics, which tracks everything you do on a website. And, you have no way of knowing whether a website uses Google Analytics or not. The only way to protect yourself against this would be to use a VPN.

2. They’re a censoring agency — Google has a unique ability to restrict or block access to websites across the internet, thus deciding what people can and cannot see. They even have the ability to block access to entire countries and the internet as a whole.

The most crushing problem with this kind of internet censorship is that you don’t know what you don’t know. If a certain type of information is removed from your search, and you don’t know it should exist somewhere, you’ll never go looking for it. And, when searching for information online, how would you know that certain websites or pages have been removed from the search results in the first place? The answer is, you don’t.

For example, Google has been investing in DNA repositories for quite a long time, and are adding DNA information to our profiles. According to Epstein, Google has taken over the national DNA repository, but articles about that — which he has cited in his own writings — have all vanished.

3. They have the power to manipulate public opinion through search rankings and other means — In so doing, they have the ability to shape the opinions, beliefs, thoughts, attitudes, purchases, behavior and votes of billions of people, all without anyone realizing they’re being manipulated. They don’t even leave a paper trail for authorities to trace. As noted by Epstein:

“They’re using new techniques of manipulation that have never existed before in human history and they are for the most part, subliminal … but they don’t produce tiny shifts. They produce enormous shifts in people’s thinking, very rapidly. Some of the techniques I’ve discovered are among the largest behavioral effects ever discovered in the behavioral sciences.”

In his article6 “Seven Simple Steps Toward Online Privacy,” Epstein outlines his recommendations for protecting your privacy while surfing the web, most of which don’t cost anything.

Vaxxed or Unvaxxed — People Want Freedom

Now, don’t get me wrong, I love Jimmy Dore as we both grew up in a poor neighborhood in Chicago and I love his humor. But for the record, while Dore tells his audience that the COVID jab will protect you from severe illness and death, I disagree. Mounting evidence suggests it might actually destroy your natural immune function, especially after the third dose.

Be that as it may, Dore rightfully states that being against mandates and vaccine passports isn’t a cause restricted to the unvaccinated. He, Dichter and countless others who have received the jab did so because they wanted to protect themselves, but they’re not willing to give up their freedoms and live in a totalitarian state.

A Political Tsunami

The good news is that, for whatever reason, the Canadian Freedom Convoy has captured the attention and hearts of the global population — even with mainstream media ignoring and/or minimizing it for days. As noted by Ron Paul in the Liberty Report above, it’s turning into “a political tsunami.”

Truck driver is one of the most common jobs in North America, and perhaps around the world, which might explain the wide appeal of this movement, and how news of it spread so rapidly and organically despite media blackouts and social media censorship. Another reason is probably because people recognize the leverage truckers as a group have.

For example, nearly 70% of all goods freight transported annually in the U.S. are delivered by truck.7In Canada, that percentage is closer to 90%.8 When thousands of truck drivers stop delivering goods and instead honk their air horns outside a government building, the effects are bound to rapidly become noticeable in the form of empty shelves.

Anyone tired of living in Orwellian dystopia recognizes that this kind of leverage over the political class is far more significant than people marching in the streets with signs — which is what Europeans have been doing every weekend for months on end, to no avail.

The Rise of Global Freedom Convoys

Inspired and encouraged by the Canadian trucker movement, truckers in other countries are now organizing their own Freedom Convoys.9 In Europe, a European Freedom Convoy will meet up in Brussels, February 14, 2022, and remain there “until vaccination passports and associated restrictions are abolished” across the European Union.10,11

Australia also rapidly started organizing a Freedom Convoy to gather outside the Parliament House in Canberra, starting January 31, 2022.12,13 Within days, the Official Convoy to Canberra Facebook page had gathered 170,400 members.14 Facebook has now removed the group.

In the U.S., American truckers are planning a DC Freedom Convoy. Facebook was quick in deleting their page, though — a move its organizers blasted as “Censorship at its finest.” As reported by Fox News:15

“The group, titled ‘Convoy to D.C. 2022,’ acted as a place for truckers to plan and coordinate their trek from California to Washington, D.C. Jeremy Johnson, who set up the Facebook group, said his personal account was also removed, prompting him to contact a civil rights attorney to discuss the next steps …

[Mike] Landis, a trucker involved in the freedom convoy, told host Carley Shimkus that this movement is ‘a long time coming.’ He said Americans are tired of the ‘government overreach’ and criticized politicians for, as he believes, not following the Constitution.

‘The presence of that amount of people that show that they are unhappy with what’s going on is a good way to hopefully get their attention,’ he said. Johnson and Brase anticipate a wide range of Americans, not only truckers, will come out to support their cause.

‘This crosses all genders, all races, all sexual orientations, all occupations,’ Brase said. ‘Truckers might be standing up, but it’s not about the truckers. It’s about America.’ The group’s goal is to end vaccine mandates through peaceful protests. ‘The government needs to really take a look at what the American people want,’ Johnson said. ‘And they don’t want mandates.'”

*

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

Notes

1 New York Times January 29, 2022 (Archived)

2 Twitter Mercola January 31, 2022

3 The Truth About Cars January 31, 2022

4 Local 12 News January 28, 2022

5 Fox News February 2, 2022

6 Medium March 17, 2017

7 TruckInfo Trucking Statistics

8 Canada Statistics Commodity Flows

9 Blog.weaccuse.org January 28, 2022

10 Twitter European Freedom Convoy 2022

11 Twitter James Melville January 28, 2022

12 National Times Australia February 1, 2022

13 Wentworth Report January 30, 2022

14 Facebook 2022 Official Convoy to Canberra

15 Fox News February 2, 2022, US truckers slam Facebook for removing page organizing DC freedom convoy: ‘Censorship at its finest’

Featured image is from The Last Refuge

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.

***

Understandably enough, commentaries on the crisis between Russia and the West tend to dwell on Ukraine. After all, more than 100,000 Russian soldiers and a fearsome array of weaponry have now been emplaced around the Ukrainian border. Still, such a narrow perspective deflects attention from an American strategic blunder that dates to the 1990s and is still reverberating.

During that decade, Russia was on its knees. Its economy had shrunk by nearly 40%, while unemployment was surging and inflation skyrocketing. (It reached a monumental 86% in 1999.) The Russian military was a mess. Instead of seizing the opportunity to create a new European order that included Russia, President Bill Clinton and his foreign-policy team squandered it by deciding to expand NATO threateningly toward that country’s borders. Such a misbegotten policy guaranteed that Europe would once again be divided, even as Washington created a new order that excluded and progressively alienated post-Soviet Russia.

The Russians were perplexed — as well they should have been.

At the time, Clinton and company were hailing Russian President Boris Yeltsin as a democrat. (Never mind that he had lobbed tank shells at his own recalcitrant parliament in 1993 and, in 1996, prevailed in a crooked election, abetted weirdly enough by Washington.) They praised him for launching a “transition” to a market economy, which, as Nobel Laureate Svetlana Alexievich so poignantly laid out in her book Second Hand Time, would plunge millions of Russians into penury by “decontrolling” prices and slashing state-provided social services.

Why, Russians wondered, would Washington obsessively push a Cold War NATO alliance ever closer to their borders, knowing that a reeling Russia was in no position to endanger any European country?

An Alliance Saved from Oblivion

Unfortunately, those who ran or influenced American foreign policy found no time to ponder such an obvious question. After all, there was a world out there for the planet’s sole superpower to lead and, if the U.S. wasted time on introspection, “the jungle,” as the influential neoconservative thinker Robert Kagan put it, would grow back and the world would be “imperiled.” So, the Clintonites and their successors in the White House found new causes to promote using American power, a fixation that would lead to serial campaigns of intervention and social engineering.

The expansion of NATO was an early manifestation of this millenarian mindset, something theologian Reinhold Niebuhr had warned about in his classic book, TheIrony of American History. But who in Washington was paying attention, when the world’s fate and the future were being designed by us, and only us, in what Washington Post neoconservative columnist Charles Krauthammer celebrated in 1990 as the ultimate “unipolar moment” — one in which, for the first time ever, the United States would possess peerless power?

Still, why use that opportunity to expand NATO, which had been created in 1949 to deter the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact from rolling into Western Europe, given that both the Soviet Union and its alliance were now gone? Wasn’t it akin to breathing life into a mummy?

To that question, the architects of NATO expansion had stock answers, which their latter-day disciples still recite. The newly born post-Soviet democracies of Eastern and Central Europe, as well as other parts of the continent, could be “consolidated” by the stability that only NATO would provide once it inducted them into its ranks. Precisely how a military alliance was supposed to promote democracy was, of course, never explained, especially given a record of American global alliances that had included the likes of Philippine strongman Ferdinand Marcos, Greece under the colonels, and military-ruled Turkey.

And, of course, if the denizens of the former Soviet Union now wanted to join the club, how could they rightly be denied? It hardly mattered that Clinton and his foreign policy team hadn’t devised the idea in response to a raging demand for it in that part of the world. Quite the opposite, consider it the strategic analog to Say’s Law in economics: they designed a product and the demand followed.

Domestic politics also influenced the decision to push NATO eastward. President Clinton had a chip on his shoulder about his lack of combat credentials. Like many American presidents (31 to be precise), he hadn’t served in the military, while his opponent in the 1996 elections, Senator Bob Dole, had been badly injured fighting in World War II. Worse yet, his evasion of the Vietnam-era draft had been seized uponby his critics, so he felt compelled to show Washington’s power brokers that he had the stomach and temperament to safeguard American global leadership and military preponderance.

In reality, because most voters weren’t interested in foreign policy, neither was Clinton and that actually gave an edge to those in his administration deeply committed to NATO expansion. From 1993, when discussions about it began in earnest, there was no one of significance to oppose them. Worse yet, the president, a savvy politician, sensed that the project might even help him attract voters in the 1996 presidential election, especially in the Midwest, home to millions of Americans with eastern and central European roots.

Furthermore, given the support NATO had acquired over the course of a generation in Washington’s national security and defense industry ecosystem, the idea of mothballing it was unthinkable, since it was seen as essential for continued American global leadership. Serving as a protector par excellence provided the United States with enormous influence in the world’s premier centers of economic power of that moment. And officials, think-tankers, academics, and journalists — all of whom exercised far more influence over foreign policy and cared much more about it than the rest of the population — found it flattering to be received in such places as a representative of the world’s leading power.

Under the circumstances, Yeltsin’s objections to NATO pushing east (despite verbal promises made to the last head of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, not to do so) could easily be ignored. After all, Russia was too weak to matter. And in those final Cold War moments, no one even imagined such NATO expansion. So, betrayal? Perish the thought! No matter that Gorbachev steadfastly denounced such moves and did so again this past December.

You Reap What You Sow

Russian President Vladimir Putin is now pushing back, hard. Having transformed the Russian army into a formidable force, he has the muscle Yeltsin lacked. But the consensus inside the Washington Beltway remains that his complaints about NATO’s expansion are nothing but a ruse meant to hide his real concern: a democratic Ukraine. It’s an interpretation that conveniently absolves the U.S. of any responsibility for ongoing events.

Today, in Washington, it doesn’t matter that Moscow’s objections long preceded Putin’s election as president in 2000 or that, once upon a time, it wasn’t just Russian leaders who didn’t like the idea. In the 1990s, several prominent Americans opposed it and they were anything but leftists. Among them were members of the establishment with impeccable Cold War credentials: George Kennan, the father of the containment doctrine; Paul Nitze, a hawk who served in the Reagan administration; the Harvard historian of Russia Richard Pipes, another hardliner; Senator Sam Nunn, one of the most influential voices on national security in Congress; Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a one-time U.S. ambassador to the United Nations; and Robert McNamara, Lyndon Johnson’s Secretary of Defense. Their warnings were all remarkably similar: NATO’s expansion would poison relations with Russia, while helping to foster within it authoritarian and nationalist forces.

The Clinton administration was fully aware of Russia’s opposition. In October 1993, for example, James Collins, the chargé d’affaires at the U.S. embassy in Russia, sent a cable to Secretary of State Warren Christopher, just as he was about to travel to Moscow to meet Yeltsin, warning him that NATO’s enlargement was “neuralgic to Russians” because, in their eyes, it would divide Europe and shut them out. He warned that the alliance’s extension into Central and Eastern Europe would be “universally interpreted in Moscow as directed at Russia and Russia alone” and so regarded as “neo-containment.”

That same year, Yeltsin would send a letter to Clinton (and the leaders of the United Kingdom, France, and Germany) fiercely opposing NATO expansion if it meant admitting former Soviet states while excluding Russia. That would, he predicted, actually “undermine Europe’s security.” The following year, he clashed publicly with Clinton, warning that such expansion would “sow the seeds of mistrust” and “plunge post-Cold War Europe into a cold peace.” The American president dismissed his objections: the decision to offer former parts of the Soviet Union membership in the alliance’s first wave of expansion in 1999 had already been taken.

The alliance’s defenders now claim that Russia accepted it by signing the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act. But Moscow really had no choice, being dependent then on billions of dollars in International Monetary Fund loans (possible only with the approval of the United States, that organization’s most influential member). So, it made a virtue of necessity. That document, it’s true, does highlight democracy and respect for the territorial integrity of European countries, principles Putin has done anything but uphold. Still, it also refers to “inclusive” security across “the Euro-Atlantic area” and “joint decision-making,” words that hardly describe NATO’s decision to expand from 16 countries at the height of the Cold War to 30 today.

By the time NATO held a summit in Romania’s capital, Bucharest, in 2008, the Baltic states had become members and the revamped alliance had indeed reached Russia’s border. Yet the post-summit statement praised Ukraine’s and Georgia’s “aspirations for membership,” adding “we agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.” President George W. Bush’s administration couldn’t possibly have believed Moscow would take Ukraine’s entry into the alliance lying down. The American ambassador to Russia, William Burns — now the head of the CIA — had warned in a cable two months earlier that Russia’s leaders regarded that possibility as a grave threat to their security. That cable, now publicly available, all but foresaw a train wreck like the one we’re now witnessing.

But it was the Russia-Georgia war — with rare exceptions mistakenly presented as an unprovoked, Moscow-initiated attack — that provided the first signal Vladimir Putin was past the point of issuing protests. His annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, following an illegal referendum, and the creation of two “republics” in the Donbas, itself part of Ukraine, were far more dramatic moves that effectively initiated a second Cold War.

Averting Disaster

And now, here we are. A divided Europe, increasing instability amid military threats by nuclear-armed powers, and the looming possibility of war, as Putin’s Russia, its troops and armaments massed around Ukraine, demand that NATO expansion cease, Ukraine be barred from the alliance, and the United States and its allies finally take Russia’s objections to the post-Cold War security order seriously.

Of the many obstacles to averting war, one is particularly worth noting: the widespread claim that Putin’s concerns about NATO are a smokescreen obscuring his true fear: democracy, particularly in Ukraine. Russia, however, repeatedly objected to NATO’s eastward march even when it was still being hailed as a democracy in the West and long before Putin became president in 2000. Besides, Ukraine has been a democracy (however tumultuous) since it became independent in 1991.

So why the Russian buildup now?

Vladimir Putin is anything but a democrat. Still, this crisis is unimaginable without the continual talk about someday ushering Ukraine into NATO and Kyiv’s intensifying military cooperation with the West, especially the United States. Moscow views both as signs that Ukraine will eventually join the alliance, which — not democracy — is Putin’s greatest fear.

Now for the encouraging news: the looming disaster has finally energized diplomacy. We know that the hawks in Washington will deplore any political settlement that involves compromise with Russia as appeasement. They’ll liken President Biden to Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister who, in 1938, gave way to Hitler in Munich. Some of them advocate a “massive weapons airlift” to Ukraine, à la Berlin as the Cold War began. Others go further, urging Biden to muster an “international coalition of the willing, readying military forces to deter Putin and, if necessary, prepare for war.”

Sanity, however, can still prevail through a compromise. Russia could settle for a moratorium on Ukrainian membership in NATO for, say, two decades, something the alliance should be able to accept because it has no plans to fast-track Kyiv’s membership anyway. To gain Ukraine’s assent, it would be guaranteed the freedom to secure arms for self-defense and, to satisfy Moscow, Kyiv would agree never to allow NATO bases or aircraft and missiles capable of striking Russia on its territory.

The deal would have to extend beyond Ukraine if it is to ward off crises and war in Europe. The United States and Russia would need to summon the will to discuss arms control there, including perhaps an improved version of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty that President Trump ditched in 2019. They would also need to explore confidence-building measures like excluding troops and armaments from designated areas along the NATO-Russian borderlands and steps to prevent the (now-frequent) close encounters between American and Russian warplanes and warships that could careen out of control.

Over to the diplomats. Here’s wishing them well.

*

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

Rajan Menon, a TomDispatch regular, is the Anne and Bernard Spitzer Professor of International Relations emeritus at the Powell School, City College of New York, director of the Grand Strategy Program at Defense Priorities, and Senior Research Scholar at the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace at Columbia University. He is the author, most recently, of The Conceit of Humanitarian Intervention.

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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The role of the Canadian media in this crisis. How it destroys people’s lives.

Kristen Nagle shames CBC workers in the streets of Ottawa.

CBC people have no heart.

This is a must watch.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

Video: Brian Peckford, Signatory of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, on Trudeau and the COVID-19 Mandates

By Brian Peckford, February 10, 2022

Watch Brian Peckford speaking to a crowd in December 2021 on Trudeau’s vaccine mandate and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Video: Trudeau Ripped for Labeling Protesters as ‘Nazis’ and ‘Fringe Minority’

By Fox Business, February 10, 2022

‘Freedom Convoy’s’ lead attorney Keith Wilson and former Newfoundland Premier Brian Peckford call out the Canadian prime minister for characterizing the protesters as ‘Nazis’ and a ‘fringe minority.’

Video: The True Causes of The Environmental Crisis. Why and How Do Corporations Keep You Addicted to Fossil Fuels?

By Emanuel Pastreich, February 09, 2022

I have watched the sad sight of sincere high school students led by Greta Thunberg, or other climate activists, demanding of politicians that they change policies and receiving from those so-called “leaders” sorrowful apologies and inspiring promises only to discover, to their surprise, that absolutely nothing has changed after six months, or after a year.

World Economic Forum’s “Young Global Leaders” Revealed

By Jacob Nordangard, February 09, 2022

Through its Young Global Leaders program, the World Economic Forum has been instrumental in shaping a world order that undermines all democratic principles. For several decades, this program has nurtured compliant leaders acting as WEF agents in governments around the world. The consequences are far-reaching and may turn out to be devastating for humanity.

The Truckers Take Abuse in Ottawa: COVID Crimes Committed Behind the Cover of “Emergency Measures”

By Prof. Anthony J. Hall, February 09, 2022

In the name of a supposed health emergency, governments have assigned to themselves all sorts of new powers. This state of emergency was deemed to be a necessary requirement to facilitate the fight against the spread of the supposedly new coronavirus.

Insane: Austrian Government Authorizes Dystopian Vaccine Registry and Imposes COVID Restrictions Through January 2024 – Will Begin Pulling Drivers Over at Random and Fining Un-Boosted Citizens Next Month

By Julian Conradson, February 09, 2022

This week, Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen imposed new Covid restrictions that require all adults in the country to be fully vaccinated and boosted or risk being fined. The new authoritarian law runs through January 31st, 2024, and will go into effect next month.

Austrians Being Stopped Randomly by Authorities and Forced to Prove They Are Vaccinated

By Steve Watson, February 09, 2022

After Austria became the first European country to mandate COVID vaccines for the ENTIRETY of its population, details have emerged on how the government plans to enforce the measure. Reports note that citizens will be stopped randomly in the street and pulled over in their vehicles and forced to comply with vaccine status checks by the ‘authorities.’

How Fact Checking Is Controlled and Faked

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, February 09, 2022

Prior to 2015 or 2016, you could still read what you wanted online without much interference. This has since changed, as propagandists have infiltrated the media and, along with other major players, like Big Tech and government, set out to control information. Fact-checking — a once-obscure term that’s since gone mainstream — is one part of the campaign to control what you see online, and therefore what you think and how you perceive reality — but it’s all a ruse.

History of World War II: The Japanese March Through Southern Malaya and to Singapore’s Outskirts, 80 Years Ago

By Shane Quinn, February 09, 2022

After the successful Japanese amphibious landings at Kota Bharu, northern British Malaya on 8 December 1941, in the 5 weeks that elapsed Tokyo’s forces had advanced more than 200 miles to capture the Malayan capital city, Kuala Lumpur, on 11 January 1942.

Slovakia: 1000s Protest U.S. Military Pact. Official Says Worse Than 1968 Soviet Deal

By Rick Rozoff, February 09, 2022

The U.S. securing air bases in Slovakia would mark the Pentagon and NATO already or soon having air bases in no less than nine former Warsaw Pact nations: Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. Those are all the former Warsaw Pact countries in NATO except for the Czech Republic.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Brian Peckford, Signatory of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, on Trudeau and the COVID-19 Mandates

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.

***

Chris Sky of the people, for the people. Ottawa Freedom Rally, February 7, 2022.

Watch him speak to the freedom fighters in the video below.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

‘Freedom Convoy’s’ lead attorney Keith Wilson and former Newfoundland Premier Brian Peckford call out the Canadian prime minister for characterizing the protesters as ‘Nazis’ and a ‘fringe minority.’

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

With Help from WEF, Canada to Launch Federal Digital ID Program

February 10th, 2022 by Michael Nevradakis

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

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

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

Fist published on August 17, 2022

***

Government officials said the program is “the electronic equivalent of a recognized proof-of-identity document,” such as a driver’s license or passport, which “confirms that ‘you are who you say you are’ in a digital context.”

The Canadian government, building on a partnership with the World Economic Forum (WEF), is developing a new federal “Digital Identity Program.”

The aim of the new initiative is to develop a digital proof-of-identity document, which could be used across different systems and environments ranging from government services to airports and border control, according to Slay News.

Officials revealed details of the program in the government’s sprawling “Canada’s Digital Ambition 2022” report, published Aug. 4.

According to the report, the “Digital Identity Program” is part of Priority 2.2 of Canada’s “Digital Ambition,” which seeks to “build and use common solutions for digital service delivery.”

“Our next step in enabling digital government is adopting a ‘government as a platform’ service delivery model,” the report states. The federal Digital Identity Program is the “next step in making services more convenient to access.”

Officials said the program is “the electronic equivalent of a recognized proof-of-identity document,” such as a driver’s license or passport, which “confirms that ‘you are who you say you are’ in a digital context.”

According to the report, “The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for government services to be accessible and flexible in the digital age.”

However, Canada’s partnership with the WEF began prior to the pandemic. Under Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a member of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders program, Canada has since 2018 participated in the “Known Traveler Digital Identity” (KTDI) program, the WEF’s pilot program to develop a digital ID.

The WEF described KTDI as “the first global collaboration of its kind” that “brings together a global consortium of individuals, governments, authorities, and the travel industry to enhance security in world travel.”

Canadian government officials in 2018 stated the aim of the KTDI initiative was “to test emerging digital technologies and how they can improve security and the seamless flow of legitimate air travellers,” in light of an expected increase in air travelers globally from 1.2 to 1.8 billion by 2030.

2030 is the target year of the United Nations’ “Agenda 2030” and its “Sustainable Development Goals,” or SDGs.

The WEF characterized the KTDI program as “the disruptive innovation the global travel security ecosystem needs,” and as a “paradigm shift to an interoperable digital identity system that prioritises traveller-centricity, upholds privacy by design, and enables the trustful cooperation between international public and private sector partners required for ensuring the safe and secure movement of people across borders.”

According to the WEF,

“The KTDI pilot offers greater control over personal information, putting passengers in charge of when and how data is shared through a ‘traveller-managed digital identity.’”

Claims that individuals will have “greater control over personal information” are a common theme in such digital identity initiatives, including digital vaccine passports, as previously reported by The Defender.

The WEF in a 2019 press release explained how the KTDI is linked more broadly to government-issued identification documents of all stripes, stating that “KTDI is based on an interoperable digital identity, linked directly to government-issued identity documents,” through the use of “cryptography, distributed ledger technology and biometrics.”

The system “ensure[s] portability and … safeguard[s] the privacy of personal data,” while the digital ledger “provides an accurate, tamper-proof record of each traveller’s identity data and authorized transactions,” the press release stated.

Blockchain technology figures prominently in KTDI, with its primary function described as being to “cryptographically issue, revoke, and verify credential identifiers without the need of a centralized intermediary (like a certification authority).”

Using “identity data that is usually stored on a chip on a passenger’s passport,” this digital appwould be “securely stored and encrypted on [a] mobile device,” and is checked by authorities “using biometrics … without the need for a physical passport.”

The WEF press release and other documents don’t explain why the use of physical passports is now apparently burdensome and don’t specify whether the “identity data” that would be digitally stored would include vaccine credentials — in effect, an extension of vaccine passports.

Andrew Bud, CEO of biometric ID company iProove, a U.S. Department of Homeland Security contractor, recently described vaccine certificates as driving “the whole field of digital ID in the future,” adding they are “not just about COVID [but] about something even bigger” and that “once adopted for COVID [they] will be rapidly used for everything else.”

Under the KTDI program, passengers can establish a “known traveller status” over time by accumulating “attestations” from “trusted partners,” such as “border agencies and recognized airlines” — a feature that seemingly resembles “social credit score” systems currently being tested in China.

Also of interest are some of the WEF’s partners in the KTDI pilot program. They include:

  • Amsterdam’s Schiphol International Airport, the site of major delays recently and where air traffic has been capped due to purported environmental concerns (the Netherlands is also part of the KTDI pilot program).
  • Toronto-Pearson International Airport — which also saw major delays recently.
  • Montreal-Trudeau International Airport, named after the current Canadian prime minister’s father, former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, and also the site of significant delaysthis past summer.

These partners are “supported” by the Irish-American information technology company Accenture, which helped Australia develop its digital vaccine passport system.

In turn, the idea for the KTDI was “initially conceptualized by a multi-stakeholder Working Group launched in 2015,” including several governments and entities such as Google, Visa, Marriott International, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the International Air Transport Association and INTERPOL.

Even though Canada has begun to loosen or eliminate some of the country’s COVID-19-related restrictions — among the world’s most restrictive over the past two-plus years — citizens and public officials continue to face penalties for violations of vaccine mandates and for refusing to use digital vaccine passports.

An Ontario councilor was docked 90 days’ worth of pay for allegedly violating her municipality’s vaccine mandate — specifically, by attending two council meetings in May without furnishing proof of vaccination against COVID-19. The penalty was levied even though the mandate in question has since been lifted.

And as recently reported by The Defender, in June, a Canadian doctor was fined $6,255 upon her return to the country, over her refusal to use the country’s ArriveCAN health information app.

According to Global Government Forum, Canada is one of eight countries that formed a working group for digital ID in 2020. The group also includes Australia, Finland, Israel, New Zealand, Singapore, the Netherlands and the U.K.

Countries that have either implemented digital ID systems or are working on doing so include Estonia, Germany, the U.K. and Australia, as well as the EU.

Canadian government officials plan to launch public consultations on a digital ID framework for federal government services but have not yet announced when.

*

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

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Excerpts: 

The Treasury Department this week reported that the total national debt of the United States surpassed $30 trillion for the first time in history, an amount equal to nearly 130% of America’s yearly economic output, known as gross domestic product. The eye-popping figure makes the U.S. one of the most heavily indebted nations in the world.

The federal debt has been high and rising for decades, but the federal government’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, which involved massive infusions of cash into the U.S. economy, greatly accelerated its growth.

… While the $30 trillion figure, by itself, has no significant meaning, it may serve to focus attention on what some see as a major concern for the future health of the country.

The $30 trillion in outstanding debt is owed to a wide variety of creditors, including the federal government itself.

However, with the Federal Reserve poised to begin raising interest rates in an attempt to ward off rising inflation, the rate the Treasury has to pay on newly issued debt will likely rise, meaning that the overall cost of servicing the federal debt will likely go up in the relatively near future.

“$30 trillion in debt is an obscene number, but what’s even more depressing is the fact that most politicians in both parties don’t really care,” Senator Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican, said in a statement. “Someone is going to have to pay that money when these politicians are long gone, and — spoiler alert — it won’t be paid by them but instead by our kids.”

To read the full article on the VOA click here

*

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

Featured image is from Pixabay

Energy of the Capitalistic Shock

February 9th, 2022 by Konrad Rękas

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.

***

We live in times of the greatest civilisation transformation since the birth of capitalism and the greatest technological change since the dawn of industrial production.  But do we really catch all circumstances related?

Energy technologies as social constructs

To understand what is a social construct is in Foucault’s meaning we have to assume that our perception shapes social reality surrounding us.  So how we call and how we feel any phenomenon – in fact determines it.  Thus it should be noted that energy is that particular kind of good that allows people to satisfy their demand for other goods.  This positions both the demand for energy and energy technologies in a wider social and awareness context. 

We do not consume energy (only) for its own sake, e.g. in the form of heat – but it defines our position in relation to the entire consumption chain.

The way we perceive energy technologies often reflects our attitude to such recognised social constructs as the market, state, economical system, community, but also the perception of humanity and its place in the universe.  And in line with the dialectic of social constructionism – these are variational phenomena, undergoing transformations along with changes in the dominant trends of social awareness.

Although modern generations may find it hard to believe – the oil industry has presented itself and has been perceived not only as the avant-garde of modernity, but also as an outpost of egalitarianism.  The American Petroleum Institute commercials from the 1950s are easy to find – especially with the emblematic “Destination Earth (1956).

Of course, today the story of the liberation of Mars from the tyranny of the Stalin-like emperor through the discovery of the blessed impact of oil refining – may be associated with another slogan, from a similar propaganda cuisine, saying that “DDT is so safe, that you can eat it” because “DDT is good for me-e-e!”.

However, today not only our ecological awareness is different – our consumer experiences also differ.

We are the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Fordism, mass consumption and universal availability of almost everything is so obvious to us that some of us are worried about that.

For the post-war generations, however, none of this was obvious.  Not only in terms of the seasonality of agri-food production (typical even for the 1980s and 1990s), but also because limited availability of industrial goods from the era before the massification of plastics, which was also a consequence of the oil boom.  The World has been subjectively shrunken thanks to oil becoming the main energy resource, and global capitalism has gained the catalyst of its presumed endless development thanks to the continual increase in consumption.  And here is where the key feedback took place.

Capitalism to exist – needed an energy based on oil (and other fossil fuels), thanks to which it was possible to produce more and more, transport goods around the globe and sell more and more, constantly stimulating demand. Including, in particular, by constantly striving to improve one’s status, also expressed in the amount of individually consumed oil and its derivatives.

But such a boom also meant increased human-nature interaction.  Global hyperproduction and hyperconsumption, synonymous with the success of mankind in its supposedly “best period in history” – had an unprecedented impact on the climate, not only polluting the environment, but also leading to the threat of annihilation of life on Earth, as it was announced one day.  First, a few believed, then the slogan was picked up by those more and more influential.  That triggered a change of consciousness aimed at finding a new paradigm.  And the new consciousness needed a new social construct, also, and perhaps above all, in the energy sector.

Image on the right is from Pixabay

The dichotomy of the old and new paradigm was initially particularly visible in the antagonism of nuclear energy and the first proposals for renewable energy (RE) technologies.  The nuclear industry was perceived not only as potentially dangerous due to the possible effects of technological disasters, with the most emblematic example of Chernobyl. Nuclear power plants evoked negative social reactions in the Western world through their association with the nuclear arms race and the entire military-industrial complex, as well as the organisational formula clearly associated with great capital, top-down attitude, imposing the strenuous path of modernisation through industrialisation.  In the realities of the Eastern Bloc, where the effects, including the social ones, of Chernobyl, were felt even more strongly – opposition to nuclear technology was clearly oppositional.  Such a strongly counter-cultural character was, for example, the campaign conducted by ecologists and pacifists against the construction of a nuclear power plant in Żarnowiec, Poland.

Meanwhile, in opposition to the atom, a positive solution was searched for, which could at least aspire to the position of an energy alternative, and at the same time would reflect the social aspirations of the circles that were active in the 1970s and 1980s.  Renewable energy (initially mainly onshore, then also solar energy) was at this stage strongly associated with bottom-up attitude, self-sufficiency beyond the reach of large-scale industry and capital, dispersion and organic. Nuclear vs. renewable energy conflict had then this strongly conscious nature.  Supporters of the former identified it with order, free competition or a strong state (depending on their own preferences), progress and modernisation through industrialisation (depending on geopolitics – capitalist or real socialist). The opponents thus appeared as anarchists, hippies, and even neo-Luddites or potential “ecological terrorists”.

What is important – in fact, these early divisions, at least to some extent, influenced the very course of the energy transition in the countries where they occurred particularly clearly, such as in Germany.  The technological change was therefore associated with a paradigm shift, thanks to which, in Germany and Denmark, it was possible to maintain a more bottom-up, dispersed and communitarian nature of the renewable energy sector.  Interestingly, the contemporary clash between the social model associated with RE and its industrial opposite based on the atom also followed to some extent the path marked out in the 1970s and 1980s, while the role of the fictional Ventana and the real Chernobyl was repeated by Fukushima.

In California directing to the RE path was a response to the trauma of the Vietnam War, and kind of displacement of Ronald Reagan neoconservative governance and then his presidency.  Former hippies and beatniks, and their children after them, maybe they cut their hair and grabbed credit cards, but to buy Priuses and build smart houses powered by RE. Involvement on this side has become the expression and main manifestation of social participation.

Albeit more detailed studies bring an interesting imposition of the awareness of RE as a certain social concept – based on the classification by gender or education (although not by age).  So as we can see – reality confirms the weaving of energy technologies into existing and new social constructs.  The dominant social attitude may be a barrier to transformation, but in fact that is the committed minority that can be the catalyst for universal change.  Changes take place not only and not primarily with the formation of a new dominant paradigm and its universal acceptance, but through the coexistence and conflict of various constructs. That is, as Moscovici (1961) pointed formulating and implementing the assumptions of the Theory of Social Representation.

Also crises have a significant impact on our perception of energy technology as a socially active factor.  They are shock impulses that stimulate change by creating an image of the future.

A shock and opposite, the human ability to “adaptation and vulnerability”, in this case to a progressive climate crisis – both currently determine the social position of energy technologies.

Even despite some of their technical or performance weaknesses, which are no secrets at all. That is why this process must be bilateral, and the social implications must remain no less important than the technological ones also from the point of view of managers and engineers directly interested in implementing changes.

The oil-based energy technology was representative and itself co-created the reality of the Golden Age of post-war capitalism. 

Supplementing with nuclear energy corresponded to the dominant paradigm of the triumph of neoliberalism, the mirage of “Star Wars” and “the end of history” vision.  RE have not (yet?) brought the expected decentralisation, nor increased participation, and they still are not an undisputable tool for transition to post-growth.  On the contrary, like their predecessors, they have simply become tools of great capital, only under the cover of new social constructs, doctrines and ideologies, with profits for the same financial and industrial players as always.  This does not mean, however, that the process of transformation is over and that the RE as a social construct will not become the beginning of the end of the of capitalism as we know it, or even the end of capitalism itself.  After all, it is primarily a matter of our awareness and the ability to imagine the unimaginable.

Lock-in and path dependence

It could seem that we are dealing with a paradox.  Especially enthusiasts could doubt how technologies and projects associated with innovation and diversification could enter the path dependence and find themselves in a lock-in situation.  Thus similar to lock-in on carbon, the breaking of which is still a key element of the entire transition process.

This doubt, however, comes from a basic misunderstanding that technological, financial and social systems naturally tend to stasis, irrespective of the benefits of transient, possibly controlled gaps and shocks.  The risk of lock-in increases with the increase in the market position of a given technology. Including the recognition by the market of the prospects of its further development, of course in the sense of accelerating and increasing returns on investment.  Also states, as those entities which, in the case of energy policy, create a legal momentum for technological change – want to operate in a predictable and possibly planned environment that can be used in the rhythm of election campaigns.  Therefore the lock-in mechanism can by no means be considered a thing of the past as the carbon footprint is reduced.   But with all the negative connotations attached to it – lock-in is also a periodic stabilization within a path dependence and that how it should be analysed without prejudice.  Lock-in is sometimes chosen on purpose or is treated as inevitability, mainly due to the investment policy, the payback period, depreciation of assets etc.  This is i.a. why it was so difficult to break the coal lock-in – since the lifetime of coal-fired power plants was calculated on 40 years, and climate change announcement created social pressure for transition before the end of that period.  RE technologies, as still relatively young and developed in a distributed manner, should theoretically have a natural defence mechanism against lock-in.  However, because often they are introduced in a kind of shortcuts, due to the extraordinary situations, including external shocks – it leaves gaps for inertial tendencies.

Following the list of main lock-in mechanisms by Klitkou et al. (2015) – we must note that there is nothing to prevent them from occurring also with the development of the RE. When it comes to the economy of scale, for example, there is a sudden increase in the number of BEV cars.  Alternative technology based on hydrogen as less popular – is also less available.  And it is less available because it is less popular when BEV production is now closer to mass scale – so its consumers faced a typical lock-in risk of resources shortage, with lithium, nickel and cobalt instead of oil.   This, in turn, leads us to the economics of scope, in which the consumer himself is ready to reject diversity in the market, considering it excessive and burdensome.  And since it is produced and sold in a specific technology – learning effects are growing, also being an element introducing path dependence.   It is strengthened by the infrastructure created for the locked-in technology, the development of complementary technologies and, as a result increasing interest in informational returns.  An informal social norm takes shape, then a custom, then a tradition, all with a propensity for further reproduction. Especially when institutional actors, crucial in the case of energy technologies become more engaged, introducing an element of differentiation of power and institutions.

A very interesting case of lock-in stimulated by the German government policy of financial incentives was described by Haelg, Waelchi and Schmidt (2018) with the example of solar technologies: thin film vs. crystalline silicon.  The former dominates among larger installations, above 100 kW, especially open ones, while the latter have an advantage among roof installations.  So diversity has been preserved – one could question.  The problem is that it depends on the adopted research perspective, and simultaneously confirms the susceptibility of RE technology to lock-in mechanisms, even sectorally.  We have already dealt with similar situations, e.g. when wind energy was temporarily stopped at the onshore stage and the transition to offshore was clearly delayed by already implemented investments in the first technology.  Apart from car problems mentioned above – the lock-in mechanism is also noticed in the field of battery storage and the heating use of electricity from RE.  Path dependence is a continuous process, even if the path is still relatively short.

Meanwhile, lock-in is considered to be an objectively undesirable, reducing innovation, threatening future performance and potentially cost-intensive in the case of lock-in using non-optimal technology.  In the case of the RE, the key argument for using them was not only their compliance with the climate target, but also the potential to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and thus their supply shocks.  While in practice, we are witnessing a lock-in indirectly related to the transition to RE – concerning gas technology, considered complementary to RE.  And there were warnings about such a threat (Haelg, Waelchi and Schmidt 2018).  Since it was rightly pointed out that a lock-in on nuclear energy as an allegedly bridge technology can only ultimately change an oil shortage into a uranium shortage – the more such a hazard should have been seen in the case of gas.

The lock-in mechanism is therefore not a past or could be closed at any time.  In research on the subject, there is a tendency to consider this process, and especially its effects, to be negative, or at least potentially dangerous for technological development (Scrase and MacKerron 2009).  However, there are also voices in favour of a more neutral approach, seeing the path dependence and lock-in scheme as a more natural process and, at certain stages, perhaps even inevitable.  Therefore, it is rather an evolution to which technologies in the economic environment are subjected, at the time of gaining even a subjective advantage over competitive solutions.

It also touches upon another important issue, i.e. considerations whether a transition, especially such a far-reaching is and should be made in a manner adopted for deliberative democracy (evidently declining) or by gaining a discursive hegemony, what is happening before our eyes, especially during a pandemic.  Theoretically, the first mechanism would seem to favour the gradual generation of path dependency in the process of reconciling and averaging positions.  However, it is not obvious whether a sudden change, due to the rapid use of the “window of opportunity”, opened especially in the reality of a shock – could constitute a protection against further lock-in, especially if the previous conditions are restored.  We can investigate it directly by observing the situation related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the recovery path that is just being adopted.  It may be a momentum that facilitates, even partially, shaking off the already existing dependencies to achieve the assumed climate and energy goals faster and more effectively.  However, reverse feedback may also occur.  But as well, all negative socio-economic effects of a pandemic and the frequently raised postulates of “stabilization and normality”, understood as the past that must be restored – can be used as arguments also for maintaining previous path dependence.  For the study of the lock-in mechanism in the RE sector – it is therefore a breakthrough moment.

Golden Path 

The main trends of modern economy work since decades around “Zero-Growth” idea.

Whether reaching it as a necessity forced by climate circumstance or considering as an objective result of exhausting the possibilities of capital accumulation.  However it is also known that permanent growth is an inherent feature of capital.  So, in fact it does not matter much whether the World economy stops by itself or should be forced to it. The shock is indispensable.  A shock supposed to manage disruptions in the supply chain (which in fact has not necessarily wanted to occur), as well as deal with weakening of demand, which also has not appeared on a satisfactory degree, so had to be caused intentionally.  But anyway – is the World of financial markets really false economy today, and production and services remain real ones? Or is it already opposite?

Maintaining the appearances of Not-Completely-Globalised Capitalism in the North-Western hemisphere seems to have lost its sense.  Sooner or later, we will be confronted with the problem of delabourisation anyway.  The problem what to do with people whose work is redundant in practice, at least in the present dimension.  Until now, however, their consumption was needed.  We checked that people can be paid to refrain from working.  And where to get for it?

By allocating a small percentage of capitalist rent obtained from the turnover of assets, considered optimal, to keep it all going somehow without nominal development and growth.  Characteristic changes known from the last two years: greater virtualisation of the remaining work, the almost complete digitisation of money, the mere increase in power of states, but only acting as actors of capital – are just details to complete a picture.

This is why COVID is the most important transformation of our times, a change at the level of the essence of Capitalism and civilization as such.  And it is a transition made jointly and inextricably with the use of energy instruments, to maximize profits from the energy market and to obtain a specific civilisation effect, in order to maximize profits from the energy market and to achieve a specific civilization effect, measurable using energy indicators.  And as it happens with transformations – we cannot even imagine their final effect, but we already know that we are led to it. Almost certainly – inevitably.

*

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

Konrad Rękas is a renowned geopolitical analyst and a regular contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Energy of the Capitalistic Shock

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.

***

I have watched the sad sight of sincere high school students led by Greta Thunberg, or other climate activists, demanding of politicians that they change policies and receiving from those so-called “leaders” sorrowful apologies and inspiring promises only to discover, to their surprise, that absolutely nothing has changed after six months, or after a year.

This “tragicomedy” is no accident; it is the result of a systematic strategy for misinforming the public through the media, through universities, and through government pronouncements concerning how policy decisions are made about energy.

We are so completely misinformed about how our environment is being destroyed by multinational interests that many citizens honestly believe that climate change is a hoax precisely because the fairy tales about carbon trading, electric cars, smart grids and the promotion of government corporate cooperation are exactly that: a hoax.

 

The recent COP 26 (October, 2021) meeting of government heads to discuss climate change in Glasgow reflected perfectly the fantastic farce to which citizens are subjected. This corporate show, funded by multinationals like Unilever, Hitachi and Microsoft that have deep ties to the promotion of petroleum, was not about policy or progress, and most certainly not about a greener planet. It was a show meant to brainwash us into thinking that a gradual, progressive shift in behavior by individuals will solve the environmental crisis.

It suggested that electric automobiles, wind farms, smart cities and smart electric grids, all run by multinational corporations funded by multinational banks would save humanity and that we need only hand over decision-making power to these criminal syndicates known as “public-private partnerships.”

COP 26 was silent about how to reduce the need for energy by creating a healthier culture and moving away from the cult of consumption, growth and trade that corporations have foisted upon us. Most countries are in a bind because their forced to prioritize growth in economic planning even though growth, as defined by the World Bank, is damaging, unsustainable and lacks any scientific, or even rational, basis.

The focus at COP 26 was on dazzling new technologies, all extremely expensive, and all with patents controlled by the few.

The true sources of the environmental crisis were covered up.

The collapse of biodiversity, the death of oceans, the plague of micro-plastics, the destruction of soil by chemical fertilizers and pesticides, the spread of deserts because of foolish “development,” and the destruction of drinkable water, and its replacement by bottled water controlled by those same multinationals, all these topics were taboo.

These trends are altering our climate but they are not related to “climate change” as the corporations defined it for us.

Their green revolution will result in the control of food, water, energy and money by a handful of billionaires and they punish the individual citizen for the destruction of the environment when the culprit is those multinational corporations who waste immense amounts of energy and rig up the economy in such a way that the citizen has no choice but to use fossil fuels.

We are supposed to believe that the best way combat climate change is to purchase a horribly overpriced Tesla, or to take out a massive loan to buy solar panels for our homes. Or, for our government to tax us, or to dilute the value of our money, by funding massive green projects which are run entirely by those multinational corporations.

I recently spoke with a professor who specializes in environmental policy. He told me that there was tremendous opposition to a wind farm being constructed of the coast in the United States from local residents. He made it sound as if these ignorant, rural Trump supporters opposed the wind farm because they had no understanding of the need for a green economy, or of the environmental crisis.

When pressed, however, he confessed that the entire project had been planned by multinational banks and that the local residents gained no jobs from this project and had not been consulted at any level before it was pronounced by the mighty. They had not stake in the wind farm and if they had applied for a loan to build a wind farm for 7 billion dollars, they would have certainly been turned down.

If we could get the sweetheart loans from the government that the multinational corporations receive, we would be happy to switch to solar power tomorrow. If you could get 30-year low interest loans to weatherize your home and install solar panels everywhere, it would be cheaper to pay off that loan than to pay for your gas and electricity—effective immediately. But no, that option is not on the table in the new “green economy” –except if you are a multinational corporation!

For that matter, you cannot generate electricity when riding your exercise bike and sell it to your neighbor. You do not have the basic rights of economic exchange in this “green economy.”

No one at COP 26 mentioned that we did not use fossil fuels much 100 years ago outside of manufacturing, and that individuals were able to use wind power, water power and horse power on a regular basis, to grow their own food, the mill their own wheat, and to travel without using automobiles while living in rationally-planned communities that did not require travel by highway.

No one at COP 26 said that the narcissistic culture that has led us to all live separately, as opposed to living together as extended families, can be reversed, or that we can build houses, or furniture or vehicles that last for hundreds of years—saving enormous amounts of energy.

Frugality and energy self-sufficiency at the local level, not smart cities and high tech automobiles, are the answer to the crisis.

No one at COP 26 suggested that the investment banks linked to fossil fuels, and the politicians and think tank experts who take kickbacks from fossil fuel concerns, should not have been invited in the first place. The reason was simple. The investment banks funded the whole show.

We are heading for an environmental crisis of Biblical proportions. You do not have to be a fundamentalist Christian anymore to believe in the Apocalypse. Hallelujah, I believe!

The true source of the crisis is not the personal decisions of individual citizens, but the creation of, and cultivation of, a sick culture based consumption and waste, on needless production and travel, that has become the norm, the ideal, for the entire world.

Most pollution comes from production sites around the world run by multinationals that are immune from regulation, from factory farms also run by multinationals that poison our soil and water, and from needless shipping of products back and forth across oceans burning coal and petroleum—an evil act considered necessary for “growth.”

All the important decisions in government are made by banks and corporations, and then fed to the heads of nation states via a network of consulting firms, lobbyists and privatized intelligence operatives.

The national leaders who appear on television to entertain us have no more impact on economic and energy policy than the clown has on the acts in the other two rings of the circus.

The inability of citizens to grasp the true nature of the environmental crisis is also a result of the decay of intellectual debate in universities and in journalism. The newspapers, the television news, and the textbooks used in schools, do not promote inquisitive debate, a search for truth, but rather promote false assumptions about science and economics favorable to corporations. Deep thinking about the future of the nation by citizens has vanished and democracy is impossible.

Intellectuals, who could help citizens to understand the climate crisis, are forced by new requirements promoted by universities—under financial pressure from corporations—forced to write articles for obscure academic journals that almost no one will read, and they are barred from participation in the debate on energy policy which is run entirely by paid lobbyists for multinational fossil fuel corporations.

We witness today the flowering of a long process that started out with the scheme of John D. Rockefeller to force complete dependence on petroleum on the citizens of the United States, and of the world, as a means of making a fortune and dominating every aspect of the economy and society, starting with the monopoly of Standard Oil.

The players have changed, the names have changed, but the game remains virtually unchanged.

If you do not control the mass media, you do not exist in the policy debate. That means anyone serious about the environment does not exist because the same global finance institutions, like BlackRock, who control the corporate media, also control fossil fuels.

They will do everything in their power to make sure that this economic parasitism rooted in the control of energy (petroleum, coal, nuclear, solar or wind) is dominated by corporations whose interests and whose administrative structure is hidden from sight and never discussed.

If you eat food, drink water, travel, receive an education, seek treatment at a hospital or are buried in a cemetery, the bankers want to make sure that they get a part of the monetary transaction, that they get their pound of flesh. They want to make sure that fossil fuels, which they control, are part of that process.

We can find cultural and spiritual depth in our lives by reading books and newspapers, writing for ourselves, creating our own art, and otherwise participating in a complex local cultural system. We do not need that much energy. We not even need computers for a healthy and meaningful life. Although the increase in human population has increased demand for energy, that demand could be radically reduced through changes in our culture, starting with the elimination of growth, production, and trade as indicators of the wellbeing of the economy.

The institutional investors that push for the use of petroleum to generate energy, to make plastics, and who promote biotechnology and pharmaceuticals that rely on petroleum want us to be dependent on them and to no longer able to produce what we need locally.

Those institutional investors also push for massive military and intelligence spending, much of which is classified, and much of which is unregulated, and therefore consists of the transfer of funds to offshore accounts.

Why do we need such a large military? We need it, they say to defend the import, and the transport, of petroleum, gas and coal over oceans, through straits, and across continents.

The obvious answer to this security problem is to produce energy at home and to minimize usage through rational city planning, organic local farming, and low cost public transit that reduces to near zero the amount of energy imported. For the cost of those F35 fighter planes the United State collects like bad nickels, we could easily pay to have solar and wind power generators installed across the nation.

But no! The powers that be want to make even more money by defending their inefficient and dangerous sources of energy.

The arguments for growth and consumption as a standard for assessing the health of society, for spending trillions of dollars to defend the transport of fossil fuels, for encouraging city planning that wastes energy are made by experts.

The banks and the fossil fuel interests, which include automobile manufacturers, and companies involved in construction and logistics, have showered billions of dollars on foundations that fund research and journalism, on universities and research institutes that produce authoritative studies, on experts for testimony, and on politicians at the local and national level.

These corporations have created a lineup of public intellectuals who rubber stamp their false assumptions.

If we want to save the Earth from climate collapse, we must first make sure that all citizens know why we have been forced to rely on petroleum, and by whom. They must know which banks and which billionaires are involved, and why. They must comprehend the manner in which those players forced us into an addiction to fossil fuels a hundred years ago, and how they plan to continue this scheme under a new green cover.

We must make manifest the hidden strategies of investment banks and hedge funds, uncover the massive investments by billionaires like Warren Buffett, Elon Musk and Bill Gates in industries seeped knee-deep in oil. We make sure that everyone sees not only that there is something deeply wrong, but also that they understand what exactly is the cause of this distortion in the economy.

*

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

This article was originally published on US Provisional Government.

Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Flickr

Tyranny Ahead

February 9th, 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

The most dangerous form of tyranny has raised its head simultaneously in Canada and the United States. The exercise of civil liberty is being criminalized. In Canada the city government of Ottawa with the aid of the US FBI and US Department of Homeland Security is criminalizing the truckers’ peaceful protest as “a threat to democracy” and is identifying organizers and participants for arrests and charges. Simultaneously, the US Department of Homeland Security has declared a domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Truth and all dissent from the official Covid narrative and Russian narrative have been labeled “false and misleading, misinformation, and conspiracy theories.” These alleged threats are “amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors.” See this.

What is the point of a peaceful protest when authorities and media lie and brand it violent and a threat to democracy? What has happened in Canada is that the elite now know who the Canadians are who will stand up for freedom. They have identified themselves, and being peaceful they will be easily taken down.

In the US, free speech is now classified as a threat to democracy. A recent DHS announcement associates all dissent from official narratives with “ideological beliefs and personal grievances that pose an ongoing threat to the nation.” Such “threat actors” are seeking to “sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions.” The ruling elite are very disturbed that the Covid and Russian narratives are losing public support and is desperate to stop the exposure of these two official lies.

Like Joseph Stalin, the US DHS is creating with its own disinformation a legal framework for prosecuting or confining to indefinite detention any and every person who confronts official lies with truth. Included in the misinformation that sows discord and undermines public trust in government are allegations of electoral fraud. The DHS adds to the massive file of dangerous speech the airline companies’ warnings about 5G cellular technology. The establishment is going to use force to protect its lies.

The DHS has no legislative power to criminalize civil liberty, but is nevertheless doing so. The courts would probably block some or all of the attempted prosecutions. But remember, the George W. Bush regime claimed the right to hold American citizens indefinitely without presenting evidence to a court. The American people made fearful by an alleged “terrorist threat” went along with this and other infringements of our constitutional protections. The day the PATRIOT Act passed marked America’s turn toward tyranny.

In the early days of Nazi Germany before the Nazis had set up their own court system, Nazi prosecutions were often dismissed by German courts. However, as soon as the released person walked out of the court, the Gestapo again arrested him and subjected him to indefinite detention in a concentration camp. This, I fear, will be the fate of all dissenters from the lies ensconced as official narratives throughout the “free West.”

Notice that no one in the Ottawa government and no one in the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation respects freedom. Unless people from all over Canada pour into Ottawa in support of the truckers, thereby creating a cause too large to be suppressed, the truckers will suffer the fate of the “Trump insurrectionists.” If the Ottawa government survives the truckers’ protest, it will no longer be possible to hold government accountable. Voting Trudeau out will achieve nothing as his replacement will be the same servant of the ruling elite serving secret agendas. By the end of this year we should know whether accountable government is any longer possible in the “free West.”

Here Is Steve Kirsch’s List of the real Covid Disinformation Spreaders

  • President Joe Biden
  • CDC Director Rochelle Walensky
  • NIAID Director Anthony Fauci,
  • 
US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy
  • 
Bill Gates
  • FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock
  • COVID-19 Guidelines Chairman Cliff Lane
  • Tom Shimabukuro (CDC vaccine expert)
  • John Su (CDC, VAERS expert)
  • Steven A. Anderson (FDA), the top vaccine safety official at the FDA
  • Gavin Newsom, Governor of California
  • Dr. Richard Pan, California State Senator
  • YouTube
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Medium
  • Nextdoor

*

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

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Future of Freedom Foundation

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.

***

This week, Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen imposed new Covid restrictions that require all adults in the country to be fully vaccinated and boosted or risk being fined.

The new authoritarian law runs through January 31st, 2024, and will go into effect next month.

Beginning on March 15th, law enforcement authorities will begin checking people’s vaccine status by conducting random traffic stops, and spot checks, in order to find dissenters. Anyone caught violating the mandate can be fined “up to four times a year,” with the penalty increasing with each violation. An individual’s first offense will result in a €600 (~$687) fine and can go as high as €3,400 (~$3,890) by the fourth.

According to reports starting on March 15, authorities will begin conducting random checks for vaccination certificates, including traffic stops.

The new law also allows the Austrian government to create a dystopian vaccine registry that will record everyone who has been vaccinated and give those who have been found disobeying a date they must be vaccinated by, allowing the government to fine them repeatedly.

Only certain people will be exempt from the mandate, including pregnant people, those with health conditions affected by vaccines, and those who have been previously infected with COVID-19, according to SchengenVisaInfo News.

The latest health data from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) shows that almost 73% of the Austrian population is two-dose vaccinated, with just over 54% having received the booster shot. But thanks to another mandate that went into effect earlier this month and requires a booster shot to be in compliance with government requirements, nearly 3.8 million Austrians will be impacted by the new law.

Unfortunately, not all of them will be able to provide proof of natural immunity. The World Health Organization has estimated a total of 1,968,963 Covid cases in the country since the beginning of the pandemic, which includes boosted individuals. Even if you account for all of the undocumented cases, there will still be countless Austrians that will be punished for not taking the experimental jab – and the booster, and the next booster, and so on.

The Austrian government also shortened the period in which vaccinations remain valid. Now, citizens are required to receive their next dose about 90 days earlier than before.

From SchengenVisaInfo News:

“‘From February 1, 2022, two-dose vaccinations are only valid for 180 days in Austria (exception: 210 days for under 18-year-olds). However, for ENTERING, the 270 days remain in place. The booster vaccination is valid for 270 days in both scenarios,’” the Austrian authorities explained.”

Meanwhile, as Austria steps up its crackdown on dissenters, several other countries in the European Union have started lifting Covid restrictions, and some have even done away with them altogether – Denmark, Sweden, and Finland, to name a few.

The fact that Austria put a timeframe of January 2024 on this Covid tyranny, is insane.

*

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

Featured image is from GP

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Insane: Austrian Government Authorizes Dystopian Vaccine Registry and Imposes COVID Restrictions Through January 2024 – Will Begin Pulling Drivers Over at Random and Fining Un-Boosted Citizens Next Month
  • 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

After Austria became the first European country to mandate COVID vaccines for the ENTIRETY of its population, details have emerged on how the government plans to enforce the measure.

Reports note that citizens will be stopped randomly in the street and pulled over in their vehicles and forced to comply with vaccine status checks by the ‘authorities.’

If, heaven forbid, a person is found to be unvaccinated they will be fined on the spot, with the penalty increasing for each violation.

A first ‘offense’ will mean a €600 ($687) fine, with subsequent violations reaching up to €3,400 ($3,890).

The Austrian government will check citizens’ vaccination status against their vaccine registry. Anyone found to not have two vaccines plus a booster will be punished accordingly.

The development confirms previous reports that the Austrian government will hire people to “hunt down vaccine refusers.”

Indeed, this is merely an official confirmation of what has already been happening in the country. After the government placed the unvaccinated under an unprecedented lockdown, footage emerged showing police patrolling shops and highways checking people’s vaccination status.

Days after imposing the lockdown on the unvaccinated, Austria hit a new COVID case record.

In addition, the Austrian government has shortened the period in which vaccinations remain valid, meaning citizens are required to receive their next dose 90 days earlier than previously.

SchengenVisaInfo News reports that “‘From February 1, 2022, two-dose vaccinations are only valid for 180 days in Austria (exception: 210 days for under 18-year-olds). However, for ENTERING, the 270 days remain in place. The booster vaccination is valid for 270 days in both scenarios,’” the Austrian authorities explained.”

The government has put a sunset on the law, for January… of 2024, meaning Austrians face at least another two years of COVID tyranny.

As we have previously reported, an amendment to the law could also see those who refuse to pay the fines for being unvaccinated imprisoned.

The amendment also orders people who are jailed to pay for their own imprisonment.

“If detention is carried out by the courts, the associated costs shall be recovered by the courts from the obligated party in accordance with the provisions existing for the recovery of the costs of enforcing judicial penalties,” it states.

No one will be “forcibly brought” to a vaccination center to get jabbed against their will, although rest assured, they will be “forcibly” placed behind bars if they continue to refuse.

It remains to be seen whether other European countries will follow suit. Several countries have begin to scrap restrictions, including vaccine passports. However, the EU wants to keep the passes in place for another entire year.

*

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

Featured image is from Summit 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

February 8th press conference with Dr. Roger Hodkinson & Dr. Paul Alexander on efforts to get the government to engage in a scientific discussion of Covid mandates.

*

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

Our thanks to Mark Taliano (CRG Research Associate) for sending us this video.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Scientific Discussion of Covid Mandates: Freedom Convoy Doctors Roger Hodkinson and Paul Alexander Press Conference
  • 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 Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

After two years of empowering every aspect of the authoritarian insanity that is COVID Mania, the American ruling class has started to awaken to the reality that citizens have had enough of the Safety Regime’s tyrannical edicts.

Governor Phil Murphy (D-NJ) announced this morning that New Jersey (not exactly MAGA country) will no longer require children to wear masks in school. These barbaric mask policies, which remain entirely unsupported by actual scientific evidence, has been in place in much of Safety Regime-compliant America for almost two years.

The new policy, and the governor’s sudden embrace of reality, is a vast departure from Murphy’s previous insistence that COVID must be entirely eliminated in order for society to return to normal.

In August of 2020, he stated that COVID deaths must go to zero in order for this “fight” against a virus to be over.

Congressman Ted Lieu, who represents a 70/30 Democrat district in Los Angeles County, struck a similar tone in his messaging, going as far as to acknowledge natural immunity to COVID-19. Acknowledging natural was once a great sin, and it remains greatly upsetting to the Branch Covidians who remain true believers.

The White House has mentioned that polling exists showing restrictions are becoming deeply unpopular. White House spox Jen Psaki said Monday that the polling shows “the public is tired of COVID.”

Even noted COVID hysteric Leana Wen, who has routinely advocated for a two tiered segregation system that discriminates against the “unvaccinated”, has acknowledged that restrictions might need to come to an end.

The pattern is obvious. The polling must be really bad for the restrictionists. This ruling class is indeed seeking the exits to protect their power, and they will attempt to do so without acknowledging that this two year campaign of destruction was all for nothing.

*

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

Featured image is from Anti-Empire