Peeking Past the Pall Put Over Arms Talks with Russia

January 20th, 2022 by Ray McGovern

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Western media are painting an image of gross failure for Russia at the U.S.-Russia bilateral talks in Geneva, as well as subsequent talks between Russia and NATO in Brussels and the Organization for Co-operation and Security in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna.

Adamant! is the impression being fostered by both Russia and the West (largely for domestic consumption): Russia will continue to oppose NATO membership for countries like Ukraine and Georgia; NATO, for its part, will continue to reject Russian opposition as “none of your business”. (Bear in mind that Ukraine and Georgia are each several years away from qualifying for NATO membership in any case.)

The corporate media takeaway is that Russian President Vladimir Putin abjectly failed to get the West to agree formally on no further expansion of NATO and that, in these circumstances, no one can divine how he might lash out (maybe invade Ukraine?). World War III, anyone?

Did Western pundits really believe that Putin expected early acquiescence to that “non-starter” proposal on NATO expansion? Far easier to make believe he did, show how he went down to defeat, and conveniently ignore signs of real progress with respect to what Moscow’s (and President Joe Biden’s) actual priorities are.

Media mention of those priorities has inched forward into subordinate clauses of lead paragraphs – usually after the word “but.” Here’s how NPR played it: “The United States and NATO rejected key Russian security demands for easing tensions over Ukraine but left open Wednesday the possibility of future talks with Moscow on arms control, missile deployments and ways to prevent military incidents between Russia and the West.”

Likewise, the Washington Post: “The United States and Russia remained deadlocked after crisis talks Monday over Moscow’s desire to block any future NATO expansion to the east, but officials agreed to continue discussions on other high-stakes security issues …”

Other High-Stakes Security Issues?

What strategic challenge does President Vladimir Putin consider most threatening? Watching this 12-minute video – especially minutes 4 to 6:30 – in which Putin tries to get through to Western reporters several years ago, will provide a good clue for Western reporters whose dogs ate their homework.

While Putin has been outspoken for 20 years on the precarious strategic situation following the Bush administration’s tearing up the ABM Treaty that had been the cornerstone of strategic balance, this video is unusually effective in showing Putin’s understandable concern and frustration.

Are dogs the standard excuse? Do Western journalists even do homework? Good question. The NY Times’ Bureau Chief in Moscow Anton Troianovsky has confessed that, after an event-packed week, he, Western officials, and Russian experts are “stumped” to explain Russian behavior. Putin, he says, is to blame for keeping people confused and “on edge”, adding that “the mystery surrounding the Russian leader’s intentions was thick as fog again this week….”. (See: Putin’s Next Move on Ukraine Is a Mystery. Just the Way He Likes It.)

It is precisely in this context that watching Putin explain Russia’s post-demise-of-the-ABM-Treaty concerns five years ago might help lazy or simply inexperienced journalists understand the importance of highly significant events over the past couple of weeks: first and foremost, President Joe Biden’s promise to Putin on Dec. 30 not to emplace offensive strike missiles in Ukraine. And, equally instructive: the importance of the U.S. negotiators’ confirming that Washington takes Moscow’s concerns seriously enough to negotiate about them – and other confidence building measures, as well.

“Progress”: The Forbidden Word

Is it unreasonable, then, to look forward to productive bilateral talks in the coming months that address what might be termed “Putin’s Pet Peeve” (although the issue is dead serious, so to speak, far more serious than the commonly understood “pet-peeve” minor annoyance)? A lot of this comes through clearly in the video, which shows Putin losing his cool watching the sleepy nonchalance on the faces of the Western journalists who are his audience: “I don’t know how to get through to you any more.”

What is important is that Putin got through to Biden on that Dec. 30 telephone call which Putin had called for with some urgency (and which was widely neglected in the Establishment media.) Hours later, the official Kremlin readout included: The presidents agreed to personally supervise these negotiating tracks, especially bilateral, with a focus on reaching results quickly. In this context, Joseph Biden emphasised that Russia and the US shared a special responsibility for ensuring stability in Europe and the whole world and that Washington had no intention of deploying offensive strike weapons in Ukraine. [Emphasis added.]

At the same time as the Kremlin readout, Putin’s main adviser on these issues, Yuri Ushakov, told reporters that Moscow was pleased with the Biden-Putin conversation on Dec. 30, adding that Biden’s pledge not to deploy offensive arms in Ukraine amounted to acknowledgment of Russia’s security concerns. Speaking to Russian media, Ushakov pointed out that this was also one of the goals Moscow hopes to achieve with its proposals for security guarantees to the US and NATO.

Ushakov, actually, is understating the case. The US non-deployment-of-offensive-missiles pledge addresses a key issue embedded in no fewer than five of the eight Articles of the Russian draft treaty on security guarantees. In contrast, only Article 4, which includes: “The United States of America shall undertake to prevent further eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and deny accession to the Alliance to the States of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics”, addresses head-on the NATO expansion issue.

Back to the Putin Video

The 12-minute video includes subtitles in English courtesy of translator “Inessa S.” Putin was speaking to reporters attending the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, 2016. I have taken Inessa’s subtitles and strung them together below into a full text for those who prefer to read rather than watch.

Putin to Western Reporters, June 17, 2016

Your people, in turn, do not feel a sense of the impending danger – this is what worries me.

Now, about the missile defense system, listen to me, we are all adults at this table, and experienced [professionals] at that.

But I am not even going to hope that you are going to relay everything, exactly how I said it, in your publications.

Neither will you attempt to influence your media outlets.

I just want to tell you this, on a personal level

I must remind you, though you already know this, that major global conflicts have been avoided in the past few decades, due to the geostrategic balance of power, which used to exist.

The two super-nuclear powers essentially agreed to stop producing both offensive weaponry, as well as defensive weaponry.

It is simple how it works – where one side becomes dominant in their military potential, they are more likely to want to be the first to be able to use such power.

This is the absolute linchpin to international security. The anti-missile defense system [as previously prohibited in international law], and all of the surrounding agreements that used to exist.

It’s not in my nature to scold someone – but when the United States unilaterally withdrew from the ABM Treaty of 1972 they delivered a colossal blow to the entire system of international security.

That was the first blow, when it comes to assessing the strategic balance of power in the world.

At that time [2002] I said that we will not be developing such systems also, because A) it is very expensive, and B) we aren’t yet sure how they will work [for the Americans].

We’re not going to burn our money.

We’re going to take a different option, and develop offensive weaponry, in order to retain said geo-strategic balance.

That was all.

Not to threaten someone else.

They said – “Fine, our defense system is not against you, and we assume that your weaponry is not against us.”

“Do what you like!”

As I already mentioned, this conversation took place in the early 2000s. Russia was in a very difficult state at that time.

Economic collapse, civil war and the fight against terrorism in our Caucasus region, complete destruction of our military-industrial complex …

They wouldn’t have been able to imagine that Russia could ever again be a military power.

My guess is they assumed that even that which was left over from the Soviet Union would eventually deteriorate.

So they said, “sure, do what you like!”

But we told them about the measures we were going to take in reaction. And that is what we did.

And I assure you – that today, we have had every success in that area.

I’m not going to list everything, all that matters is we have modernized our military-industrial complex.

And we continue to develop new generation warfare. I’m not even going to mention systems against the missile-defense system!

No matter what we said to our American partners [to curb the production of weaponry] they refused to cooperate with us, they rejected our offers, and continue to do their own thing.

Some things I cannot tell you right now publicly, I think that would be rude of me.

And whether or not you believe me, we offered real solutions to stop this [arms race].

They rejected everything we had to offer.

4-MINUTE MARK

So here we are today – and they’ve placed their missile defense system in Romania.

Always saying “we must protect ourselves from the Iranian nuclear threat!”

Where’s the threat?

There is no Iranian nuclear threat.

You even have an agreement with them – and the US was the instigator of this agreement, where we helped.

We supported it.

But if not for the US then this agreement would not exist – which I consider Obama’s achievement.

I agree with the agreement, because it eased tensions in the area. So President Obama can put this in his list of achievements.

So the Iranian threat does not exist.

But the missile systems are continuing to be positioned …

That means we were right when we said that they are lying to us.

Their reasons were not genuine, in reference to the “Iranian nuclear threat.”

Once again, they lied to us.

So they built this system and now they are being loaded with missiles.

You, as journalists, should know that these missiles are put into capsules

Which are utilized from sea-based, midrange Tomahawk rocket launchers

These are being loaded with “anti-missiles’ that can penetrate distances of up to 500km.

But we know that technologies advance …

We even know in which year the Americans will accomplish a new missile, which will be able to penetrate distances of up to 1000km, and then even further …

And from that moment on they will be able to directly threaten

Russia’s nuclear potential

We know year by year what’s going to happen – and they know that we know!

It’s only that you tell tall-tales to, and you spread it to, the citizens of your countries.

Your people, in turn, do not feel a sense of the impending danger – this is what worries me.

How can you not understand that the world is being pulled in an irreversible direction?

That’s the problem.

Meanwhile, they pretend that nothings going on …

I don’t know how to get through to you any more.

MINUTE 6:30

And they justify this as a “defense” system, not weaponry that is used for purposes of offense. Systems that “prevent aggression.”

That is absolutely not true.

A missile defense system is one element of a whole system of offensive military potential.

It works as part of a whole that includes offensive missile launchers.

One complex blocks, the other launches a high precision weapon, the third blocks a potential nuclear strike, and the fourth sends out its own nuclear weapon in response.

This is all designed to be part of one system.

This is how it works in current, non-nuclear, but high precision missile defense systems.

Well okay, let’s put aside the actual missile ‘defense’ issue.

But those capsules into which ‘anti-missiles’ are inserted, as I’ve mentioned, they are sea based …

On warships which can carry the Tomahawk subsonic cruise missile system

One could deploy it to position in a matter of hours, and then what kind of “antimissile” system is that?

How do we know what kind of missile is in there? All you have to do is change the programme! (non-nuclear to nuclear)

That’s all it would take.

This would happen very quickly, and even the Romanian government itself won’t know what’s going on.

Do you think they let the Romanians call any shots?

Nobody is going to know what is being done-not the Romanians, and the Polish won’t either.

Do you think I am not familiar with their strategies? Ha!

From what I can see, we are in grave danger.

We had conversation once with our American partners – where they said they’d like to develop ballistic missiles, but without a nuclear warhead.

And we said – “Do you actually understand what that might entail?”

So you’re going to have missiles launching from submarines, or ground territories – this is not a ballistic missile, how do we know whether or not it has a nuclear warhead?!

Can you imagine what kind of scenario you can create?

But as far as I am aware, they did not go through with developing these weapons – they have paused for now.

But the other one they continue to implement.

I don’t know how this is all going to end.

What I do know is that we will need to defend ourselves.

And I even know how they will package this – “Russian aggression “again!

But this is simply our response to your actions.

Is it not obvious that I must guarantee the safety of our people?

And not only that, but we must attempt to retain the necessary strategic balance of power, which is the point that I began with. Let me return to it in order to finish my response.

It was precisely this balance of power that guaranteed the safety of humanity from major global conflict, over the past 70 years.

It was a blessing rooted in a “mutual threat” but this mutual threat is what guaranteed mutual peace, on a global scale.

How they could so easily tear it down, I simply don’t know.

I think it is gravely dangerous. I not only think that, I am assured of it.

*

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.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. His 27-year career as a CIA analyst includes serving as Chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and preparer/briefer of the President’s Daily Brief. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

All Global Research articles 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.

***

There is a great paradox in the increasingly aggressive US and NATO military stance towards Russia, and China, when measured against the clearly suicidal national Green Agenda economic policies of the USA as well as the EU NATO states. An astonishing transformation of the economies of the world’s most advanced industrial economies is underway and gaining momentum.

The heart of the transformation is energy, and the absurd demand for “zero carbon” energy by 2050 or before. To eliminate carbon from the energy industry is not at this time, or perhaps ever, possible. But the push for it will mean tearing apart the world’s most productive economies. Without a viable industrial energy base, NATO countries become a military joke. We cannot speak of “renewable” energy for solar, wind and battery storage. We must speak of Unreliable Energy. It is one of the most colossal scientific delusions in history.

On December 31 the new German coalition government shut down three of the remaining six nuclear power plants permanently. They did so at a point where natural gas in reserves were extremely low entering hard winter, and when any severe cold front could lead to power blackouts. Because of the German refusal to allow import of a second Russian gas pipeline, Nord Stream 2, Germany is facing a 500% increase in the spot price of electricity compared with January 2021.

EU Energy Crisis Preplanned

In 2011 when Chancellor Merkel declared an early end to nuclear power, her infamous Energiewende, to phase out nuclear and go to renewable sources, 17 nuclear plants reliably supplied 25% of all electric power to the country. Now the remaining 3 plants must close by end 2022. At the same time the Green Energy agenda of the government since 2016 has closed 15.8 GigaWatts of coal generation as of January 2022. To make up for the fact that solar and wind, despite glowing propaganda, do not fill the gap, Germany’s electric grid must import significant electricity from EU neighbors France and Czech Republic, ironically much of it from their nuclear plants. Germany today has the highest electricity cost of any industrial nation as a result of the Energiewende.

There is now a problem with the supply of nuclear electricity from France. In December EDF the French state nuclear agency announced a total of four reactors would shut for inspection and repairs following discovery of corrosion damage. President Macron facing April elections is trying to play the nuclear champ in the EU opposing Germany’s strong anti-nuclear position. But the nuclear bridge is vulnerable and France is unlikely to make any major new investment in nuclear, despite recent claims, with plans to shut down twelve reactors in the next few years, along with coal, leaving both France and Germany vulnerable to future energy shortages. Macron’s France 2030 program calls for investing a pitiful $1.2 billion in small plant nuclear technology.

But the nuclear issue is not the only fly in the EU energy soup. Every aspect of the current EU energy plan is designed to wreck a modern industrial economy, and the architects who generously fund green think tanks like the Potsdam Institute in Germany know it. To bring wind and solar, the only two serious options being implemented, to replace coal, gas and nuclear, is simply said, not possible.

Wind Mills and Madness of Crowds

For Germany, a country with less than optimal sunshine, wind is the leading alternative. One problem with wind as the winter of 2021 dramatically showed, is that it does not always blow, and unpredictably so. That means blackouts or reliable backup, which means coal or natural gas as nuclear is being forced out. Wind mills are misleadingly rated in terms of gross theoretical capacity when states like Germany want to boast of renewable progress.

In reality what counts is actual electricity produced over time or what is called capacity factor or load factor. For solar, capacity factor is typically only about 25%. The sun in northern Europe or North America doesn’t shine 24 hours a day. Nor are skies always cloudless. Similarly wind doesn’t always blow and is hardly reliable. Germany boasts of 45% gross renewable energy but that hides the reality. Frauenhofer Institute in a 2021 study estimated Germany must install at least six to eight times present solar to reach 2045 100% carbon free goals, something the government refuses to estimate costs for, but private estimates are in the trillions. The report says from the present gross 54 GW solar capacity as much as 544 GW by 2045 is needed. That would mean a land space of 3,568,000 acres or 1.4 million hectares, more than 16,000 square kilometers of solid solar panels across the country. Add major wind stations to that. It is a suicide recipe.

The fraud of wind and solar as a sensible carbon free option is beginning to be realized. This January 5, Alberta Canada where the government is furiously building wind and solar sites, a severe cold day with temperatures near 45 F minus, Alberta’s 13 grid-connected solar facilities, rated at 736 megawatts, were contributing 58 megawatts to the grid. The 26 wind farms, with a combined rated capacity of 2,269 megawatts, was feeding the grid 18 megawatts. The total from renewables was a piddly 76 megawatts out of a theoretical 3,005 megawatts of supposedly green, renewable energy. Texas during the severe snow of February 2021 had similar problems with solar and wind as did Germany. Also when it snows solar farms are worthless.

As well to reach zero carbon from renewable sources huge acreages of land must be paved with solar reflectors or dedicated to wind farms. By one estimate, the amount of land needed to accommodate the 46,480 solar PV plants envisioned for the US is 650,720 square miles, almost 20% of the US lower 48 territories. This is the areas of Texas, California, Arizona and Nevada combined. Alone in the US state of Virginia a new green law, the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) has created an enormous rise in solar project applications to date for 780 square miles of solar slabs so far. As David Wojick points out, that is about 500,000 acres of countryside, farmland or forests destroyed and paved over with some 500 separate projects blanketing much of rural Virginia that will need a staggering 160 million solar panels, mostly from China and all destined to become hundreds of tons of toxic waste.

Millions of Jobs?

The Biden administration and Renewables czar John Kerry have falsely claimed their Green Agenda or Build Back Better will mean millions of new jobs. They omit to say the jobs will be in China which produces far the most solar panels, a near monopoly after they destroyed the USA and EU competition a decade ago with cheap subsidized panels Made in China.

Similarly most of wind power is made in China by Chinese companies. Meanwhile China uses record volumes of coal and postpones its pledge for zero carbon a full decade after the EU and USA to 2060. They are not willing to jeopardize their industrial dominance to a climate theory based on fake data and lies that CO2 is about to destroy the planet. The German trade union federation DGB recently estimated that since 2011 that country had lost some 150,000 jobs in the renewable sector alone, mainly as China-made solar panels destroyed leading German solar companies. And Germany is the most green-crazy EU country. Because by definition the less energy-dense renewables of wind or solar drive basic electricity costs far higher, they kill more jobs in the overall economy than they ever add.

NATO Industrial Collapse

Because solar and wind are in reality far more costly than conventional hydrocarbon or nuclear electricity, they drive up overall cost of electric power to industry forcing many companies to close or move elsewhere. Only official statistical fraud hides this. Europe and North America will need huge volumes of steel and concrete to build the expected millions of solar panels or wind parks. That needs huge amounts of conventional coal or nuclear energy. How many E-car electric charging stations will be needed to home-charge 47 million German E-cars? How much more electric demand?

A significant Green Energy think tank in the US, RethinkX ,issued a propaganda study for renewables in 2021 titled Rethinking Energy 2020-2030: 100% Solar, Wind, and Batteries is Just the Beginning. Their answer to the problems of low capacity for wind and solar is to build 500% or even 1000% more than envisioned to make up for the low 25% capacity factor. They make the absurd claim, with no concrete proof that, “Our analysis shows that 100% clean electricity from the combination of solar, wind, and batteries (SWB) is both physically possible and economically affordable across the entire continental United States as well as the overwhelming majority of other populated regions of the world by 2030… this superabundance of clean energy output – which we call super power – will be available at near-zero marginal cost throughout much of the year .” That statement is presented without an iota of data or concrete scientific feasibility analysis, merely dogmatic assertion.

The late Canadian architect of the UN Agenda 21, Maurice Strong, a billionaire oil chum of David Rockefeller was Undersecretary of the United Nations and Secretary General of the June 1972 Stockholm Earth Day conference. He was also a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation. He more than perhaps anyone else, is responsible for the de-industrialization agenda of the zero carbon “sustainable economy.”

At the UN Rio Earth Summit in 1992 he openly stated the blunt agenda of the radical eugenics advocates such as Gates and Schwab: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?That agenda is very much the Great Reset today.

War Now?

If the once-advanced, energy-intensive economies of NATO member countries in Europe and the USA continue on this suicidal journey, their ability to mount a convincing military defense or offense will become a mirage. Recently the corrupt German EU Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, declared that the high-tech German defense industry and its suppliers should not receive bank credit because they were not “green” or “sustainable” enough. Reportedly banks have already gotten the message. Along with oil and gas now defense production is targeted. Von der Leyen as German Defense Minister was widely blamed for allowing German defense to collapse to a catastrophic state.

In their now one-sided pursuit of their insane Agenda 2030 and Zero Carbon agenda, the Biden Administration and the EU are putting their industry on a deliberate road to destruction well before the end of this decade. Is this in turn driving the current NATO agenda towards Russia in Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia and now Kazakhstan? If the NATO Powers that Be know they will lack the basic in depth military industrial infrastructure in the near future, do they think it better to provoke a possible war with Russia now, to eliminate a potential resistor to their de-industrial agenda? Other than China, Russia holds the only potential to deal a devastating blow to NATO if provoked.

Mass Formation Psychosis or Madness of Crowds

In 1852 English historian Charles Mackay wrote a classic titled Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, giving a little-known insight to the mass hysteria behind the religious Great Crusades of the 12th Century, the Witch Mania or the Dutch Tulip Mania and numerous other popular delusions. It is relevant to understand the global irrational rush to economic and political suicide.

The same key actors behind the mass COVID vaccine mandates for an unproven experimental genetic-altering vaccine and the ensuing lockdowns globally, including Bill Gates and Pope Francis, are behind the Klaus Schwab World Economic Forum Great Reset and its UN Agenda 2030 green zero carbon madness, to get the world to accept unprecedented draconian economic measures.

This will require a docile and physically weak population to be railroaded, what Belgian psychology professor Dr. Mattias Desmet and Dr Robert Malone call Mass Formation Psychosis, a crowd psychosis, a kind of mass hypnosis that ignores reason.

It is clear that both the myth of Global Warming and the corona pandemic agenda require such a mass hypnosis—an “extraordinary popular delusion.”

Without the COVID fear hysteria we would never allow the Green Agenda to get so far that our very electric grids are on the verge of blackouts and our economies on verge of breakdown. The ultimate goal of both the COVID WHO pandemic and the Green Agenda is a march to Schwab’s dystopian Great Reset of the entire world economy to the benefit of a corporate dictatorship by a handful of global corporations like BlackRock or Google-Alphabet.

*

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.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics.

This article was first published by “New Eastern Outlook”  

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from NEO


Seeds of Destruction: Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation

Author Name: F. William Engdahl
ISBN Number: 978-0-937147-2-2
Year: 2007
Pages: 341 pages with complete index

available in print and pdf

 

This skilfully researched book focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread. “Control the food and you control the people.”

This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO. Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms.

The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

 

 

 

When Biden’s executive branch sets its internal security apparatus sights on “domestic extremists” (intelligence jargon for any group or individual who deviates from the corporate state narrative), The Daily Bell was among the first independent media to sound the alarm.

However, we didn’t rigorously assess why the populist Right, and not the Left, poses an existential threat to the ruling class.

The “establishment” references the conglomeration of dominant interest groups that sits atop the political food chain.

In a past era (in the Western context, before the original Industrial Revolution), the establishment was a landed aristocracy in collusion with the Church and militaries that ruled nation-states.

In the 21st century iteration of feudalism, the ruling class is a consortium of multinational offshore corporate elites.

Theoretically, regardless of who occupies power, any social group outside of the establishment is a latent threat – hence the oppressive apparatus of state.

In a rough 99% vs. 1% breakdown, if the vast majority or the “ruled” rose up against the tiny minority of “rulers,” their days perched atop the social hierarchy would be finished.

But, if the 99% can be chopped up into all manner of sub-groups – either along pre-existing cultural, racial, or political fault lines or artificial ones engineered by the state –  and then turned against one another, the status quo can be maintained.

The British perfected this method of rule – often called “divide and conquer” –in their management of colonial assets.

Politically, the population at large (outsiders of the establishment) in the United States is divided into two large groups: “Right” and “Left.”

Here is a brief breakdown of why, in the current social configuration, the Left serves as the enforcement arm of the state to suppress the grassroots Right, which is correctly viewed as the only faction that is a threat to the power structure.

#1: International vs. National Orientation

First, it’s imperative to understand that the United States, along with the rest of the West, is now under the effective control of a multinational corporate elite.

Piece by piece, sovereignty over decision-making is chipped away at the national level and handed over to international governing institutions like the UN, World Bank, World Economic Forum, WHO, et al.

We’ve explored this concept in greater detail in several pieces:

Cutting the legs out from insurgent nationalist movements, accordingly, is essential to moving the multinational corporate agenda ahead.

The Right is nationalist in its orientation, not internationalist. This is, as just one example, why the corporate media intently demonized the UK Brexit separation from the European Union as “racist” to taint the nationalist movement.

The inverse is true of the Left – especially as you move further to the fringes – which makes it a natural ally.

#2: The True Anti-Authoritarian, Anti-Establishment Left in America Is Dead

The corporate state certainly would target the Left if it posed a threat to its interests -– except that there is no authentic anti-authoritarian Left still alive in the United States.

Whatever “Left” remains has been thoroughly co-opted to serve the interests of the multinational oligarchy.

Leftist protests used to target multinational trade organizations, as happened in ’99 anti-WTO riots in Seattle.

Then (1999): the “Black Bloc” in ’99, fighting a class war that may have legitimately challenged the multinational corporate state (embodied by the WTO) if it had fostered popular support.

Now (2021): “Antifa” earlier this year showed up to fight the culture war outside of an LA spa where a “transgender woman” flashed her semi-erect penis at a mother and child in the women’s-only section. The “transgender” perpetrator was later charged by the LAPD over the incident and exposed as a convicted sex offender for previous indecent exposure crimes.

The victim (the mother) had the audacity to make a social media video about the trauma imposed on her daughter, which led to a “trans rights” protest against alleged rampant transphobia (in LA, one of the most “progressive” cities in America).

One of these things is not like the other:

  • The former version of the Left targeted the rape of the American economy by multinational corporations that offshore American manufacturing jobs to generate profits (which, also, incidentally, was a centerpiece talking point to Trump’s successful 2016 campaign in which he defeated the entire GOP and DNC establishment)
  • The modern version of the Left targets normal mothers who don’t want their daughters wantonly exposed to men’s genitalia in public spas, fueling a culture war and distracting the population with nonsense while the oligarchs methodically implode the US economy

#3: The Left Is Hyper-focused on Identity ‘Equity’ Politics, Not Governmental or Corporate Overreach

The modern Left can be neutered (quite easily) with language such as “going green” or “promoting [insert protected minority group]’s rights.”

When the Department of Justice requested additional funds to combat “domestic extremism” earlier this year, they pacified any potential resistance from the Left with such fig leaves. These came in the form of a variety of race and gender-based spending proposals:

“[Attorney General] Mr. Garland also said that the department sought $1 billion… [to] fund services for transgender survivors of domestic abuse, support women at historically Black colleges and in Hispanic and tribal institutions….”

Given their unending obsession with identity politics, this stuff is catnip to the Left base.

#4: The Left Will Dependably Enforce the Vaxx/Lockdown Agenda

Action item #1 on the corporate state to-do list is the vaxx/lockdown agenda, the initial stages of the internationally-standardized CCP-style digital control grid.

Reconciliation with far-gone elements of the “Left” is a losing cause – time for the remaining independent, undomesticated elements of civilization to de-rig with our own “Great Reset” parallel society.

*

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.

This article was originally published on The Daily Bell.

Ben Bartee is a Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via his blog, Armageddon ProseSubstack, Patreon, Gab, and Twitter.

All images in this article are from The Daily Bell

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Outstanding analysis by Dr. John Goss, first published by Global Research on August 19, 2021

 

Last year I warned pregnant women of dangers from the flu vaccine. This warning is likely to amount to little when compared with dangers from the spiked Covid-shots masquerading as vaccines.

Published in early August the UK government is urging pregnant women to take part in these infanticide trials the length and breadth of the country. It is a tall tale the Department of Health and Social Care and Nadhim Zahawi MP are telling women to encourage them to participate in the murder of their unborn.

Following 130,000 pregnant women being vaccinated in the US and no safety concerns being raised, the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines were recommended by the independent experts at the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) for pregnant women in the UK. Almost 52,000 pregnant women in England have now been vaccinated – similarly, with no safety concerns reported.

You will see that the government website does not provide a link for this US information. There is good reason. The link is here.

Note: those doing the research were all on the government payroll, with affiliations to CDC (Center for Disease Control and Protection) or the FDA (Federal Drugs Agency).

Further note: by the time the report was published only 21% of pregnancies had come to an end (this includes stillbirths and abortions). And there has not been time to determine post-natal effects on babies.

Partisan research of this nature luring pregnant women to become guinea pigs is far from robust. Follow-up of those vaccinated has not been done. Yet they want more and more innocent victims for their spikes – which once in the body can never be removed. The vaccines introduce only the spike whereas if left to the body’s immune system it produces protection from the whole virus cell.

It is known that placebos are being used in these trials, and suspected that attenuated “vaccines” are also being used. Couple this with the faulty PCR test and the financial influence of Big Pharma companies on those doing the research, expecting mothers must balance a dodgy sales-pitch against the untested experimentation on their babies and the unborn with life-threatening and life-changing concoctions.

Large increases in the deaths of pregnant women have coincided with the “vaccine” rollout in Brazil.

The spike protein from inoculations attack various organs in the body. Lipid nanoparticles concentrate in the ovaries in women (and testes in men).

Watch and listen to Dr. Ryan Cole explain (the part about testes and ovaries starts at 10 minutes 15 seconds). Also disturbing Dr. Cole has seen a 20% increase in uterine cancer since the vaccinations started.

This table shows official UK figures in a programme that has barely started for pregnant women who have gambled with Big Pharma’s poisonous recipes. The actual figures are likely to be much higher.

Nursing mothers have also been finding severe reactions in their babies (including at least one death).

The following US adverse reactions were extracted by Mairead who does the latest Covid-19 statistics for All the Goss.

Harm to babies from nursing mothers

Click on the case number to see the full link in VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System)

Mother received vaccine and after only three breast-feeding sessions her 9 month old baby boy developed diabetes mellitus, gastro-intestinal and therapeutic procedures. Had to go on frozen reserves. Outcome unkown.

A 7 month old baby boy had an anaphylactic reaction and other diagnosed problems from breast-feeding after mother received Pfizer vaccine. Mother not affected.

Mother, herself no adverse reactions, reported fever in 8 month old baby girl after mum received Pfizer vaccine: Baby’s temperature 104 degrees F.

5 month old baby boy died after breastfeeding. Mum received second dose of Pfizer vaccine the day before.

Issues Reported in 11 month old baby boy after mum received Pfizer vaccine:

Morning after mother received Pfizer vaccine baby developed a rash and fever. Recovering – no medical follow-up.

6 month old breast-feeding baby had moderate fever for 3 days following mum’s Pfizer vaccine and about a week to 10 days later developed a rash.

7 month old breast-feeding baby boy after mum received Moderna vaccine had an elevated temperature together with loss of appetite. “The infant had symptoms of decreased appetite, elevated temperature 99.8 degrees, mottled skin, inconsolable crying, and diarrhea all that occurred within 48 hours after the mother received the vaccine . . .”

11 month old baby girl after mum received Pfizer vaccine “developed hives on trunk and extremities. . . The child had a fever 3 days prior to the reaction however the rash was not obvious at that time. If the rash gets worse she has bee[n] told she may need to stop breastfeeding. “

Issues Reported in a 2 month old baby girl after mum received Pfizer vaccine: “Blood test abnormal, Colitis, Inflammatory bowel disease, Maternal exposure during breast feeding”

Study of deaths in children

When babies grow into children they still need protecting from the pharmaceutical giants who have no mercy in trying out their new cauldron brews. If you can stomach more assaults on the innocents you should read this from Children’s Health Defense. It adds to the other deaths of children reported on this blog.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on The Dangers of the Covid “Vaccine” to Pregnant Women: Do Not be a Lab Rat. The Untested Experimentation on Babies and the Unborn
  • Tags: , ,

Video: Ukraine: Calm Before the Storm?

January 19th, 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.

***

On January 17, the ex-president of Ukraine, a well-known oligarch Petro Poroshenko, returned to the country. Poroshenko faced a criminal case opened under the articles ‘high treason’ and ‘assistance to the activities of terrorist organizations.’ In particular, it concerns the purchase of coal from the Donbass. According to the investigation, the ex-president created a criminal group and disrupted coal supplies from South Africa in the fall of 2014. A month ago, the State Bureau of Investigation tried to serve a subpoena on the ex-president and summon him for questioning, but Poroshenko evaded receiving the document and immediately fled abroad.

He did not waste time. His team managed to mobilize ultranationalist forces and the masses dissatisfied with the policy of the current Ukrainian president, the former comedian Zelensky.

Apparently, Poroshenko received certain guarantees by Euro-Atlantic elites.

.

The ex-president was not detained before the election of a preventive measure at the airport upon his arrival, as required by law. The judge also refused to make a decision on the pre-trial restrictions on January 17 and postponed the hearing to January 19.

Meanwhile, President Zelensky’s approval rating is rapidly declining. Key members of the president’s office are resigning. The country suffers from a protracted economic crisis accompanied by a demographic catastrophe. The main reasons are widespread corruption and the colonial-styled exploitation of the country’s economy by the Euro-Atlantists. In fact, Ukraine is under the external control of Washington and Brussels.

Today, the most important task for the West is to maintain the status quo in Ukraine. Both Poroshenko and Zelensky are completely controlled by Washington. At the same time, there are high risks of mass protests and even a coup due to the dissatisfaction with the policies of the current president. Poroshenko is seen as a loyal figure who, in case of a crisis, will not allow any third parties to come to power and change the course of the country’s foreign policy.

The events in Ukraine are taking place amid the failure of the dialogue on strategic stability between Russia and NATO, as well as the extreme price volatility in the energy markets.

On January 17, the Permanent Representative of Russia to the OSCE announced the end of negotiations on security guarantees within the security organization due to their futility. In recent days, there have been reports that Moscow is consistently reducing its diplomatic corps in Ukraine. The Kremlin has also tightened its rhetoric, accusing NATO of preparing aggressive actions against Russia.

In turn, the president of Belarus Lukashenko, a Russian ally, claimed the buildup of Ukraine’s troops near the country’s borders. NATO keeps up similar accusations against Russia.

At the same time, there is a temporary lull in Donbass.

Only sporadic skirmishes with no use of heavy weapons are reported on the frontlines between the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the armed units of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics.

Earlier, the concentration of the UAF shock troops, including armored units, in the immediate vicinity of the contact line was confirmed. Volunteer nationalist battalions, consisting mainly of residents of the Ukraine’s western regions, arrived at the forefront. NATO has increased arms supplies to Kiev. Following the Washington’s example, the head of the British Defense Ministry said that London will send anti-tank weapons to Ukraine. There are a large number of NATO instructors in the UAF ranks.

The constellation of events indicates that the parties consider the outbreak of another armed conflict in Eastern Europe as the most likely scenario in the near future.

*

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.

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

PayPal: [email protected], http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Ukraine: Calm Before the Storm?
  • 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.

***

 

The meeting of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) foreign ministers was postponed amid disagreements over Myanmar. The West could use this division within ASEAN to dominate the association and pressure Southeast Asian countries to turn against China. ASEAN’s differences over Myanmar in the context of Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen’s visit to the isolated country is the likely reason why the meeting was postponed.

The meeting should have taken place on January 18-19 in the northern Cambodian city of Siem Reap. It was to be the first ASEAN forum hosted by the country. However, on January 12, Cambodian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Koy Kuong announced the postponement of the meeting. The spokesperson declined to give further details, but it is known that Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines did not fully support Hun Sen’s visit to Myanmar, and even criticized him indirectly.

Hun Sen held talks with the head of Myanmar’s military junta, General Min Aung Hlaing, and did not hold any meetings with opposition representatives, including Aung San Suu Kyi. In an interview with journalists last week, Malaysian Foreign Minister Saifuddin Abdullah suggested that Hun Sen as ASEAN chairman should have consulted other leaders of the association and asked for their views on what he should try and achieve in Myanmar. As the Minister noted, in ASEAN there are different opinions on the visit but that he would judge after the fact whether Hun Sen’s visit to Myanmar was constructive.

Despite the “wait-and-see” position of Malaysia, some countries are concerned that the visit could be seen as regional recognition of the junta and that their views should have been consulted.

Singapore’s Foreign Ministry announced that during talks via video link a day earlier, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong urged the new president of ASEAN to have dialogue with all parties involved in the conflict in Myanmar, including the party of Aung San Suu Kyi. Lee noted that all of Cambodia’s proposals as ASEAN Chair should be discussed in detail by ASEAN foreign ministers. He also expressed hope that Cambodia would take into account the views of Singapore and other ASEAN leaders.

The Philippines expressed a similar stance to Malaysia and Singapore, with Foreign Minister Teodoro Locsin saying on Sunday that he sees Aung San Suu Kyi as an “indispensable” participant of any negotiations between the opposing parties in Myanmar, despite her four year prison sentence. He stressed that the special envoy’s access to all parties concerned should not have any conditions. Locsin also announced his intention to work with his ASEAN counterparts in the coming weeks to reach a dialogue between all stakeholders in Myanmar and make progress on the Five-Point consensus.

The crisis in Myanmar is not new and will certainly not have a quick solution. Despite this reality, some kind of concession in ASEAN will still need to be found. In the worst-case scenario, if the path towards a solution is not opened, a rift, if not even a split, will emerge in ASEAN. If ASEAN countries do not come to an agreement on Myanmar, Western forces could take advantage of the internal crises to dominate the association that is becoming increasingly closer to China.

The West has repeatedly used events in Myanmar to put pressure on ASEAN since the country became a member state in 1997. Washington constantly incites tensions in Myanmar and elsewhere in Southeast Asia in a controlled manner as part of their attempts to stop, or at least limit, Chinese influence from strengthening and expanding in the region.

One of Myanmar’s leading newspapers, The Irrawaddy, noted China’s efforts to support dialogue between Myanmar and ASEAN to resolve the political crisis in the country. The Irrawaddy, founded by Burmese exiles living in northern Thailand but now also based in Rangoon, also acknowledged that Hun Sen’s visit to Myanmar sparked mixed reactions in Myanmar and abroad due to his contacts with the military government.

The newspaper cited Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wen as saying that Beijing supports the creation of favourable conditions that are conduit to resolving issues. The spokesperson also said that for the ASEAN envoy to fulfill its responsibilities, China is working to reach a consensus between Myanmar’s “five-point roadmap” and ASEAN’s “five-point consensus.”

As ASEAN countries rely on China for the development of their infrastructure and economy, Washington wants to break relations that Southeast Asian countries have with Beijing. So long as the Myanmar issue persists, it will deepen differences within the association that can then be exploited by external forces, especially the US.

*

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.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ASEAN’s Discord Over Myanmar, Could Expose Association to External Dominance
  • 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.

First published by Global Research on January 13, 2022

***

Six weeks into the Soviet Army’s counteroffensive, on 15 January 1942 Adolf Hitler at last agreed that German Army Group Centre could make a gradual, fighting withdrawal to a straighter and shorter line slightly further west of Moscow. 

The Nazi hierarchy hoped that this would fortify the Wehrmacht’s defensive position, and enable them to fend off continued Soviet counterattacks; in order to reconstitute German forces for another major offensive in the summer of 1942.

Hitler attributed the failure of his 1941 campaign to destroy the USSR as largely due to “a surprisingly early outbreak of a severe winter in the East” (1). He did not mention the crucial errors himself and the high command made regarding grand strategy, and neither did he give the Soviets credit for putting up a stronger showing than the Nazis had anticipated.

Nevertheless, the Russian winter of 1941-42 was far colder and longer than normal, and indeed was “one of the most severe winters on record”, as noted in a paper co-authored by prominent climatologists (Jehuda Neumann and Hermann Flohn) with the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. (2)

A table produced in this study reveals that the temperature around Moscow, for the month of November 1941, was on average a remarkable 6.8 degrees Celsius colder when compared to November 1940 (3). For December 1941, the temperature in Moscow was 5.2 degrees Celsius lower than 12 months before; and in January 1942, it was 6 degrees colder than January 1941. Even the month of March 1942 was appreciably colder than March 1941, showing a 3.6 degree lower temperature on average, with the thermometer still well under zero.

Map of the Soviet 1941–1942 winter counteroffensive. (Source: Public Domain)

These much colder than typical temperatures are similarly reflected in recordings posted at Leningrad, Soviet Russia’s second largest city (4). However, the appalling weather was not the principal reason behind Operation Barbarossa’s derailing. The Germans were pressed for time, and had been unable to reach their goals, mainly because of the strategic blunders committed by the German high command; such as stretching their forces over too broad a front on 22 June 1941, and two months later when Hitler on his own initiative delayed the advance on Moscow. The Blitzkrieg had slowed in large part because of this.

Military author Donald J. Goodspeed wrote,

“The German high command had attempted too many things at the same time. It had neglected the primary axiom of the single objective [taking Moscow]”. (5)

Considering by late 1941 the Germans were deep inside the western Soviet Union, that they had not been given sufficient warm clothing, were experiencing problems with logistics and supplies, and had received barely any new fighting divisions, their performance that winter was quite incredible. In total during the three months of January to March 1942, the Wehrmacht inflicted 620,000 casualties on the Red Army, according to British scholar Evan Mawdsley; the Germans in that same period lost 136,000 men, equating to 22% of Soviet personnel losses. (6)

It was the ongoing German ability, to exact heavy casualties on the Soviets, which ensured that Hitler and his military command remained confident they would emerge victorious from the war, particularly as the winter progressed and the Wehrmacht’s position solidified. Goodspeed stated,

“It is impossible to withhold admiration from the German achievement in that terrible winter, an achievement much more significant than all the previous German victories. It is impossible to withhold admiration, but it is infinitely sad that men should have been called on to fight so well for so bad a cause”. (7)

On 29 January 1942 General Georgy Zhukov, the Soviets’ top commander, complained that he had so far lost 276,000 soldiers in the winter fighting, and received a mere 100,000 reinforcements (8). In his memoirs, Zhukov unceremoniously labelled the Russian counteroffensive “a Pyrrhic victory”; he criticised how the counterattack is often regarded as a Soviet triumph, calling it an “embellishment of history” and “a sad attempt to paint over failure” (9). The above casualty figures support the arguments of Zhukov.

While Zhukov’s lamentations on not being granted enough replacements also seems justified, in the three months from December 1941 the Soviet Army was bolstered with 117 new divisions, a very high number (10). The leading enemy force, German Army Group Centre, received only 9 fresh divisions from December 1941 to March 1942.

Hitler was relieved to observe that the Germans’ slow retirement of mid-January 1942 was successfully implemented. In the process, the Wehrmacht did suffer considerable losses in men and matériel. By 31 January 1942, total German casualties on the Eastern front came to 918,000, amounting to 28.7% of the original German invasion force of June 1941. (11)

In comparison, the Soviet Army at the end of 1941 had suffered almost five million casualties (12); that is the vast majority of the Red Army’s personnel strength of mid-1941. The halting of the German advance had, meanwhile, breathed new life into anti-fascist guerrilla activities, especially those in Yugoslavia and Greece. The Resistance forces helped to tie down a few German divisions. The Wehrmacht had no such difficulties from the Western European nations under Nazi rule. The French, for example, sent a contingent to fight alongside the Germans against Soviet Russia. (13)

In an unforeseen twist of events, the positive outcome of Hitler’s standfast directive of mid-December 1941 – in which he had ordered German commanders to deploy dynamite and other explosives to blast gaping holes in the frozen ground (14), to be used as defensive strongholds called “hedgehogs” – coupled with the successful action of 15 January 1942, appears to have augmented Hitler’s status as the German Army’s Supreme Commander.

Mawdsley acknowledged,

“Hitler came out better from these winter battles than Stalin did, at least within his own short-range terms. The ‘standfast’ policy saved his Eastern front. Ironically, the disaster at Moscow probably enhanced in the short term his reputation (and his self-estimation), as a war leader, although in a different way from the 1940 campaign in France. He could claim to have saved the German Army from its own errors”. (15)

On 19 December 1941 Hitler appointed himself Supreme Commander, replacing Field Marshal Walther von Brauchitsch. The latter had resigned due to heart trouble and the deteriorating circumstances in the East. Hitler insisted that,

“Anyone can issue a few tactical orders. The task of a Commander-in-Chief is to educate the army in the spirit of National Socialism. I don’t know any general in the army who could do this as I want it done”. (16)

Hitler’s self-assignment as Nazi Germany’s warlord was not at all bad news for the Russians. Having limited military experience, Hitler was bound to commit errors in the time ahead. In reality, the Nazi leader had been de facto Supreme Commander for months before December 1941.

On 10 January 1942, Joseph Stalin informed his generals in a directive that he expected “the complete defeat of the Nazi forces in 1942” (17). The Red Army’s May Day slogan expounded, “In 1942 we will achieve the decisive defeat of the German-fascist forces”. The Soviet leadership continued to state this aim was achievable “until at least late June 1942”, Mawdsley wrote (18); despite the fact by then, the Germans were hundreds of miles deeper in Russian territory than Napoleon’s Grand Armée had been in 1812.

As opposed to Hitler, however, Stalin possessed an extensive background in top military echelons, which would stand him in good stead as the war continued. English historian Geoffrey Roberts realised,

“Stalin was no general but he did have experience of high command in the field, and of serving in the combat zone, although not on the front line. During the Russian civil war he served as a political commissar, a representative of the communist party’s central committee, responsible for securing and maintaining supplies for the Red Army, a job that involved him in high-level military decision-making”. (19)

In January 1942, the Kremlin sought to inflict a fatal blow on the Nazis by executing a gigantic pincers movement, around the Russian towns of Rzhev and Vyazma. Such a move, had it been successful, would have led to the encirclement and destruction of the largest German force, Army Group Centre. Were the Soviets to achieve this, the war would have been virtually over (20). Partly because of the Russian plan, Hitler had reluctantly ordered his step-by-step withdrawal on 15 January.

The Soviets had already recaptured the Russian city of Kalinin (Tver) on 16 December 1941, 100 miles north-west of Moscow, followed by the strongpoint of Kaluga on 26 December, a similar distance south-west of Moscow. With Kalinin and Kaluga back in Soviet hands, Stalin and the Supreme high command (Stavka) now carried out their enveloping manoeuvre further west, focusing on Rzhev and Vyazma. These towns lie just over 130 miles west of Moscow.

Army Group Centre was not destined to be surrounded and destroyed. In bitter fighting the Germans held on to Rzhev. Their formidable commander, Walter Model, launched sustained and vigorous assaults against oncoming Soviet troops. Mawdsley wrote,

“General Walter Model was appointed to take over the 9th Army on the northern face of the German position… An officer of extraordinary abilities, Model began a meteoric rise, and would establish himself as the German Army’s best defensive specialist, Hitler’s ‘fireman’.” (21)

Hitler repeatedly described Model as “the saviour of the Eastern front”. For his successful action at Rzhev, the Führer personally awarded Model the Knights’ Cross with Oak Leaves on 1 February 1942, and promoted him to Colonel-General (22). Model, trusted furthermore by Hitler because of his pro-Nazi stance, was the only commander who could persuade Hitler to sanction retreats, sweetened with a “Shield and Sword” policy.

Through this stratagem Model would suggest a withdrawal to Hitler, with the general then stressing that it be followed by a bold counterstroke, in which the lost territory would swiftly be recaptured, or so they hoped. German military staffs were frequently amazed, to witness how Model’s Shield and Sword policy promptly convinced Hitler to authorise temporary retreats (23). Other generals risked being sacked for proposing as much.

Towards mid-January 1942, the Soviet 29th and 39th armies bypassed Rzhev, and advanced south-westwards in the direction of Vyazma. Further south again, General Zhukov’s divisions approached Vyazma. Despite these threats, Vyazma remained under Nazi occupation, and the Soviet 29th and 39th armies were cut off behind German lines, as General Model closed the Rzhev gap (24). The Russian advance was halted and the pincers never closed.

A Russian attempt to overcome the German 9th Army was stopped in front of Vitebsk, in north-eastern Belarus. South of Leningrad, a Soviet offensive along the Volkhov river failed to reach its objectives, and resulted in the annihilation of the Soviet 2nd Assault Army (25). On 8 February 1942, six German divisions were surrounded by the Russians at the urban locality of Demyansk, 235 miles north-west of Moscow (26). The encircled Germans fought on, and their survival was made possible by Luftwaffe supplies of food and medicine dispatched from the air.

At the Russian town of Kholm, about 200 miles south of Leningrad, a mix of German Army and police units were surrounded in late January 1942, as the Soviet 33rd and 391st rifle divisions tightened the ring around Kholm (the Kholm Pocket). Over this town the besieged Germans were likewise reinforced with Luftwaffe aerial drops. They clung on to Kholm in spite of repeated Soviet assaults, heavy casualties and a sudden upsurge of exanthematic typhus, a lethal bacterial disease. (27)

The success of the Luftwaffe manoeuvres, at Demyansk and Kholm, may have assured Hitler the following winter that it would be possible to safeguard the German 6th Army trapped at Stalingrad (28). Certainly, the Demyansk and Kholm operations lent credence to the Nazi air chief Hermann Göring, who was heartened by the Luftwaffe showing here. Later, Göring was optimistic the same undertaking would be possible at Stalingrad, until the 6th Army could be relieved.

It did not prove so, for the German airfields were further away from Stalingrad than at Demyansk and Kholm. The 6th Army was also multiple times larger, and more mouths would need to be fed to sustain it.

Outbreaks of typhus in late winter, as had afflicted the Germans in the Kholm Pocket, was expected. Such occurrences were predicted accurately by Hitler’s ally, the Romanian autocrat Marshal Ion Antonescu, who said on 13 November 1941, “In my experience exanthematic typhus breaks out in February. We must organize ourselves by then. We must limit the area of the disease, send bath and delousing trains, because otherwise we will have a wide-scale epidemic in February… The disaster will come in February, when a person is weakened by the winter, because he has not fed himself properly”. (29)

In the south-western USSR, on 31 December 1941 the Soviet 302nd Mountain Rifle Division, led by Colonel Mikhail K. Zubkov, liberated the city of Kerch in eastern Crimea. Over four months later, Kerch would be taken by the Germans again on 14 May 1942. In the Crimea’s far south, General Erich von Manstein’s German 11th Army had “occupied the shore of the Black Sea” and the Germans enjoyed “access to the wheat granaries of the Ukraine”, Leopold Trepper wrote, a top level anti-Nazi intelligence agent. (30)

Manstein’s forces were still stuck outside Sevastopol, the Crimea’s biggest city, which resisted heroically. Sevastopol would not fall to the invaders until the high summer (31). The most promising Russian operation took place near Kharkov, the USSR’s fourth largest city, which had been captured by the German 6th Army on 24 October 1941.

In the middle of January 1942, the Soviets launched twin attacks around Kharkov (32). The Germans managed to halt the northern Soviet arm at Belgorod, 45 miles north of Kharkov; but the Russians manufactured a deep wedge in the German lines near Izyum, about 70 miles south-east of Kharkov. Only after extended fighting was the Wehrmacht able to restore the situation, and prevent the Red Army from advancing southward on Kharkov, possibly retaking the city.

*

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. 

*

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

Notes

1 J. Neumann and H. Flohn, Great Historical Events That Were Significantly Affected by the Weather: Part 8, Germany’s War on the Soviet Union, 1941–45. Long-range Weather Forecasts for 1941–42 and Climatological Studies, June 1987, Jstor, p. 7 of 11

2 Ibid., p. 1 of 11

3 Ibid., p. 4 of 11

4 Ibid.

5 Donald J. Goodspeed, The German Wars (Random House Value Publishing, 2nd edition, 3 April 1985) p. 403

6 Evan Mawdsley, Thunder in the East: The Nazi-Soviet War, 1941-1945 (Hodder Arnold, 23 Feb. 2007) p. 147

7 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 405

8 Mawdsley, Thunder in the East, p. 128

9 Ibid., p. 127

10 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 407

11 Jacques R. Pauwels, The Myth of the Good War: America in the Second World War (Formac/Lorimer; 2nd Edition, 1 Sept. 2015) p. 73

12 Ian Johnson, Stalingrad at 75, the Turning Point of World War II in Europe, Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective, 15 August 2017

13 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 407

14 Chris Bellamy, Absolute War: Soviet Russia in the Second World War (Pan; Main Market edition, 21 Aug. 2009) p. 447

15 Mawdsley, Thunder in the East, p. 148

16 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 406

17 Geoffrey Roberts, Stalin’s Wars: From World War to Cold War, 1939-1953 (Yale University Press; 1st Edition, 14 Nov. 2006) p. 116

18 Mawdsley, Thunder in the East, pp. 118-119

19 Roberts, Stalin’s Wars, p. 12

20 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 407

21 Mawdsley, Thunder in the East, p. 123

22 C. Peter Chen, “Walter Model”, World War II Database, April 2007

23 Samuel W. Mitcham Jr., Hitler’s Field Marshals and Their Battles (Guild Publishers, 1988) p. 319

24 Bellamy, Absolute War: Soviet Russia in the Second World War, p. 347

25 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 408

26 Ibid.

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

29 Dennis Deletant, Hitler’s Forgotten Ally: Ion Antonescu and His Regime, Romania 1940–1944 (Palgrave Macmillan; 2006th edition,12 Apr. 2006) p. 176

30 Leopold Trepper, The Great Game: Memoirs of a Master Spy (Michael Joseph Ltd; First Edition, 1 May 1977) p. 132

31 C. Peter Chen, “Battle of Sevastopol, 30 Oct 1941 – 4 Jul 1942”, World War II Database, January 2008

32 Goodspeed, The German Wars, p. 408

Featured image: German soldiers tend to a wounded comrade near Moscow, November–December 1941 (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 de)

All Global Research articles 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.

***

 

 

 

One of the most popular and regular items of the Western media menu is the demonization of China, Iran and North Korea for their human rights violations. These media have three characteristics.

First, they give us the impression that human rights violation takes place only in those countries which are not friendly to Washington; they try to tell us that Washington-friendly countries do not violate human rights.

Second, the Western media limit their critics to the violation of civil and political rights such as oppression of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. They do no talk about the violation of economic, social and cultural rights (foods, clothing, public housing, public health, public education) which China and North Korea are trying to respect and protect.

What makes me disturbed is that the violation of human rights is globalized and getting worse.

In this paper, I am asking the following question: “What is human rights?” and “How badly is it violated in Asia?” 

Definition of Human Rights

I define human rights in this way:

“Every normal human being has right to live a dignified and decent living.”

Decent living means the access to foods, clothing, housing, a job, health and education. On the other hand, dignified life means independence, autonomy and freedom.

Thus, we have two sets of inseparable human rights. One is the right to be autonomous and free from government intervention. This concept has led to international covenant on civil and political rights.

This concept of civil and political right is much influenced by English philosophers, Thomas Hobbes (1558-1670) and John Locke (1632-1701). These philosophers have one thing in common, namely, the sovereignty of individuals and freedom for self preservation. The right to self preservation is a natural right.

However, the major difference between the two philosophers is their perception of the type of political regime. Hobbes goes for monarchy which is likely to better protect human rights. For Locke, non-authoritarian regime also can protect human rights. However, for him, if the government fails its job of protecting human rights, the government deserves to be replaced.

The idea of civil and political rights was enshrined in the Declaration of the French Revolution and that of American Revolution.

The right to individual freedom is called the first generation of human rights or negative human rights in the sense that the state should not infringe on individual freedom.

The concept of decent of economic, social and cultural rights is well defined by James Nickel. These rights are called the second generation of human rights.

“Human rights aim to secure for individual the necessary conditions for leading a minimally good life. Public authorities, national and international, are identified as typically best placed to service these conditions.” (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Human Rights)

The idea of economic, social and cultural rights derives from the need for mutual cooperation. This idea is inspired primarily by religious traditions. The Christian love of neighbours, the Muslims teaching of interconnectivity of humans, the respect for all living beings in Buddhism are sources of inspiration for the doctrine of economic, social and cultural rights.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) argues that one’s freedom should not harm the freedom of others. Marx emphasized the recognition and importance of economic, social and cultural rights.

These two schools of thought on human rights have invited a sustained debate, especially the debate on the universality of civil and political rights. One side of the controversy argues that human rights, especially the right to individual freedom, is universal; China’s oppression of individual freedom is human rights violation. James Nickel argues for the universality of human rights.

“The moral justification of human rights is thought to precede consideration of strict national sovereignty.” (James Nickel, 1992)

“Moral universalism posits the existence of rationally identifiable trans-culture and trans-historical moral trust.” (James Nickel 1992)

On the other hand, the argument for relative universality is also convincing. At the World Congress on Human Rights in Vienne in 1993, the Foreign Minister of Singapore said this:

“The universal recognition of human rights can be harmful, if universalism is studied to deny or mask the reality of diversity.”

The localized human rights become more convincing when it comes down to economic, social and cultural rights. These rights are also known as positive rights in the sense that the state has the positive duty to assure decent living or at least produce conditions conducive to such life.

The point is this: all human rights are of universal value, but depending on the local conditions, they cannot be realized everywhere to the same degree. In short, the degree of the guarantee of such human rights cannot be universal.

There are also third generation of human rights which are not covered in operational terms in the first and the second generation human rights; these rights are collective rights designed to protect specific groups of people such as women, religious and cultural minorities, elderly people, children, the disabled and so on. Later in this paper, a partial list of these rights will be shown.

Evolution in the Fight for Human Rights

The first fight for freedom was the Magna Carta of 1215. It was the fight against unpopular king and the protection of the right of the Church and Barons.

The most important battles for the human rights promotion were the Declaration of American Independence of 1776 and the Declaration of Man and the Citizen of the France’s National Constituent Assembly of 1789. The key message of these documents was the idea that “Man is born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

The first important international covenant on human rights was the  Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (UDHR) which was followed by two other international human rights covenants, namely the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 1966 and the International covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1966.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 (UDHR)

Image: The universal declaration of human rights 10 December 1948 (Licensed under Public Domain)

The universal declaration of human rights 10 December 1948.jpg

This was one of the decent things ever done by human beings.

No less than 193 countries adopt the UDHR.

It has 24 articles roughly divided into three parts.

Part 1. (Articles 1 to 11): the judicial system suitable for human rights protection. For instance, Article 5 prohibits torture, while Article 11 argues for innocence before proven guilty.

Part 2. (Article 12 to 17): civil rights. For example, Article 12 is about privacy, while Article 17 is concerned with private property.

Part 3. (Article 18 to 24): political rights. Article 18 is about the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

The International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights of 1966 (ICCOR)

Adopted by 179 countries.

It has four parts and 53 articles.

Part 1. Article 1 deals with the right to self determination (Article 1-1) and the duty of the State (Article 1-3).

Part 2. State responsibility (Article 4 to 5): Article 4-1 is concerned with racial discrimination. Article 4-1 explains the role of international institutions.

Part 3. (Article 6 to 27): the UN’s human-right related functions. For instance, Article 6-2 asks the abolition of death penalty. Article 18-3 merits our particular attention. It explains the limit of religious freedom:

“Freedom to manifest one’s religious or belief may be subject only to such limitation as are prescribed by law and necessary to protect public safety, order, health or the fundamental rights and freedom of others.”

What this article is saying is that religious freedom is not absolute; it should be contextualized.

Part 4. (Article 28 to 45): the organization of the UN’s human-right related UN institutions including UN Human Rights Committee and Commission. Article 28-2 specifies that the UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) is composed of 18 members. Article 41-1 specifies how inter-government human-right related dispute should be dealt with through the UNHMC.

Part 5. (Article 46-53): The legitimacy of the ICCPR. Article 46 says that the ICCPR does not impair the provisions of the UN Charter and the constitutions of the specialized agencies which define the responsibility of UN agencies. 

The International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966 (ICESCR)

Adopted by 171 countries.

It has 4 parts and 31 articles.

Part 1. (Article 1): deals with the right to self determination.

Part 2. (Article 2 to 5): international cooperation, rights of women: Article 2-3 is of particular interest: “Developing countries with due regard to human rights and their national economy may determine to what extent they would guarantee the economic rights recognized in the present Covenant to non-nationals.” This allows the developing countries some flexibility in the range of human rights protection.

Part 3. (Article 6 to 15): Labour, education, daily necessities. Articles 6 to 9 are concerned with labour rights. Article 10 is for education right. Article 11 is for the right to food clothing and housing. Article 12 is for public health.

Part 4. (Article 16-31): role of UN agencies for human rights, in particular the role of the UN Economic and Social Council.

List of Human Rights Conventions

In addition to UDHR, ICCPR and ICESCR, we have the following international agreements on human rights and national declaration of human rights:

  • The Covenant on the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948)
  • The International Convention of the Statute of Refugees (1951)
  • The European Convention on Human Rights (1954)
  • The UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to Ethnic, Religious and Language Minorities (1966)
  • International Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1966)
  • The UN Declaration on the Human Environment: The right to freedom and equality in the condition for life of dignity (1972)
  • International Convention against Torture and Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment of Punishment (1984)
  • The African Charter on Human Rights under the auspice of the African Union (1986)

It is interesting to notice that Article 19 guarantees the right to equality; Article 20 is about the right to self determination; article 21 the right to natural resources:

  • The UN Convention of the Right of Children (1989)
  • The UN Declaration on Indigenous People (2007)
  • The La Via Campesina Movement (2008)

This movement had a huge assembly in Jakarta to promote the international convention on the protection of peasants; 200 million peasants support it worldwide; the meeting was attended by representatives of 20 countries. The movement was approved by the UN General Assembly in 2018 supported by 121 countries.

  • The Beijing Declaration on Human Rights. In this Declaration, human rights are the unity of individual and collective rights. To be more precise, individual rights cannot be harmonized, if collective economic and social entitlement is not sufficient (2017).

Western critics think that this is an international blackmail against the West’s attachment to individual rights and freedom. The third world human rights are hostage with the notion that without more economic aid, economic and social rights cannot be enjoyed in the Third World.

This is true, indeed, because the Third World has provided cheap labour and natural resources which have made the West rich.

In recent years, there is a movement for the protection of sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics (SOGIESC), but there is no international convention.

There is one other group which is not covered by an international convention; it is the right of senior people who may need more protection than other groups.

One of the controversies on human rights is about the proliferation of international human rights agreements, which the former Secretary of State Michael Pompeo was quoted to have said:

“Indeed, human rights proliferation is watering down and diluting focus on protecting basic liberty.”

Here, Pompeo is alluding to the individual freedom of American version which values the merciless competition for the sake of efficiency and business profit.

What he is saying is that the government should not interfere with the free action of individuals and businesses; he does not consider the cases where the liberty of one person can harm that of another person.

Take, as an example, the right to free public assembly. Most national constitutions guarantee the right to free expression, even in so-called authoritarian countries like Iran, China, Russia and North Korea.

However, there is one condition for the guarantee of this freedom; such freedom should not threaten national security. But, even in liberal democratic country like the U.S., violent public protest such as the “June 6 Washington protest” is a criminal act; its leaders are expected to be charged for their activities. In fact, as long as we live in a society, absolute freedom cannot be tolerated.

The authoritarian countries especially China and North Korea are criticized for violating  civil and political rights.

In the West, for individual liberty such as individual property, free assembly, free choice of religion, freedom of speech and other civil and political rights, the government should not interfere.

The Western perception of freedom may seem logical, but in reality, it is just impossible for a responsible government not to set up the red line which cannot be ignored. In other words, even in the U.S., individual rights cannot be tolerated without considering the danger of undermining the collective right of the American society.

In China, it is the official position that civil and political rights are vertically structured. The individual right is subordinate to the collective entity; the right of the collective entity is subordinate to the right of the State; the right of the State is subordinate to right of the nation. The basic idea is that individual rights and the collective rights are to be assured simultaneously.

Violation of Civil and Political Human Rights in Asia

The Western opinion makers try to make the world to believe that in Asia, human rights violation is the monopoly of China and North Korea.

Civil rights mean the right to healthy physical and mental life requiring safety, non-discrimination, freedom of opinion, press, religion, association and movement. On the other hand, political rights mean the right to vote, political party membership and other politics-related activities. It is to be noted that political and civil rights can be the same; the distinction is blurred.

What we will see in this section is how difficult it is to find countries that are free from human rights violations. There are always the strong and the weak ones. The strong wants to despise and exploit the weak. Such is human nature. In other words, violation of human rights is a part of human life. No country, whether liberal or authoritarian, can say it is clean. Therefore, what is wise and constructive is to avoid labelling other countries as human violators and rather cooperate to fight against human rights abuse.

None of the Asian countries I discuss here is free from being violator of human rights. I will discuss the human rights violations by types.

I have decided not to mention the names of the violators and the violated to respect their confidentiality.

The Sexual violence: The case of rape of women is particularly high in India. In September 2020, a Dalit woman was raped and murdered by a group of upper-class men in Hathra District in Uttar Pradesh and she was cremated by the police without consulting her family. There are dozens of other reported cases where low-class women were raped by upper-class men.

The crime of rape is not confined to India. In many countries, lot of girls are raped every day by the rich and the powerful. Lots of women are raped by close life-partners in developed countries.

Mass killing of people: Mass killings by the government or large corporations in complicity with corrupt governments are widespread. In India, since the BJP took over the power in March 2017, 77 people were killed and 1,100 were injured by 2020. In the Philippines, a Major General killed thousands of political activists. In Malaysia, on 25th of August 2018, the military assisted by several ethnic groups attacked Rohingya villages, raped and massacred the poor people. More than 362 villages were destroyed, more than one million Rohingya people were excluded from the Census; 12,800 were displaced.

Immunity Killing: In India in February 2020, violence erupted that killed 50 Muslims. On April 18 in Uttar Pradesh, a Muslim man died in a hospital after being beaten by the police. In July 2020 in Kashima, three young workers were killed by the Indian army in an apple orchard. In Cambodia, a prominent political commentator was murdered after a Cambodian general ordered the army to kill anyone who foments turmoil. One of the worst mass immunity killings took place in Indonesia between 1965 and 1966. Millions of Indonesian communists, Chinese, trade union leaders and others were killed.

The violation of the right to freedom of speech, expression, opinion and the press: In India in recent years, 49 people including cinema-related people were convicted of sedition charges for having written a letter to the Prime Minster expressing concern over hate crimes. A journalist with Hindustar was killed for writing about the political leaders.

In Pakistan on the 29th of May 2011, a journalist of the Pakistan Bureau of the Asia times was abducted and killed. In Cambodia, the authorities revoked the license of Mohanokor Radio which broadcasts for Voice of America and Radio Free Asia. In Indonesia in March 2017, two French journalists were deported from Papua for a reporting that may have displeased the authorities. In Malaysia in April, 2017, the government threatened to withdraw the license of a Chinese language newspaper because of the publication of a satirical cartoon about the parliament’s debate on Islamic law.

In Myanmar in December, 2018, the police arrested two reporters for reporting on the violence of the security forces against the Rohingya people. They were charged for possessing leaked documents related to the security forces operations. In Thailand in March 2017, Voice TV, Spring News Radio, Peace TV, TV24 were forced to temporarily close operations because of their critical reporting against the government.

The violation of the freedom of press occurs when government prevents by force the reporting of unfavourable news. But, is the government’s sin of violating the right to free press always bad? Suppose that the press use the freedom of press to topple the good government. In such case, would it not be justified to restrict the freedom of press?

Take the case of South Korea. The government of Moon Jae-in did his best to free the Korean people from injustice committed by the corrupted conservative elite. Under Moon’s government, the press is completely free. But the press does everything to topple Moon’s government so that they can have a part of wealth stolen by the corrupt conservative elite group. To what extent should we allow the right to free press?

In many developed countries, the press abuse their freedom to promote the interests of corrupt privileged groups. Hence, we have to be careful before labelling certain countries for the violation of the freedom of press.

Persecution of human rights activists: The violation of the right to the promotion of human rights is another wrongdoing of many countries. In Cambodia in 2017, the government detained four senior staff member of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC). In August 2018, a Women’s Rights defender was arrested during “Black Monday”, day of protest for the release of five ADHOC members. She was sentenced to 30 years in prison. In August 2019, the Cambodian Ministry of Foreign Affairs closed the US-funded Democratic Institute and expulsed foreign staff members.

In Myanmar on January 1, 2017, a prominent Muslim lawyer, senior advisor to NLD (National League of Democracy under Aung Saan Suu Kyi) was shot to death. In Vietnam in 2017, 40 human rights activists were arrested under the National Security Law.

Racial/Religious Discrimination: In India in February 2020, the India Supreme Court ruled to evict two million people from tribal communities. In August 2020, the government of India published the National Registration of Citizens excluding three million people mostly Muslims. In Indonesia in March 2017, a Jakarta court handed down 5-year imprisonment to two leaders of non-Muslim religious community. On May 9, former Jakarta governor, a Christian, got 2-year prison life for blaspheming Islam.

In Malaysia in August 2018, the government has ordered to remove a statue of a woman with wings from a park for being atheist. In Myanmar, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and other non-Buddhist religions are threatened on a daily basis. In Vietnam, the Christian Church and Buddhist Temples are under constant surveillance.

The Violation of the Right to Assembly: In Malaysia, the Society Act requires that all organizations of 7 persons or more must register. In Thailand in August 2017, several academic people who attended the International Conference on the Thai Studies in the province of Chiang Mai were charged with the violation of NCPO (National Council for Peace and Order) policy.

On November 27, the Thai police dispersed peaceful protests in a province against the construction of a coal power plant. In Vietnam, no labour union is allowed; no assembly for human rights is allowed. In Singapore, public assembly is allowed only at predetermined place, namely Hong Lun Park, where the “speaker corner” is located; no foreigner is allowed.

Abduction: There are many cases of abduction without trace. In the Philippines in August 2016, a girl was abducted on her way to work with no trace.

In 2019 in Asia as a whole, there were 2,500 cases of enforced or involuntary disappearances. In Thailand in August 2004, it was found out that a Muslim lawyer disappeared since 1980.

Other Violations of Human Rights: There are cases of violations of the rights of children. For example, in Indonesia, thousands of children were working on tobacco fields risking exposure to pesticides.

Unlawful detention seems to be widespread. In Singapore, under the Internal Security Act and Criminal Laws, persons can be arrested and detained for unlimited period without any charge of judicial review. In Thailand, under the law of NCPO (National Council for Peace and Order) the military can detain for 7 days without charge and without a lawyer.

To sum up, the human race has been trying for centuries to promote and respect human rights. An impressive number of institutions and international agreements have been established in order to combat the violation of human rights. The UN has allocated an important amount of scarce resources to the protection of human rights. Furthermore, every country has some sort of mechanism created to uphold and improve human rights.

However, the reality is not encouraging. Every country is a victim of human rights violations.

It is perhaps inevitable as long as there is the strong and the weak; as long as there is the rich and the poor. It is human nature that the strong exploit the weak; the rich despise the poor.

Therefore, it is ridiculous to label a certain country as human rights violator. What we can do is to minimize the destructive effects of human rights violations. For this, we need more international cooperation and, especially, more binding laws.

*

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.

Dr. Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQAM) and member of the Study Center on Integration and Globalization (CEIM) of UQAM. 

He is Research Associate of the Center of Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from Tortilla con Sal

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Globalization of Human Rights Violations: “The Right to Live a Dignified and Decent Living”
  • 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.

***

The US and its allies are countering the re-emergence of China with a Sinophobic confection of new alliances (the AUKUS and the Quad), military threats, jingoism and false propaganda about a falsely claimed Uyghur Genocide in Xinjiang. The UK Uyghur Tribunal admits that there have been no mass killings in Xinjiang but absurdly asserts that application of globally-praised Chinese family planning in Xinjiang is “genocide”. However excellent health, infant mortality, maternal mortality, life expectancy, population growth, per capita GDP, education, literacy and birth rate outcomes in Xinjiang and China contradict Sinophobic US, UK and Australian claims of a Uyghur Genocide.

Below are some key relevant data on China and Xinjiang (42% Han Chinese, 58% ethnic minorities), and by way of comparison data for the US, UK, Australia, and Apartheid Israel (serial war criminal occupier countries), Indigenous Australians (socio-economically disadvantaged survivors of a 2-century Australian Aboriginal Genocide), Occupied Palestine and Occupied Afghanistan (war criminally occupied countries), and India, Pakistan and Bangladesh (major impoverished but democratic neighbours of China).

  • Annual population growth: 0.2% (Australia) 0.3% (China), 0.4% (the US), 0.6% (UK), 1.0% (Bangladesh), 1.0% (India), 1.8% (Apartheid Israel), 1.8% (Xinjiang), 2.0% (Pakistan), 2.1% (Indigenous Australians), 2.3% (Occupied Afghanistan), and 2.5% (Occupied Palestine).
  • Life expectancy in years: 83.9 (Australia), 83.5 (Apartheid Israel), 81.8 (UK), 79.1 (US), 77.5 (China), 74.7 (Xinjiang), 74.6 (Occupied Palestine), 73.6 (Indigenous Australians), 73.6 (Bangladesh), 70.4 (India), 67.8 (Pakistan), and 66.0 (Occupied Afghanistan).
  • Under-1 infant deaths per 1,000 births: 3 (Australia), 2.5 (Apartheid Israel), 3.5 (UK), 5.5 (US), 6 (Indigenous Australians), 6.8 (Xinjiang), 9 (China), 16.5 (Occupied Palestine), 24.5 (Bangladesh), 29.5 (India), 48.5 (Occupied Afghanistan), and 58.5 (Pakistan).
  • Under-5 infant deaths per 1,000 births: 3 (Apartheid Israel), 3.5 (Australia), 4 (UK), 7 (US), 7 (Indigenous Australians), 10.9 (Xinjiang), 11 (China), 19 (Occupied Palestine), 29 Bangladesh, 36 (India), 62.5 (Occupied Afghanistan), and 71.5 (Pakistan).
  • Maternal deaths per 100,000 births: 3 (Apartheid Israel), 6 (Australia), 7 (UK), 17.9 (Xinjiang), 19 (US), 20 (Indigenous Australians), 27 (Occupied Palestine), 29 (China), 140 (Pakistan), 145 (India), 173 (Bangladesh) and 638 (Occupied Afghanistan).
  • GDP per capita: $65,134 (US), $54,763 (Australia; perhaps about 2 times lower  for the socio-economically disadvantaged Indigenous Australians), $46,376 (Apartheid Israel), $41,855 (UK), $10,001 (China), $8,575 (Xinjiang),  $3,424 (Occupied Palestine), $2,116 (India), $1,846 (Bangladesh), $1,187 (Pakistan), and $470 (Afghanistan).
  • Adult literacy:  99.0%  (US), 99.0% (Australia), 99.0%  (UK), 97.1% (Apartheid Israel), 96.7% (Occupied Palestine), 96.4% (China), 96.3% (Xinjiang), 72.2% (India), 61.5% (Bangladesh), 56.4% (Pakistan), and 38.2% (Occupied Afghanistan).
  • Annual births per 1000 of population: 12.4  (US), 12.0 (Australia), 12.0  (UK), 12.1 (China; as per (1) higher for Uyghurs), 17.9 (Apartheid Israel), 18.6 (Bangladesh), 18.7 (India), 21.6 (Pakistan), 28.3 (Occupied Palestine), and 37.5 (Occupied Afghanistan).

These data show that Xinjiang is performing as well as or better than China in most of these parameters but has a much higher birth rate and population growth rate. Conversely, the shocking data on Indigenous Australians, Occupied  Palestine  and Occupied Afghanistan show that the genocidal Occupiers (Australia, Apartheid Israel and the US Alliance, respectively)  are grossly violating  Articles 55 and 56 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War (the Fourth Geneva Convention) that unequivocally state that the Occupiers are inescapably obliged to provide their conquered Subjects with life-sustaining food and medical requisites “to the fullest extent of the means available to them”.

A holocaust involves the deaths of a huge number of people. However genocide is precisely defined by Article 2 of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide thus:

“In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group”.

In Xinjiang there have been no mass killings or expulsions, and birth control policies are much less restrictive for Uyghurs than for Han Chinese. Deaths from violence and imposed deprivation total 2.2 million (the WW1 onwards Palestinian Genocide) and 6.7 million (the 2001 onwards Afghan Genocide; it is worsening under deadly US and US Alliance sanctions, and through the US crippling impoverished Afghanistan by freezing $9.5 billion in Afghan reserves).

Here is a shocking testament to massive lying by Western Mainstream journalist, editor, politician, academic and commentariat presstitutes – if you Google the terms “Uyghur Genocide”, “Palestinian Genocide” and “Afghan Genocide” you obtain the following results (deaths in brackets): 221,000 (“Uyghur Genocide”; 0 deaths), 11,200 (“Palestinian Genocide”; 2.2 million deaths) and 6,960 (“Afghan Genocide”; 6.7 million deaths). Similarly, searches of the mendacious ABC (the Australian taxpayer-funded equivalent of the mendacious UK BBC) for these terms yield the following results: 95 (for “Uyghur Genocide”), 0 (“Palestinian Genocide”) and 0 (“Afghan Genocide”).

The Sinophobic claims made by US and US Alliance politicians and propagandists of “genocide” in Xinjiang are patently false. China  can and indeed must be legitimately criticized for the one party state, air pollution, the death penalty, censorship, the surveillance state, harsh treatment of Uyghurs, Hong Kong pro-democracy activists, and dissidents in general, and the harshness of its de-radicalization measures and associated human rights abuses in Xinjiang. However set against those harsh treatments are avoidance of the entrenched deadly jihadi extremism found in Muslim countries from West Africa to South East Asia.  It should be noted that the China-threatening US has an appalling record of covertly supporting non-state terrorism (including jihadi non-state terrorism) from Latin America to South East Asia.

For a detailed and documented analysis see Gideon Polya, “Excellent Xinjiang Health, Growth & Education Outcomes Contradict Sinophobic US Lies”, Countercurrents, 16 January 2022. Peace is the only way but silence kills and silence is complicity. Please disseminate this to everyone you can.

*

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.

Dr Gideon Polya taught science students at La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia for 4 decades. He published some 130 works in a 5 decade scientific career, most recently a huge pharmacological reference text “Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds” (CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, New York & London , 2003).

Featured image is from United World International

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “False Propaganda” against China: Excellent Xinjiang Health Statistics vs US Alliance Lies
  • 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.

***

Over the past few months, U.S. lawmakers, the Afghan government, and the international community have called on Washington to stop strangling the Afghan economy as its people continue to suffer from a U.S.-created humanitarian crisis. On December 22nd, the Biden administration effectively rejected those calls, opting instead for half-measures that will do little to counter the effects of stringent economic sanctions imposed on the Taliban or to improve the material well-being of the Afghan people.

Sanctions in Context

Contrary to the narrative of U.S. politicians and journalists, the August 2021 withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan did not mark the end of the United States’ so-called “forever war” but rather a shift in U.S. policy—from direct military intervention and occupation to one based on economic sanctions and indirect political subversion. Although the tactics changed, the goal is the same: the accumulation of wealth and power through class warfare against the Afghan people.

Just days after Kabul fell to the Taliban on August 15th, Washington took measures to turn off the flow of funds to the new government and paralyze the Afghan banking system. The Treasury Department quickly issued a freeze order on nearly $9.5 billion of the Afghan Central Bank’s assets held in U.S. financial institutions, including the New York Federal Reserve Bank.

Although the Taliban was entitled to receive more than $460 million from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in currency reserves known as Special Drawing Rights, or SDRs, the U.S. directed the IMF to block those funds as well.

President Biden has also ensured that $1.3 billion of Afghan funds held in international accounts remain frozen, including funds denominated in euros and British pounds and those held by the Swiss-based Bank for International Sanctions.

People hold banners before marching on the street during a protest in Kabul on December 21, 2021, as the country struggles with a deep economic crisis. (Photo by Mohd RASFAN / AFP) (Photo by MOHD RASFAN/AFP via Getty Images)

Protests against U.S. sanctions outside U.S. embassy in Kabul. [Source: theintercept.com]

Notably, these punitive measures are in addition to the pre-existing economic sanctions that the U.S. has imposed on the Taliban, which began in 1999 under President Bill Clinton and which President George W. Bush ramped up following the 9/11 attack as part of the U.S.’s newly created counterterrorism sanctions program, known as the Specially Designated Global Terrorist list. The Obama and Trump administrations followed suit by imposing over 100 and 23 sanction orders, respectively, against Taliban-related targets.

Despite purported exemptions for humanitarian aid, the lack of clarity under U.S. law deters financial institutions from processing such transactions out of fear of violating U.S. sanctions—which not only freeze all assets associated with the Taliban; they subject any individual or entity that conducts a transaction involving the Taliban to criminal liability. The ubiquity of U.S. dollars and financial institutions in international commerce provides the U.S. with virtually global jurisdiction.

Horrific Consequences of Sanctions

Decades of U.S. occupation and war have left Afghanistan a poor country dependent on external sources to fund public spending. No longer able to rely on brute military and political force to protect the interests of Western capital in Afghanistan, U.S. strategists understand that seizing the central bank’s money and cutting all international aid gives Washington powerful leverage against the Taliban, all while inflicting maximum pain on the Afghan people, who continue to be relegated to “starving pawns in big power games.”

The horrific and totally foreseeable consequences of these sanctions have, so far, been well documented by international humanitarian organizations, even if they are reluctant to depict the United States as culpable.

On October 25th, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization and World Food Program published a report urging humanitarian assistance, warning that Afghanistan is on a “countdown to catastrophe.” According to the report, more than 50% of Afghans will face “crisis” or “emergency” levels of acute food insecurity, including over 3 million children under the age of five.

On November 22nd, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) published a report warning that Afghanistan’s financial and bank payment systems are “in disarray” and on the verge of collapse. The UNDP report, citing the IMF, predicts the Afghan economy could contract by 30% for 2021-2022.

A picture containing person, outdoor, people Description automatically generated

Afghanistan is teetering toward famine under Taliban rule. [Source: asiatimes.com]

On December 6th, the International Crisis Group issued a more scathing report, warning that the “hunger and destitution” caused by “economic strangulation,” imposed by the West in response to the Taliban takeover, could “kill more Afghans than all the bombs and bullets of the past two decades.”

In other words, U.S. policy of intentionally starving the Afghan people through economic sanctions on Afghanistan is going as planned. As many predicted, blocking funds from the Taliban and curtailing foreign aid and assistance would lead to a rapid financial meltdown and exacerbate the ongoing famine plaguing Afghanistan.

U.S. Retaliates for Taliban’s Military Success

Despite the Taliban’s success in forcing the U.S. government to the negotiating table in Doha and then ousting the U.S. military from Afghanistan, or rather, because of that success, Washington has made it clear that it has no plans to respect Afghanistan’s sovereignty. Indeed, the Biden administration’s response to pleas that the asset freeze be lifted demonstrates the hypocrisy and callousness of U.S. foreign policy.

On November 17, 2021, as reported by Tolo News, Mawlawi Amir Khan Muttaqi, Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, sent a letter to the U.S. Congress calling for the return of Afghan assets, correctly noting that “the fundamental challenge of our people is financial security, and the roots of this concern lead back to the freezing of assets of our people by the American government.”

The U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan, Thomas West, rejected the Taliban’s request in a series of revealing tweets. West’s remarks effectively admitted that the dire situation pre-dates the Taliban takeover and confirmed that the United States was preventing “critical” international aid from reaching Afghanistan as retribution for the Taliban’s military success, while recognizing that Afghanistan’s “economy [is] enormously dependent on aid, including for basic services.”

Further, in a fashion typical of bourgeois idealism, which values words and appearances over substance and material reality, West condescendingly lectured the Taliban that “[l]egitmacy and support must be earned” and confirmed that the United States would consider lifting the murderous sanctions if the Taliban only learned to “respect the rights of minorities, women and girls.”

The irony of Washington’s position of respecting humanitarian rights by denying humanitarian aid was not lost on Muttaqi, who, in response to West’s tweets, questioned the tortured logic: “The U.S. froze our assets and then told us that it will provide us humanitarian aid. What does it mean?” Muttaqi reiterated the demand to release Afghanistan’s assets: “The assets should be freed immediately. The Americans don’t have any military front with us now. What is the reason for freezing the assets? The assets don’t belong to the Mujahideen (Islamic Emirate) but to the people of Afghanistan.”

In tacit acknowledgment that the state needs legitimacy to stabilize its rule, the U.S.-driven humanitarian crisis has prompted members of Congress to ask the Biden administration to reconsider certain aspects of its sanctions policy in light of the dire warnings issued by the UNDP and World Food Program.

A picture containing person, child, outdoor, little Description automatically generated

Children collect food waste in dumpster near Kabul airport. [Source: English.aawsat.com]

On December 15th, a bipartisan group of 39 lawmakers wrote a letter to the State and Treasury departments calling on the Biden administration to “allow international financial institutions to inject the necessary economic capital into Afghanistan while avoiding the transfer of money to the Taliban-led government” and designate a “private Afghan or third-country bank” as a central bank. The lawmakers also recommended, among other things, the release of the $9.5 billion of Afghan assets—but only if sent “to an appropriate United Nations agency” and only if used “to pay teacher salaries and provide meals to children in schools, so long as girls can continue to attend.”

On December 20th, a group of 46 lawmakers led by House progressives wrote a similar letter to President Biden, explicitly linking the “U.S. confiscation of $9.4 billion” of Afghan assets to “contributing to soaring inflation” and “plunging the country…deeper into economic and humanitarian crisis.” Although the House progressives struck a harsher tone, they made the same requests as the December 19th letter, urging President Biden to allow Afghanistan’s central bank to access its reserves, consistent with proposals by “[c]urrent and former Afghan central bank officials appointed by the U.S.-supported government” and supported by “private sector associations such as the Afghan Chamber of Commerce and Investment and the Afghanistan Banks Association.”

This congressional pushback, tepid as it is, also reflects an inherent tension in the U.S. use of sanctions: While economic warfare is a necessary tool of U.S. foreign policy, sanctions are not always good for business in the short term. Afghanistan had been a source of wealth for the imperialist bourgeoise for the past two decades, and now certain sectors of the capitalist class apparently want back in.

Still, the Biden administration has shown no sign of easing the sanctions. In fact, the Biden administration is considering permanently depriving the Afghan people of the funds needed to combat the current humanitarian crisis, by transferring those funds instead to U.S. plaintiffs with outstanding default judgments against the Taliban. That is what two groups of judgment creditors have argued to U.S. federal judges. (Those cases are captioned Havlish et al. v. Bin-Laden et al., No. 03 Civ. 9848, and Doe v. The Taliban et al., No. 20 Misc. 740, and are pending in the Southern District of New York before Judges Daniels and Failla, respectively.)

Although its formal statement is not due until January 18, 2022, the Biden administration seems willing to go along with the plan—the only apparent obstacle is how to seize the Afghan funds without recognizing the Taliban as the legitimate Afghan government. Press Secretary Jen Psaki has twice cited that ongoing litigation as the primary reason for maintaining the asset freeze.

Following its imperial playbook, the U.S. sanctions imposed on Afghanistan are aimed at destabilizing Afghan civil society, making daily life so unbearable that the Afghan people eventually blame the Taliban for their misery, providing the United States and its proxies an opening to enact regime change.

Similar to sanctions imposed on Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Zimbabwe, Eritrea, Nicaragua, and many others, the sanctions on Afghanistan are having their intended effect, which is to deprive the masses of essential goods and services as punishment whenever a government refuses to surrender its nation’s resources and sovereignty to the demands of U.S. and European capital.

Now more than ever, those in the imperial core must demand the end of U.S.-imposed sanctions against the Afghan people and oppressed people all over the world.

*

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.

Zachary Scott is an attorney, activist, and member of Black Alliance for Peace Solidarity Network and the Sanctions Kill coalition. He can be reached at: [email protected].

Featured image is from theintercept.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.

***

 

Threats that Washington could impose sanctions directly on Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a demonstration of American strength and capability, but rather a demonstration of desperation. If such sanctions were passed and implemented, it will lead to a serious deterioration of relations between the US and Russia and, possibly, even a severing of ties.

Senior Democratic senators, led by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez, unveiled a fresh package of sanctions last week to target Putin and other high-ranking Russian officials – if Washington determines that Russia started a war with Ukraine.

It could be speculated that this is really about trying to stop the Nord Stream 2 Pipeline project that will deliver Russian gas to Germany and other parts of Europe.

 

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov warned that sanctions on Putin are “an unprecedented measure tantamount to severing ties.” Although such an action by the US would be drastic, news of possible sanctions, especially at a time when security negotiations were underway last week between Russia and the US/OSCE, should be seen as a desperate attempt to pressure Moscow into submission.

Perhaps the threats were made to strengthen the American negotiating position during last week’s discussions. There is nothing particularly new about sanction threats against Russia, except now the emphasis has been placed on personal sanctions on Putin. This is being spearheaded by the anti-Russian lobby linked to the part of the Democratic Party that is unhappy with what they perceive to be President Joe Biden’s soft policy towards Russia.

Another problematic aspect is what kind of sanctions the Americans might be able to impose on the Russian president given that he has no assets or bank accounts in the West. Since no one publicly knows what sanctions US senators have devised, it is likely the sanction threats against Putin were empty given in the hope of strengthening US negotiating power with Moscow. This does not negate though that the US could sanction other individuals or perhaps even the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

In addition, new sanctions are being prepared in case the situation escalates in Ukraine. This is despite the fact that Moscow insists it has no intention of invading Ukraine. This has not stopped the US from disseminating disinformation, with the latest being that Russia has been “laying the groundwork to have the option of fabricating a pretext for invasion” by blaming Ukraine.

“We have information that indicates Russia has already prepositioned a group of operatives to conduct a false-flag operation in eastern Ukraine,” said Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary on Friday.

Despite Russia desperately trying to avoid war, the US is painting a picture that the country is nefariously seeking ways to justify an invasion of Ukraine. Given the US’ long history of false flag operations, perhaps Ukrainian provocations are being prepared to be presented as a Russian false flag operation to justify sanctions and perhaps coerce Russia into a destructive and costly war.

The sanctions proposed by the Democrats could also include the prime minister, the foreign minister, the defence minister, the chief of staff of the Armed Forces and other military figures. Sanctions could also target key banks and the SWIFT system. Washington believes that such threats send a clear signal about its readiness to devastate the Russian economy.

None-the-less, if there really is a desire to reduce tensions, then Washington should speak the language of diplomacy and not of threats that can be considered a brazen and cynical method to trade on what is needed and important to the US side in the negotiations. However, it was for this very reason that controlled leaks during last week’s negotiations sent the message that sanctions have been prepared if Russia does not capitulate to American demands.

Sanctions undoubtedly affect the Russian economy, but it certainly has not destroyed it. Take for example the fact that Russia used to be an importer of agricultural products, but today it is a major exporter despite sanctions. The same could happen in other sectors of the economy where sanctions could be imposed.

In this way, threats of strengthened sanctions, especially against Putin, is nothing more than a desperate attempt to force Russia into capitulation and abandon the humanitarian situation in Ukraine and the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. As Moscow will not capitulate or be dragged into war with Ukraine, the biggest threat is not whether Washington will impose strengthened sanctions against Russia, but if it is preparing a false flag operation in Ukraine to blame the Kremlin.

*

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.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst and a frequent contributor to Global Research

Featured image is from OneWorld

Who Will be the Next King of Saudi Arabia?

January 19th, 2022 by Steven Sahiounie

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has jailed everyone who poses a threat to his path to becoming King. King Salman’s brother, his brother’s son, Mohammed bin Nayef, and two sons of the previous monarch, King Abdullah, remain under arrest, while a Princess was released from prison recently.

King Abdullah died on January 23, 2015, and the throne passed to Salman, one of the two living sons of the founder of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz Al Saud, while on the same day King Salman named Muhammed bin Nayef as the Crown prince.

Salman’s younger full brother, Prince Ahmad bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, is the other son of the founder of Saudi Arabia.

In March 2020, Prince Ahmad was detained in Saudi Arabia in what can be termed as house arrest after returning from London, with assurances that he would be free.

The government of King Salman is solely run by Crown Prince Mohammed, his young son, otherwise known as MBS.  It was MBS who issued the orders to arrest his Uncle, Prince Ahmad, and the former Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Nayef, his cousin.

Both Prince Ahmad and Prince Mohammed bin Nayef received their higher education in America, and both had formerly held the position of Minister of the Interior.

Prince Ahmad opposed MBS becoming Crown Prince, while Mohammed bin Nayef held the position in 2017. Prince Ahmad sits on a Royal family body which is charged with the approval of the accession to the throne of Saudi Arabia.

In February 2017, Mike Pompeo, as head of the CIA, awarded Mohammed bin Nayef the George Tenet Medal in recognition of his “excellent intelligence performance, in the domain of counter-terrorism”.

On 21 June 2017, Crown Prince Muhammed bin Nayef was replaced as the heir to the Saudi Kingdom by MBS in a move considered to be “upending decades of royal custom and profoundly reordering the kingdom’s inner power structure.”

He also lost his position as interior minister. He had been crown prince and first deputy prime minister of Saudi Arabia from 2015 to 2017 and the minister of interior from 2012 to 2017.

Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst, and counter-terrorism expert served for 29 years until his retirement in 2006.  He recalled Vice President Al Gore’s visit to Saudi Arabia in May 1998, when Prince Mohammed bin Nayef and his father Prince Nayef had prevented a plot by Al Qaeda to attack the US consulate in Jeddah while Gore was there.

Riedel said of Mohammed bin Nayef’s imprisonment, “He has not faced any judicial process that we know of. The charge of treason is absurd. He is in prison because he is the symbol of a viable, competent alternative to the reckless and dangerous crown prince. Mohammed bin Salman wants to eliminate the leading candidate for leading Saudi Arabia away from its current perilous course and back to being a responsible partner. The Biden team, especially its new intelligence leadership, should press for MBN’s freedom.”

In November 2017, MBS ordered his relatives to be rounded up like criminals and locked up dozens of Princes at the luxurious Ritz Carlton Hotel in Riyadh. MBS billed the shake-down as an anti-corruption operation while draining his relatives of much of their money.

On June 21, 2018, Ben Hubbard, NYT journalist and author, received an Arabic text message on his cellphone which looked suspicious.  After consulting with technology researchers at Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto’s Munk School, it was confirmed that Hubbard was the first US journalist targeted by powerful software sold by NSO Group, an Israeli company, and deployed by hackers working for Saudi Arabia.

Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon and the Washington Post, had similarly been hacked by the same Pegasus software on orders from MBS, in an intimidation tactic for the Washington Post’s reporting that their journalist, Jamal Khashoggi had been executed in 2018 on orders of MBS.

Agnes Callamard, the United Nations special rapporteur on summary executions and extrajudicial killings, and Gina Haspel, the head of the CIA, both concluded that the order to murder Khashoggi came from MBS.

In March 2020, Muhammed bin Nayef was arrested along with his Uncle Prince Ahmed. The move to arrest the former Crown prince along with the younger brother of King Salman was an obvious tactic to remove potential rivals to the future succession to the throne after the current King Salman should die.  MBS wants to secure his seat on the throne of the only absolute monarchy.

The Wall Street Journal reported there were claims made by Saudi authorities that the two men were plotting a coup against King Salman and his son MBS, but no proof was offered.

Mohammed bin Nayef was at first held in solitary confinement, deprived of sleep, and suspended upside down by his ankles, which has left him permanently unable to walk without a cane. He is kept alone with no television or other electronic devices and receives only limited visits from his family. In the fall of 2021, he was moved to a villa inside the complex surrounding King Salman’s Al-Yamamah Palace in Riyadh.

Besides Muhammed bin Nayef’s success in counter-terrorism and his educational background, he was seen as among the staunchest supporters of the US among the Saudi royals, as was his Uncle Prince Ahmed.  Experts believe this is a further factor why MBS targeted the two for arrest.  MBS is said to harbor disdain for the US and wants to move away from being dependent on Washington.  Trump’s famous speech about the US being the only thing holding the Saudi King on his throne reinforced MBS’s resolve to distance the royal family from the US.

Earlier this month, it was reported Princess Basmah, daughter of Saud, the son of the founder of Saudi Arabia, was released from prison after three years of detention without charges.  She would be the niece of both King Salman and Prince Ahmed.

Her daughter, Suhoud al-Sharif, was also released from Al-Ha’ir prison. The mother-daughter pair’s arrest came in March 2019 after Princess Basmah had planned a trip to Switzerland to receive treatment for a heart ailment.

Princess Basmah had been an outspoken critic of the Saudi treatment of women’s issues.  But, experts also point to the fact she was an ally of Mohammed bin Nayef as being another reason MBS locked her up.

While speaking to BBC Arabic in 2018, Princess Basmah accused MBS of refusing to accept those who did not support his overhaul plans, known as Vision 2030.  “He has a vision, Vision 2030, and I see that in that vision, there is a direction toward a type of isolation of all those who do not agree with that vision,” she said.

The future King of Saudi Arabia may want to keep his distance from Washington, but that doesn’t mean that the US isn’t interested in who takes up the throne in the kingdom in the sand.

*

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.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Who Will be the Next King of Saudi Arabia?
  • Tags:

Arise, Pandemic Profiteers

January 19th, 2022 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

History’s annals are filled with war profiteers and hustlers for the opportunistic return.  They come in the form of hoarders, arms manufacturers and wily business folk making a steal on slaughter and mayhem.  But the other conflict – that of battling a pandemic – has also shown that profits exist for those willing to exploit the crisis.

With the global surge of SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, there were early signs that saving money, notably for large corporations, and earning greater revenue from such a lethal crisis, was possible.  Work remotely as Zoom zombies – if you can.  Retreat to the second or third abode, preferably in a remote location – if you have them.  The sardine-packed proles toiling and providing essential services could endure the heavier burden of suffering.

Other historical periods also suggest sharp social inequalities in the face of disease and despair.   That sublime Italian writer, Giovanni Boccaccio, who wrote The Decameron, a collection of 100 tales, gives us more than just a bird’s eye view into the horror of plague and affliction.  The Black Death gathered somewhere between 40% to 50% of the European populace between 1347 and 1351.  While Boccaccio cites the proverb that, “It is inherently human to show pity to those who are afflicted”, his colourful spread of characters suggests something quite different.  The wealthy find fine seclusion amidst their provisions; the essential workers of the time go about their doomed labours, contracting the plague and dying in the process.

In October 2021, Americans for Tax Fairness and the Institute for Policy Studies Program on Inequality (IPS) found that billionaires in the US had seen their wealth balloon by 70%, or a mighty $2.1 trillion.  The number of billionaires in the country had also spiked: from 614 to 745.  During that same time, there were 89 million job losses among the less fortunate, 44.9 million attributable to COVID-19 illness, not to mention 724,000 deaths.

The culprits for such a huge wealth distortion are now familiar to us.  The burgeoning online market during times of lockdown and stay-at-home orders enormously enriched the megalomaniacs of Silicon Valley and other industries.

There were some in the same income bracket who did not even need to lift a finger before seeing eye-wateringly improved accounts; asset prices shot up with jittery regularity, occasioned by enormous injections of taxpayer cash.  In some cases, with the knowledge of government financial support, figures such as Australian billionaire Kerry Stokes could rake in corporate welfare while cutting the wages of workers.  The spirit of pandemic generosity is rarely invoked.

In December 2021, the World Inequality Report, authored by a number of social scientists, estimated that the share of global household wealth owned by billionaires had risen that year from 2% at the start of the pandemic to 3.5% that year.  “Contemporary global inequalities,” the authors of the report suggest, “are close to early 20th century levels, at the peak of Western imperialism.”

The one ray of reassurance in the otherwise discouraging report is the fact that government support, notably in wealthier states, did mitigate the more brutal effects of impoverishment.  As lead author of the report, Lucas Chancel remarks, “in rich countries, government intervention prevented a massive rise in poverty”.  The pandemic had demonstrated “the importance of social states in the fight against poverty.”

Oxfam has now added more material to the heaving shelves of inequality with a report released to coincide with that gathering of wealthy natterers known as the World Economic Forum.  Not a smidgen of Oxfam’s dark revelations are original, but this does not make them any less relevant.  The picture, filled in, shows a world of brutal, stratified inequality that promises to grow.

The opening is dramatic enough. “The wealth of the world’s 10 richest men has doubled since the pandemic began.  The incomes of 99% of humanity are worse off because of COVID-19.”  Good to throw the men into this, but it is also worth noting that there are some worthy representatives of the female sex, not least Australia’s wealthiest figure, iron ore magnate Gina Rinehart.  This most unsympathetic of characters saw her own wealth soar from AU$16 billion to AU$36 billion.  Not a bad return for someone who specialises in ruthlessly renting the earth while attributing this to hard work and genetic ingenuity.

All in all, 2,755 billionaires are raking it in globally, having received more in terms of their fortunes in the past two years than the previous 14 combined.  “This is the biggest annual increase in billionaire wealth since records began,” the Oxfam report notes glumly.  No wonder the hot-headed conspiracy theorists are champing at the bit, feverish at the prospect that plots have been hatched, and are being acted upon, in Davos and other champagne drenched venues.

The Oxfam account adds more texture to the arguments.  As with other accounts about the increasing wealth disparity in pandemic times, the rise in revenues have occurred because of dizzying rises in stock market prices, “a boom of unregulated entities,” a greater prevalence of monopoly power, ongoing privatisation and that ongoing pattern of lower corporate tax rates and easing regulations.  Workers’ rights and wages have also suffered, though Oxfam also makes the point that “the weaponization of racism” has its role to play.

Another parallel of the Black Death is worthy of note.  The plague was so disruptive as to cause its own alterations of the feudal order.  The wealthy might have scurried to their places of ornate and padded seclusion, but they were by no means guaranteed survival.  Around them, aggressive depopulation fed the fulcrum of change.  It emboldened the peasantry, resulting in a range of riots and a challenge to social and economic circumstances.

The likes of Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg have yet to see a modern version of a peasant insurrection.  Perhaps it’s time they did.

*

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.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Arise, Pandemic Profiteers

Myocarditis Tops List of COVID Vaccine Injuries Among 12- to 17-Year-Olds, VAERS Data Show

By Megan Redshaw, January 18, 2022

Of the 9,936 U.S. deaths reported as of Jan. 7, 19% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

The US Plan of an Afghanistan Inside Europe

By Manlio Dinucci, January 19, 2022

Soldiers in war gear and armored fighting vehicles have been deployed by Sweden on Gotland, the island in the Baltic Sea 90 km from its eastern coasts. The Ministry of Defense declares that it has done so in order to defend the island from threatening Russian landing ships crossing the Baltic Sea.

Dr. Meryl Nass: My Side of the Story, and the Constitutional protections that I believe are being abridged by the Misinformation Witch Hunt

By Dr. Meryl Nass, January 18, 2022

States and state agencies are not allowed to abridge these rights, which have been granted to all US citizens.  However, my state’s Medical Board is trying hard to abridge them.  The Board has apparently realized they do not have the evidence to convict me of anything, so they are now going on a fishing expedition, asking for a list of every patient I have seen during the past six months, and much more.

Up to 65% Increase in Deaths Among 18-49 Year Olds in the U.S. During 2021, the Year of the Experimental COVID “Vaccines”

By Brian Shilhavy, January 18, 2022

Earlier this month (January, 2022), Scott Davison, the CEO of OneAmerica, a $100 billion insurance company based out of Indiana, made headline news in the Alternative Media when he announced that the death rate on life insurance claims skyrocketed an unprecedented 40% among those between the ages of 18 and 64 in 2021.

In Kathmandu, a Struggle for Water Amid Worsening Floods

By Johan Augustin, January 18, 2022

Stuffed garbage bags float gently down the Bisnumati River in the western part of Kathmandu. The river, sacred to Nepal’s Hindu and Buddhist populations, is one of the main waterways running through the Kathmandu Valley. Brownish water empties from pipes directly into the river: unfiltered sewage from households and factories.

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich: Latest Bombshell About COVID “Vaccines” Will Dismantle Big Pharma

By Planet Today, Reiner Fuellmich, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, and Kevin Hughes, January 18, 2022

International trial lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich said on Dec. 31 that the latest “bombshell” about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines will dismantle the big pharmaceutical companies that have pocketed billions of dollars during the pandemic.

As Protests Erupt, Some Countries Backtrack on COVID Mandates While Others Double Down

By Michael Nevradakis, January 18, 2022

As protests grow in EU countries and worldwide against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and so-called “vaccine passports,” some countries appear to be backtracking or at least harboring second thoughts about enforcing such measures, while others are digging in their heels and moving forward with punitive restrictions on the unvaccinated.

Cyberspace Close to Become New Focus for NATO-Ukraine Joint Actions Against Russia

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, January 18, 2022

Once again, the West seems to be creating arguments to justify the implementation of coercive measures against Russia. A cyberattack against Kiev allegedly occurred last week has been making headlines around the world. Now, the Ukrainian government claims to have proof that the attack has Russian involvement – although no details have been provided so far as to what such “proof” would be.

The Dollar Has Entered a Death Spiral, and a Lot More Inflation Is on the Way

By Michael Snyder, January 18, 2022

Did anyone out there actually expect things to turn out differently?  When the federal government kept borrowing and spending trillions upon trillions of dollars that we did not have, we were warned that this day was coming.  And when the Federal Reserve kept pumping trillions upon trillions of fresh dollars into our financial system, we were warned that this day was coming.

“No Dialogue Has Begun. Washington Could Not Care Less About Russia’s Security Concern.”

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts and GEOFOR, January 18, 2022

Russians are always looking for a silver lining, this time that the US condescended to talk with Russia on equal terms.  The US did no such thing. Washington used the talks to elevate the propaganda against Russia as, for example, Undersecretary of State Nuland’s denunciation of Russia.

Get Well Soon Rocco Galati!

By WholeHearted Media, January 18, 2022

It took some time but we finally finished editing the “Knowledge is Liberating” course put on in the summer time with Rocco. The course is jam packed with info and real life scenarios. Many people were asking where they could access it. Pls go to WholeHeartedmedia.ca and click on courses for more info or follow this link.

Confirmed: COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Can Cause Severe Liver Damage

By Paul Anthony Taylor, January 18, 2022

A recent Letter to the Editor published on the Journal of Hepatology website adds to the growing evidence that the mRNA vaccines used against COVID-19 can cause severe liver damage. Entitled ‘Immune-mediated hepatitis with the Moderna vaccine, no longer a coincidence but confirmed’, the letter – written by four hospital doctors from the UK – summarizes the case history of a patient who received two doses of the vaccine.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Myocarditis Tops List of COVID Vaccine Injuries Among 12- to 17-Year-Olds, VAERS Data Show

The US Plan of an Afghanistan Inside Europe

January 19th, 2022 by Manlio Dinucci

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Soldiers in war gear and armored fighting vehicles have been deployed by Sweden on Gotland, the island in the Baltic Sea 90 km from its eastern coasts. The Ministry of Defense declares that it has done so in order to defend the island from threatening Russian landing ships crossing the Baltic Sea. Thus Sweden also contributes, as a partner, to the frantic US-NATO campaign which, inverting reality, presents Russia as an aggressive power preparing to invade Europe.

130 km east of Gotland, Latvia is on alert, together with Lithuania and Estonia, against the invented enemy that is about to invade. As a “defense against the Russian threat”, NATO has deployed four multinational battalions in the three Baltic republics and in Poland. Italy participates in the one in Latvia, with hundreds of soldiers and armored vehicles.

Italy is also the only country that has participated in all NATO “air police” missions, from bases in Lithuania and Estonia, and the first that has used F-35 fighters to intercept Russian aircraft in flight in the international air corridor over the Baltic. The F-35 and other fighter jets, deployed in this region close to Russian territory, are aircraft with dual conventional and nuclear capabilities.

However, the three Baltic republics do not feel sufficiently “protected by NATO’s enhanced advanced presence.” The Latvian Minister of Defence, Artis Pabriks, has requested a permanent US military presence in his country: the US forces – experts explain according to a Hollywood-movie scenario – would not be in time to arrive from Germany to stop the Russian armoured forces that, after having overwhelmed the three Baltic republics, would cut them off from the European Union and NATO, occupying the Suwalki corridor between Poland and Lithuania.

Ukraine, a partner but in fact already a member of NATO, has the role of the first actor as a country under attack. The government denounces, on its word of honor, that it has been hit by a cyber attack, attributed of course to Russia, and NATO rushes, together with the EU, to help Ukraine fight the cyber war. Washington denounces that Ukraine is now surrounded on three sides by Russian forces and, in anticipation of the blockage of Russian gas supplies to Europe, is generously preparing to replace them with massive supplies of US-made liquid natural gas.

The Russian attack – informs the White House on the basis of news whose veracity is guaranteed by the CIA – would be prepared by a false flag operation: Russian agents, infiltrated in eastern Ukraine, would carry out bloody attacks against the Russian inhabitants of the Donbass, attributing the responsibility to Kiev as a pretext for the invasion. The White House does not remember that in December the Russian Minister of Defense, Sergei Shoigu, had denounced the presence in eastern Ukraine of US mercenaries with chemical weapons.

The United States – reports the New York Times – have told the Allies that “any quick Russian victory in Ukraine would be followed by a bloody insurgency similar to the one that forced the Soviet Union to withdraw from Afghanistan” and that “the CIA (secretly) and the Pentagon (openly) would resist”. The United States – recalls James Stavridis, former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe – know how to do it: at the end of the seventies and in the eighties they armed and charged the mujahidin against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan, but “the level of US military support to a Ukrainian insurrection would make appear as a trifle what we did in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union”.

What Washington’s strategic design is evident: to precipitate the Ukrainian crisis, deliberately provoked in 2014, to force Russia to intervene militarily in defense of the Russians in the Donbass, ending up in a situation similar to the Afghan one in which the USSR got bogged down. An Afghanistan inside Europe, which would cause a permanent state of crisis, to the benefit of the U.S., which would strengthen its influence and presence in the region.

*

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.

This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from Stars and Stripes

The Constitutional amendments I have excerpted below are the premier law of the land. 

States and state agencies are not allowed to abridge these rights, which have been granted to all US citizens.  However, my state’s Medical Board is trying hard to abridge them.  The Board has apparently realized they do not have the evidence to convict me of anything, so they are now going on a fishing expedition, asking for a list of every patient I have seen during the past six months, and much more.

The reason my story has gotten so much press is because the Board ordered a neuropsychological evaluation of me–which leads to mandatory reporting to a national physician database, and makes my case accessible to the media.

Since the Maine Medical Board wanted to “out” me publicly, I feel no compunction about telling my side of the story to the public, and I will continue to do so.

For those who feel there must be a fire where there is smoke, and that I may in fact be a danger to my patients, I would like you to know my history and the facts as I see them.  I was probably one of the safest and most careful physicians in the state:

1.  There has not been a single complaint to the Board by a patient in this case.  Not one.

2.  I have never been accused or charged with malpractice, in 41 years of practicing medicine.

3.  I have only ever had one complaint to a Medical Board, about 15 years ago, and the complainant apologized to me after the investigation, once he learned my treatment was excellent. The Board found in my favor then.

4.  I am well known for successfully treating very challenging cases of chronic, undiagnosed illnesses.

5.  I am listed in Who’d Who in America and Who’s Who in the World for my accomplishments, which included the first scientific analysis of an epidemic that proved it was due to biological warfare.

6.  I have spent most of my career trying to serve patients who were ‘left behind’ by the prevailing medical system. This included soldiers being forced to receive a dangerous anthrax vaccine, and those who were injured by it; veterans with Gulf War syndrome; patients with chronic fatigue syndrome; with Lyme disease; and patients with puzzling illnesses that other doctors were unable to diagnose and/or treat.  I pivoted my practice to focus on the best care of COVID precisely because other doctors failed to prescribe treatments that would keep the vast majority of patients out of the hospital.

7.  I charged a one-time fee of $60 to treat COVID–this included as much treatment as needed for no additional cost.  I am flabbergasted that the Board is criticizing my charting of many text messages, phone calls and emails, and calling them “telemedicine visits” as if each one deserved a history and physical.  Don’t other doctors chat briefly with their patients outside the office any more?

I spoke to patients nights and weekends, and made brief notes of these many encounters, which I think is exactly what other doctors do.  The Board has tried to turn my exemplary care of patients and one missed phone call (the doc had left the hospital when I called back) into a charge of negligence.  And then into a charge of cognitive decline or psychiatric illness.

It seems that if you do not support vaccinations that the CEOs of Pfizer and BioNTech have now deemed practically worthless, and you treat patients with usually effective, legal medicines like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, then you must be stopped, whatever it takes.

And what about the patients who want their COVID treated with methods other than those prescribed by the NIH of Tony Fauci, Francis Collins and Lawrence Tabak,* all of whom conspired to cover up the lab origin of COVID and furthermore ‘take down’ the esteemed physicians who wrote the Great Barrington Declaration? In other words, unindicted criminals are responsible for our government-authorized COVID treatments. 

What is the Board doing to serve these patients?

The Board wants to cut off these patients’ access to cheap, safe and effective COVID medicines, and deny them any choice.  It even wants to cut off their access to treatment information.

I do not intend to roll over while the Board trashes the First Amendment, imposes government-designated medical care on patients, and destroys the sacred bond between patients and their physicians.

Meryl Nass

*Tony Fauci is the Director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Francis Collins just stepped down as the Director of the National Institutes of Health.

Lawrence Tabak is the current Acting Director of the National Institutes of Health.

All three are shown in numerous emails to have covered up the role of the NIH in funding research in Wuhan through a pass-through organization, created a fake scientific paper designed to kill the lab origin hypothesis (without disclosing their role), and worked to get articles published to destroy the Great Barrington Declaration and its 3 prominent authors.  Fauci has also perjured himself to Congress on multiple occasions.

AMENDMENT I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

AMENDMENT IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

AMENDMENT XIV – Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dr. Meryl Nass: My Side of the Story, and the Constitutional protections that I believe are being abridged by the Misinformation Witch Hunt

All Global Research articles 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 (January, 2022), Scott Davison, the CEO of OneAmerica, a $100 billion insurance company based out of Indiana, made headline news in the Alternative Media when he announced that the death rate on life insurance claims skyrocketed an unprecedented 40% among those between the ages of 18 and 64 in 2021.

See: Crisis in America: Deaths Up 40% Among Those Aged 18-64 Based on Life Insurance Claims for 2021 After COVID-19 Vaccine Roll Outs

The usual corporate media “fact checkers” quickly published articles trying to contain the damage, and I received a few emails from gullible people who don’t bother researching things for themselves and didn’t bother to fact check the “fact checkers” to see if in fact they actually did debunk the story.

They didn’t, of course, but in typical fashion they setup a straw man to knock down in most cases, by stating that Scott Davison never blamed the excess in deaths on the roll out of the COVID-19 shots in 2021.

But that hardly debunks the numbers from the life insurance industry that was truly a major news story, clearly showing that deaths dramatically increased in 2021, the year of the COVID-19 experimental “vaccine” roll out.

I did my own investigation to corroborate what he was reporting, and examined the number of deaths the CDC was reporting through December, 2020, before they revised their website and changed the total number of people who died in 2020, the year the pandemic scam started, which clearly showed that total deaths in 2020 were about the same as the previous two years, and that all they basically did was eliminate most of the flu deaths and blame those on COVID-19.

The result of this investigation was that we saw about an additional 400,000 deaths in 2021, the year of the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out. See: 2021: COVID Deaths Increase, Flu Deaths Disappear, 400,000+ More Total Deaths than 2020

Since publishing that report, Petr Svab of the Epoch Times has also done an investigation on this issue, looking at death certificates from the CDC website of people between the age of 18 and 49 in 2021.

He examined the data by state, and he found that in some states the deaths in this age group had increased by as much as 65% compared to the same period in 2018 and 2019.

Here are the two articles he published that report this:

EXCLUSIVE: Nationwide Surge In Deaths Among People Aged 18-49: A State by State Overview and EXCLUSIVE: States Investigating Surge in Mortality Rate Among 18–49-Year-Olds, Majority Unrelated to COVID-19

If you hit a pay wall, ZeroHedge News has also published them:

Nationwide Surge In Deaths Among People Aged 18-49: A State By State Overview and

States Investigating Surge In Mortality Rate Among 18–49-Year-Olds, Majority Unrelated To COVID-19

Some excerpts:

Deaths among people aged 18 to 49 increased more than 40 percent in the 12 months ending October 2021 compared to the same period in 2018–2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic, according to an analysis of death certificate data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) by The Epoch Times.

The increase was notable across the country and in no state was COVID reported in more than 60 percent of the excess deaths. Some states experienced much steeper hikes than others.

Nevada was the worst with a 65 percent prime-age mortality surge of which only 36 percent was attributed to COVID. Texas was second with a 61 percent jump of which 58 percent was attributed to COVID. Arizona and Tennessee recorded 57 percent increases with 37 percent and 33 percent attributed to COVID respectively. Not far behind was California at 55 percent and 42 percent attributed to COVID as well as New Mexico (52 percent, 33 percent), Florida (51 percent, 48 percent), and Louisiana (51 percent, 32 percent).

Health departments in several states confirmed to The Epoch Times that they are looking into a steep surge in the mortality rate for people aged 18 to 49 in 2021—a majority of which are not linked to COVID-19.

Texas saw the 18 to 49 age mortality jump 61 percent, the second-highest increase in the country. Of that, less than 58 percent was attributed to COVID-19.

“Our Center of Health Statistics is looking at the data,” said Chris Van Deusen, the head of Media Relations at the Texas Department of State Health Services, via email. “We’ll get back with you.”

Florida, which saw an increase of 51 percent, 48 percent of that attributed to COVID-19, is also probing the matter.

I am looking into it to see if there is some sort of correlation/causation,” said Jeremy Redfern, spokesman for the Florida Department of Health via email.

Petr Svab was careful to not link or blame the excess in deaths to the COVID-19 shots, probably to try and avoid the same “fact checkers” trying to discredit his investigation.

But the correlation to the COVID-19 shots now is irrefutable, just from using the U.S. Government’s own data from the CDC, and also from the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).

This is a national catastrophe of the magnitude that this nation has never before faced, and the total collapse of the United States now seems inevitable.

*

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

Featured image is from HIN

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Farmer’s Movement in India: Looking at the Larger Picture

In Kathmandu, a Struggle for Water Amid Worsening Floods

January 18th, 2022 by Johan Augustin

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on In Kathmandu, a Struggle for Water Amid Worsening Floods

Il piano Usa di un Afghanistan dentro l’Europa

January 18th, 2022 by Manlio Dinucci

Soldati in assetto di guerra e veicoli corazzati da combattimento sono stati schierati dalla Svezia su Gotland, l’isola nel Mar Baltico a 90 km dalle sue coste orientali. Il ministero della Difesa dichiara che lo ha fatto per difendere l’isola da minacciose navi da sbarco russe che incrociano nel Mar Baltico. Così anche la Svezia contribuisce, in veste di partner, alla frenetica campagna Usa-Nato che, rovesciando la realtà, presenta la Russia quale potenza aggressiva che si prepara a invadere l’Europa. A 130 km a est di Gotland, la Lettonia è in stato di allerta, insieme a Lituania ed Estonia, contro il nemico inventato che starebbe per invaderla. Quale «difesa contro la minaccia russa», la Nato la schierato nelle tre repubbliche baltiche e in Polonia quattro battaglioni multinazionali.

A quello in Lettonia partecipa l’Italia, con centinaia di soldati e mezzi corazzati. L’Italia è inoltre l’unico paese che ha partecipato a tutte le missioni di «polizia aerea» della Nato, da basi in Lituania ed Estonia, e il primo che ha usato caccia F-35 per intercettare aerei russi in volo nel corridoio aereo internazionale sul Baltico. Gli F-35 e altri caccia, schierati in questa regione a ridosso del territorio russo, sono aerei a duplice capacità convenzionale e nucleare. Le tre repubbliche baltiche non si sentono però abbastanza «protette dalla presenza avanzata rafforzata della Nato».

Il ministro lettone della Difesa, Artis Pabriks, ha richiesto una presenza militare Usa permanente nel suo paese: le forze Usa – spiegano gli esperti in base a uno scenario da film hollywoodiano – non farebbero in tempo ad arrivare dalla Germania per fermare le forze corazzate russe che, dopo aver travolto le tre repubbliche baltiche, le taglierebbero fuori dall’Unione europea e dalla Nato, occupando il corridoio di Suwalki tra Polonia e Lituania. L’Ucraina, partner ma di fatto già membro della Nato, ha il ruolo di primo attore quale paese aggredito. Il governo denuncia, in base alla sua parola d’onore, di essere stato colpito da un cyberattacco, attribuito ovviamente alla Russia, e la Nato si precipita, insieme alla Ue, ad aiutare l’Ucraina a combattere la guerra cibernetica.

Washington denuncia che l’Ucraina è ormai circondata da tre lati dalle forze russe e, in previsione del blocco delle forniture di gas russo all’Europa, si prepara generosamente a sostituirle con massicce forniture di gas naturale liquefatto statunitense. L’attacco russo – informa la Casa Bianca sulla base di notizie la cui veridicità è garantita dalla Cia – sarebbe preparato da una operazione false flag: agenti russi, infiltrati in Ucraina orientale, compirebbero sanguinosi attentati contro gli abitanti russi del Donbass, attribuendone la responsabilità a Kiev quale pretesto dell’invasione. Non ricorda la Casa Bianca che in dicembre il ministro russo della Difesa, Sergei Shoigu, aveva denunciato la presenza in Ucraina orientale di mercenari Usa con armi chimiche.

Gli Stati uniti – riporta il New York Times – hanno comunicato agli Alleati che «qualsiasi rapida vittoria russa in Ucraina sarebbe seguita da una sanguinosa insurrezione simile a quella che costrinse l’Unione Sovietica a ritirarsi dall’Afghanistan» e che «la Cia (segretamente) e il Pentagono (apertamente) la sosterrebbero». Gli Stati uniti – ricorda James Stavridis, già Comandante Supremo Alleato in Europa – sanno come farlo: alla fine degli anni Settanta e negli anni Ottanta armarono e addestrarono i mujahidin contro le truppe sovietiche in Afghanistan, ma «il livello di sostegno militare Usa a una insurrezione ucraina farebbe apparire come un’inezia quello che demmo in Afghanistan contro l’Unione Sovietica».

Quale sia il disegno strategico di Washington è evidente: far precipitare la crisi ucraina, volutamente provocata nel 2014, per costringere la Russia a intervenire militarmente in difesa dei russi del Donbass, finendo in una situazione analoga a quella afghana in cui si impantanò l’Urss. Un Afghanistan dentro l’Europa, che provocherebbe uno stato di crisi permanente, a tutto vantaggio degli Usa che rafforzerebbero la loro influenza e presenza nella regione.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Il piano Usa di un Afghanistan dentro l’Europa

All Global Research articles 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.

***

International trial lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich said on Dec. 31 that the latest “bombshell” about the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines will dismantle the big pharmaceutical companies that have pocketed billions of dollars during the pandemic.

In a video presented by OVAL Media-Prevent Global Genocide channel and shown on Brighteon.com, Fuellmich discussed with Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg the latest game-changing findings by researcher Craig Paardekooper of Kingston University London.

(Article by Kevin Hughes republished from NaturalNews.com)

*

Vaccine batches marked by varying toxicity

According to Wodarg, a German medical doctor and epidemiologist specializing in lung diseases and environmental medicine, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data shows vaccine batches are sequentially marked by varying toxicity.

He added that this has now been statistically graphed out and will prove that the COVID vaccine manufacturers have worked in a coordinated fashion with the intent to purposely kill and maim people who have taken their vaccines.

“It’s not the vaccinations. It’s not true that there is the same stuff in each in each shot. And we have a very hard evidence with the batches that are different, shaped differently, have different effect,” Wodarg explained.

Wodarg took note of the lots and batches in the U.S. where there were no cases, while other batches showed many people dying. He explained that in some batches you can see that something is happening and this is where cases of toxicity expressed in deaths are seen. The German doctor added that the Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson vaccines have a horrible accumulation of cases in certain batches.

Fuellmich pointed out that once “intent” has been proven, there is no immunity or liability protection for anyone or any organization involved in these crimes against humanity.

“If you look at the totality of the evidence, there’s more than enough evidence. A very recent presentation done by [former Pfizer vice president] Dr. Mike Yeadon shows precisely how they use these different batches in order to have an experiment within an experiment in order to try out what kind of dosage is needed in order to kill people and maim people,” said Fuellmich, who has successfully indicted big companies like Volkswagen and Deutsche Bank.

“And it is inescapable evidence of premeditation and once you have premeditation, there is no immunity for anyone anymore. Not even in the United States.”

Wodarg: Vaccines made to kill thousands intentionally

Wodarg said the vaccines were a planned, obscure trial and were made to kill thousands of people intentionally.

Fuellmich added that it was done in a coordinated effort and synchronized way with Pfizer taking the lead and followed by Moderna and Johnson & Johnson. He noted that these pharmaceutical companies all knew about this mass serial killing.

“This is a legal problem. But this [graph] makes it a whole lot easier for any lawyer in this world to show intent. There is an inescapable conclusion from these graphs,” Fuellmich said. “You can show intent. They are deliberately using different dosages coordinated with each other so that they won’t interfere with each other in order to try and find out what kills the best or what maims the best.”

Dr. Sam White, a doctor from the United Kingdom who was suspended by the National Health Service (NHS) in June 2021 for raising concerns about the safety of the COVID injection, said that everything has been done to disguise the true figures and that the reporting systems were never robust enough for an outright clinical trial of millions or even billions of people.

“If we can prove criminal intention, or even gross negligence, manslaughter, it may well be that those who’ve been harmed, or those who’ve lost a loved one can actually get some form of compensation,” White said.

“At the moment, it’s basically impossible in the U.K. and worldwide. And that’s been the case with vaccines for a long, long time. It’s almost like unbelievable, that there’s some sort of synchronized effort.”

Fuellmich said that the findings will have immense legal repercussions when it is proven that the vaccines were deliberately and intentionally done to harm people.

“You have to draw the legal conclusion and the legal conclusion is its intent. And from its intent, you can get punitive damages. You can go up to 21 times the actual damage, which is added on top of the actual damage. In these cases, I would think you can go up to thousand times because these people got so badly injured. I think this is going to be enough to dismantle the entire industry,” Fuellmich concluded.

Watch the video below to learn more about the latest bombshell regarding the COVID-19 vaccines.

*

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

Featured image is from 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.

***

It might not be quite within the bounds of good taste to compare military calculations of a bridge too far – the title used in Cornelius Ryan’s work on the disastrous Allied airborne operation during the Second World War – with the latest foolish, mendacious and buffoonish efforts of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, but on some level, the analogy works.

Throughout the COVID-19 lockdowns of 2020, the Prime Minister was pressing his own assault on the pandemic fortifications developed in response to SARS-CoV-2.

He had already shown himself incapable of understanding, let alone following health directions, shaking hands with infected patients, and furnishing the British public with inscrutable information.

But then came those libation, food-ladened parties held during the lockdown phases, gatherings which often eschewed social distancing.

The interest last December was initially on Christmas gatherings that had taken place in 2020.  The Mirror first noted that a Christmas Party had taken place at 10 Downing Street on December 18, 2020 under lockdown conditions that prohibited indoor social and household mixing.  The rest of the UK was told at the time that Christmas lunches or parties were deemed primarily social activities and “not otherwise permitted by the rules in your tier.”

The party was the subject of discussion in a clip released by  ITV featuring a former spokesperson for Johnson, Allegra Stratton, who, giggles and all, is found conducting a mock press conference with colleagues.  The video’s release pushed Stratton to a tearful resignation, but few others walked the plank.  Johnson was certainly not going to be one of them, concluding “that guidelines were followed at all times”.

Evidence of more parties in government offices emerged, resulting in the establishment of an investigation led by Cabinet Secretary Simon Case.  This mild effort, designed to distract and dissuade any investigations that might be conducted by the Metropolitan Police, went awry with revelations that the investigator had held two events in his own private office last December.  Chase’s replacement, Sue Gray, once described by Labour MP Paul Flynn as “deputy God”, has been given more room to wander.

In the new year, Johnson finds himself facing a threat that promises to be graver to him than others, as if that was possible.  It concerns yet another 2020 festive gathering that took place at Downing Street.  Taking place in May that year in the Downing Street garden, the drinks gathering was held during the first lockdown and described by Johnson as a “work event”.  This implausible understanding was reached after the PM’s Principal Private Secretary Martin Reynolds invited more than 100 Downing Street staff to “make most of the weather”.  No. 10 has also claimed that it was “untrue” to claim that Johnson was “warned about the event”.

This is not deemed credible by Johnson’s former top advisor, Dominic Cummings, himself a seasoned breaker of lockdown rules and a master of the elaborate fib.  Opining ever darkly, and with keen malice, he is of the view that Johnson “knew he was at a drinks party cos he was told it was a drinks party and it was actually a drinks party.”  In his blog, Cummings claims that both he and one other advisor warned that such a gathering would “be against the rules and should not happen.”

At the start of prime minister’s questions in parliament, Johnson tried to sound contrite.  “I want to apologise.  I know that millions of people across this country have made extraordinary sacrifices over the last 18 months.”  He claimed to know “the anguish they have been through”, acknowledging that there were things “we simply did not get right.”

Other parliamentarians were incredulous.  Labour’s Keir Starmer called Johnson a “man without shame” and asked whether the PM could “see why the British public think he’s lying through his teeth”.  Chris Bryant, also of the Labour Party, proved cuttingly unsympathetic.  “So the prime minster didn’t spot that he was at a social event?  Come off it.  How stupid does the prime minister think the British people are?”

The PM’s reactive strategy to being found out is one born in the cribs of privilege.  Why take the blame for your own actions when you can find the locus elsewhere?  According to the veteran news reporter Robert Peston, a scorched earth policy is being considered against certain allegedly culpable civil servants.  Once they have been cleared out, Johnson intends to “live securely ever after at No. 10.”  Little wonder that Whitehall is both outraged and suffering a decline of morale.

Any hope of placing Johnson’s head on the block, politically speaking, will have to come from within the Conservative Party.  So far, six Tories have publicly made their case that they lack confidence in the PM.  In a functional sense, any leadership contest can only feasibly take place if 54 Tory MPs write to the chairman of the 1922 Committee, the powerful backbench body chaired by Sir Graham Brady.  Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross is one MP who has promised to do so.

Despite the Tory rumbles, Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi is strumming the tune of “he’s human and we make mistakes.”  To BBC Radio 4’s Today program, Zahawi claimed that Johnson had done enough.  “He came to the despatch box and apologised and said he will absolutely submit himself to Parliament, because that’s our parliamentary democracy.”

Much stock will be placed on Gray’s report and how it goes down among the Tory faithful.  Downing Street has chosen to neither confirm nor deny a Daily Telegraph account that Johnson has been interviewed by Gray.

As a former minister told Peston, the findings by the civil servant will define “the rest of her life”.  She will hardly be remembered well for sacrificing her own colleagues to avoid the scalping of Johnson.  The PM’s response then is bound to be something he has adopted during the entire course of his public life: apologise and hope it all vanishes.

*

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.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

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 following article entitled: US promises ‘robust response’ to Russia if it invades Ukraine – White House

NATO will work to put Moscow in a “weaker strategic position,” senior official warns, confirms that that the CIA rules America.

If Russia invades Ukraine, the US will move strongly to damage Moscow’s strategic position and employ measures that take aim at the country’s economy, a top White House official threatened on Sunday.

… Just last week, [National Security Advisor] Sullivan accused Moscow of preparing to “fabricate a pretext” for justifying a military incursion into Ukraine, following accusations that Russia has placed more than 100,000 troops on the border to prepare for war. Later, a CNN report citing anonymous sources in the US intelligence community suggested that operatives have been placed in eastern Ukraine to stage a false-flag operation.

The Russians called a security conference with Washington and NATO. The Russians explained that security is a joint undertaking and that security only exists if every country feels secure. The CIA responded with accusations against Russia handed to the CIA-puppet Biden regime and the CIA-puppet US media. The national security advisor read the script to us peons: Russia intends a false flag attack on its own troops so that it will have an excuse to invade Ukraine.

The national security advisor is so stupid that it does not occur to him that if Russia wants to invade Ukraine Russia will. Russia needs no excuse, and there is no one in Washington or NATO who can do anything about it.

The Russians explained that they do not feel secure. They are constantly demonized, sanctioned on the basis of accusations in the Western press, and their president insulted.

Military maneuvers are conducted on their borders, and the US Navy is in the Black Sea where it has no purpose to be. Washington broke its word given to Gorbachev and has not only moved NATO to Russia’s borders but also established missile bases in Poland and Romania.

Washington has overthrown the Ukraine government in an attempt to evict Russia from her Black Sea naval base, established a puppet Ukrainian government hostile to Russia and to the Russian population of eastern Ukraine, and is gradually invading Ukraine economically and militarily with Americans on the ground training Ukrainians in the use of the American supplied arms.

On top of all of this, Washington and NATO are talking about making Ukraine, formerly a province of Russia, and another former province of Russia, Georgia, members of NATO which shows indications of ringing Russia with bases in preparation for war.

Russia explained that the situation is so threatening that it is unacceptable. During the long Cold War the two powers tried to reduce tensions by stabilizing the relationship, but in the 21st century Washington has disavowed all the arms control agreements that were accomplished in the 20th century, and has behaved aggressively toward Russia.

Russia explained that she will no longer tolerate the implied threat of US/NATO bases on her borders and most certainly will not permit Ukraine and Georgia to be members of NATO. Any move by the West in this direction will result in “dire consequences.”

As an old cold warrior as a member of the anti-Soviet Committee on the Present Danger and as a member of a secret presidential committee that helped Reagan end the Cold War, I can tell you that I am astonished that Washington has not heard what the Russians have, in all frankness, told them.

If the Committee on the President Danger had heard the Russians say this in the 1980s, we would have told President Reagan to acknowledge their concern and reduce the tension.

Today the situation is so different that to an experienced cold warrior such as myself it is extremely scary. But the idiots in Washington, who face a far more powerful Russia armed with weapons that Washington can only dream about, have no fear. Washington, the collection of the most stupid and arrogant people in the world, is exposing human life to untold risk on the sole basis of Washington’s belief in its own omnipotence.

Washington is so lacking in omnipotence that its belief in it is a sign of insanity.

According to Russian news reports, Russia is moving four entire armies from the far east to the Western fount. These four armies, even without those already present in western Russia, are sufficient to instantly destroy any force NATO and the US can muster and overrun all of Europe in a few days.

Moreover, Russia can likely mobilize 10 million troops quickly, and China, whose president has stated publicly that China has more than a treaty agreement with Russia, can mobilize 50 million soldiers. NATO, for all the bluster of its idiot Secretary General, has zero prospect of withstanding Russia in non-nuclear war.

This means, and the Kremlin knows this, that to save face Washington would have to go nuclear. This would mean the total destruction of the US and Europe. They would cease to exist.

For Russia with its extensive anti-missile defenses and nuclear bunkers for 40-50% of targeted populations, the war would be disastrous, but Russia would survive.

Russia does not want such a war. Russia doesn’t want to destroy anyone, not even Ukraine. Russia has asked for a security guarantee. That is all.

If we experience Armageddon, it will be only because Washington refused a security guarantee to Russia.

*

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.

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.

All Global Research articles 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 protests grow in EU countries and worldwide against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and so-called “vaccine passports,” some countries appear to be backtracking or at least harboring second thoughts about enforcing such measures, while others are digging in their heels and moving forward with punitive restrictions on the unvaccinated.

As protests grow in EU countries and worldwide against COVID-19 vaccine mandates and so-called “vaccine passports,” some countries appear to be backtracking or at least harboring second thoughts about enforcing such measures.

Some policymakers point to evidence COVID is here to stay and we need to live with it, since Omicron is similar to the common cold or seasonal flu. Others appear more willing to accept natural immunity in lieu of vaccination.

Still, other governments are digging in their heels and moving forward with punitive restrictions on the unvaccinated.

Here’s a look at the latest shifting policies outside the U.S.

 

 

Austria, citing ‘technical complications,’ won’t enforce mandates until at least April

Austria garnered much attention in November 2021 when it became the first country in the world to impose an all-encompassing vaccine mandate for its entire adult population and minors 14 years old and up.

This mandate, set to take effect in February, would be accompanied by fines of up to 3,600 euros per quarter. To that end, Austria recently reportedly began hiring “headhunters” to track down those who continue to remain unvaccinated.

The mandate has resulted in frequent large-scale protests against the mandate, as well as a political movement opposing this policy.

An open letter recently sent to Austria’s Interior Minister, Gerhard Karner, signed by 600 police officers, also expressed opposition to mandatory vaccination.

This opposition may be having an impact. Recently, the firm responsible for the technical implementation of the mandate announced that due to “technical complications,” the mandatory vaccination law cannot be enforced until at least April.

This news came amidst calls in Austria that the mandate should be reevaluated in light of the spread of the Omicron variant.

Germany struggling with mandate implementation; support not unanimous

Similar concerns over the feasibility of rapid implementation of a vaccine mandate have been raised in Germany, which has also mulled the implementation of compulsory vaccinations and has already approved such a mandate for healthcare workers.

In December 2021, Germany’s Ethics Council also gave its stamp of approval for vaccine mandates.

Nevertheless, concerns have been raised in Germany that parliamentary debate and subsequent technical implementation of a vaccination database cannot be completed before June at the earliest, calling into question the feasibility of the mandate in light of rapidly changing conditions.

Such hesitation comes despite renewed calls from German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier for an immediate full parliamentary debate on a potential vaccine mandate, and from German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for COVID vaccines to be mandated.

Similarly, German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach recently suggested vaccine mandates, not natural herd immunity stemming from the rapid spread of the Omicron variant — which he described as “dirty vaccination” — represent the only way “out” of the crisis.

In November 2021, Lauterbach’s predecessor, Jens Spahn, publicly predicted that by the end of the coming winter, everyone would be “vaccinated, recovered, or dead” — due to the Delta variant.

Soon thereafter, in December 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden made a similar warning, predicting a winter of “severe illness and death” for the non-vaccinated.

Despite these public proclamations from German politicians though, recent reports suggest support for a vaccine mandate in Germany’s three-party governing coalition is far from unanimous.

Nevertheless, some localities in Germany are moving ahead with their own innovative means of confirming individuals’ vaccination status.

The city of Saarbrücken will soon launch a system where individuals who received a COVID vaccine or who have recovered from infection can voluntarily wear a colored wristband to indicate their status.

Greece pushes ahead with age 60+ mandate policy, threatens fines for unvaxxed

Greece was one of the first countries in Europe to implement a vaccine mandate for a portion of its general population when, in December 2021, it imposed such a policy for everyone age 60 and over.

The policy is set to take effect Jan. 16, with fines of 100 euros per month levied against anyone who doesn’t comply.

Despite this policy, which has received broad and highly sensational media attention in Greece, and despite the burden the policy would place on pensioners in a country where the average pension is just over 700 euros per month, a significant number of individuals 60 and older appear to have opted to remain unvaccinated.

In late December 2021, it was reported that 400,000 people in this age group had not received the COVID vaccine.

In a televised appearance on Jan. 11, Greek government spokesperson Giannis Oikonomou stated that 200,000 people aged 60 and over had gotten vaccinated as a result of this mandate, touting this as a “big success.”

However, this would suggest approximately half of the relevant population in question had chosen to remain unvaccinated, despite the looming threat of a financial penalty.

It is perhaps, for this reason, the Greek government reportedly “froze” any further discussion of expanding the mandatory vaccination policy to those aged 50 and over, while it has been suggested the measure is unconstitutional and may eventually be struck down judicially.

However, despite rumors that the enforcement of fines against individuals 60 and older who have not been vaccinated would be postponed, Greece’s far-right Interior Minister Makis Voridis announced the policy would be enforced as originally planned.

Nevertheless, the Greek government will now extend existing measures, which include a midnight curfew and ban on music for dining and entertainment venues, and a 1,000-spectator capacity limit at sporting events, for at least an additional week past the original sunset date of Jan. 16.

In Balkans, protests lead to standstill on mandates

Major protests against the so-called “Green Pass,” or vaccine passport, took place recently in both Bulgaria and Romania.

In Bulgaria, protesters on Jan. 12  stormed the parliament building in opposition to the “Green Pass” and other restrictions. Attempts to enter parliament resulted in clashes with police and multiple arrests.

Similar events transpired recently in Romania, where on Dec. 21, 2021, protesters attempted to enter Romania’s parliament as part of a protest against proposed legislation making the “Green Pass” mandatory for workers.

Disagreements that have since followed between the parties which comprise Romania’s governing coalition have resulted in talks on this proposed policy coming to a standstill.

Notably, Bulgaria and Romania have the lowest and second-lowest COVID vaccination rate in the EU as of this writing.

Herd immunity as official policy?

As attempted moves toward wide-ranging vaccine mandates and broader implementation of vaccine passports appear to be floundering in Europe, such hesitation has increasingly been accompanied by ever more vocal suggestions that a form of herd immunity, via natural infection stemming from the rapid spread of the milder Omicron variant, should be considered at the policymaking level.

In Israel, for instance, a country that was among the first to move forward with a mass vaccination and booster campaign against COVID, health officials are mulling a “mass infection model.”

On Jan. 11, EU regulators, who had previously supported the administration of COVID booster shots every three months, had a sudden about-face, warning about the dangers the continued administration of boosters could pose for the human immune system.

That same day, the World Health Organization issued a remarkably similar warning, stating that “a vaccination strategy based on repeated booster doses of the original vaccine composition is unlikely to be appropriate or sustainable.”

Just one day prior, on Jan. 10, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez suggested European officials should move towards treating COVID as an endemic illness, calling for a debate on the issue and for a move away from the detailed pandemic case tracking system in place since early 2020.

Dr. Clive Dix, former chairman of the UK’s vaccine task force, Nick Moakes, chief investment officer of the Wellcome Trust (Britain’s largest independent funder of medical research) made similar remarks. Moakes suggested coronavirus be treated like the common cold.

Meanwhile, certain European countries appear to be shifting away from considering a mandatory vaccination policy for their populations. Irish Prime Minister Michael Martin said his country will maintain a system of voluntary vaccination, while Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo said his intention to give people a “free choice” on the matter.

This shift is occurring despite remarks made on Dec. 1, 2021, by Ursula von der Leyen, president of the EU Commission, who said it is time to “potentially think about mandatory vaccination within the European Union” and to have a “discussion” about this possibility.

Punitive measures continue elsewhere

The gradual shift away from vaccine mandate policies in Europe and elsewhere is far from uniform, with punitive restrictions and policies continuing to be implemented in several countries.

In Italy, for instance, mandatory vaccination was expanded on Jan. 5 to everyone age 50 and older. The unvaxxed will face a potential fine ranging from 600 to 1,500 euros.

French President Emmanuel Macron made waves in an interview with the Le Parisien newspaper on Jan. 4, justifying the implementation of his country’s “Green Pass” by stating “I really want to piss them off, and we’ll carry on doing this — to the end” and that “irresponsible people [the unvaccinated] are no longer citizens.”

Despite uproar and protests that his comments generated, Macron later doubled down on these remarks.

On Jan. 11, the premier of the Canadian province of Quebec, Francois Legault, stated adults who refuse the COVID vaccine will face a “significant” financial penalty.

This statement came on the heels of remarks made on Jan. 7 by Canadian Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos. When asked whether mandatory vaccination was on the horizon in Canada, Duclos stated, “I personally think we will get there at some point.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau previously stated, in May 2021, that “[w]e’re not a country that makes vaccination mandatory.”

Other countries have resorted to more extreme, albeit “temporary,” measures.

Non-vaccinated individuals in one Australian state, the Northern Territory, were recently required to stay home for a four-day period, with limited exceptions. The conclusion of this four-day ban coincided with the launch of vaccine passports in the territory.

And in the Philippines, the country’s president, Rodrigo Duterte, called for the arrest of non-vaccinated citizens who venture outside their homes, in light of what he described as the “galloping” spread of the coronavirus.

This nevertheless may represent a milder stance on the part of Duterte, who in April 2020, empowered the police and military with shoot-to-kill orders against lockdown violators.

*

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.

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.

***

Once again, the West seems to be creating arguments to justify the implementation of coercive measures against Russia. A cyberattack against Kiev allegedly occurred last week has been making headlines around the world. Now, the Ukrainian government claims to have proof that the attack has Russian involvement – although no details have been provided so far as to what such “proof” would be. Apparently, NATO and Kiev are ready to turn cyberspace into a new focus of their anti-Russian campaigns.

An alleged cyberattack against Ukraine took place in the early hours of Friday last week, leaving several official government systems inaccessible. For a few hours, the websites of several Ukrainian ministries were absolutely offline. On some of the hacked sites, some messages appeared warning Ukrainians to “expect the worst”. In addition to ministries, virtual databases of many government offices were hacked, but according to information published by the Ministry of Digital Transformation, there was no leakage of personal data of government officials, being the damage limited to the operability of the websites.

The alleged “attack” generated immediate worldwide repercussions. Governments and international organizations around the world have published notes repudiating the hackers’ attitude. The European Union, the US, pro-Western governments, and NATO reinforced their desire to “help” Kiev to strengthen its cyber defense system.

NATO’s Secretary Jen Stoltenberg published the following words about the case:

“I strongly condemn the cyber attacks on the Ukrainian Government. NATO has worked closely with Ukraine for years to help boost its cyber defenses (…) In the coming days, NATO and Ukraine will sign an agreement on enhanced cyber cooperation, including access to NATO’s Ukrainian malware information sharing platform. NATO’s strong political and practical support for Ukraine will continue”.

In the same sense, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki also commented on the case, saying:

“We are also in touch with Ukrainians and have offered our support as Ukraine investigates the impact and nature and recovers from the incident”.

In Europe, on the other hand, the comments were more aggressive and tried to blame Russia. EU top diplomat Josep Borrell said:

“We are going to mobilize all our resources to help Ukraine to tackle this cyber attack. Sadly, we knew it could happen (…) It’s difficult to say (who is behind it). I can’t blame anybody as I have no proof, but we can imagine”.

By saying “we can imagine”, Borrell was certainly referring to Russia. Also, something similar has been said by Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Lind, who commented directly on the possibility of Russian involvement, saying words in a threatening tone:

“we have to be very firm in our messages to Russia: that if there are attacks against Ukraine, we will be very harsh and very strong and robust in our response”.

Later, on Sunday, Kiev definitively adopted the rhetoric that had been previously promoted by Europeans, blaming Russia. Ukrainian digital transformation ministry Mykhailo Fedorov said that “all the evidence points to Russia being behind the cyber-attack”. Evidently, this is a suspicion that could arise at any moment, considering that the attack took place amid tensions between Russia and Ukraine and that cyber operations are a common military tactic in contemporary warfare. The problem in this case is that no details were provided on what such “evidence” would be. Kiev simply believes that Moscow operated the attacks because it is a “plausible” suspect, considering the fact that these are rival countries, but no material evidence has been presented so far, which makes the narrative very weak.

If Kiev and the West accuse Russia of involvement in the attack, it is up to them to prove the allegations. The burden of proof for the accuser is a universal principle of justice that cannot be ignored in diplomatic relations. Furthermore, in the same way that cyber-attacks are common practice in contemporary warfare (which would make the Russian involvement narrative plausible), self-sabotage operations and “false flag attacks” are also constantly practiced in current conflicts between states, which makes it plausible that Kiev or some other western government operated the hacking attack in order to blame Russia and tighten security measures against Moscow – and the fact that there was no data leakage in the attack can be considered an evidence in this regard, as such leakage would not be of interest in a false flag operation.

Indeed, there are many possibilities, and it would be wrong to accuse either side without prior investigations. However, unfortunately, what we can expect going forward is that the anti-Russian narrative, despite being weak, will be considered sufficient for NATO to harden the measures against Russia and start a campaign of cyber warfare. Increasingly, cyberspace can be considered a new battlefield, as important as land, sea, air, and outer space.

*

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.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural 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.

***

Did anyone out there actually expect things to turn out differently?  When the federal government kept borrowing and spending trillions upon trillions of dollars that we did not have, we were warned that this day was coming.  And when the Federal Reserve kept pumping trillions upon trillions of fresh dollars into our financial system, we were warned that this day was coming.  So why is anybody surprised by what is happening at this point?  On Wednesday, it was being reported that in December the U.S. consumer price index rose at the fastest pace in nearly 40 years…

Inflation rose at the fastest pace in nearly four decades in December, as rapid price gains fueled consumer fears about the economy and sent President Biden’s approval rating tumbling.

The consumer price index rose 7% in December from a year ago, according to a new Labor Department report released Wednesday, marking the fastest increase since June 1982, when inflation hit 7.1%. The CPI – which measures a bevy of goods ranging from gasoline and health care to groceries and rents – jumped 0.5% in the one-month period from November.

They keep telling us that the consumer price index was actually increasing at a faster rate back in 1982, but whenever the corporate media makes such a claim they are not being honest.

The way that the consumer price index is calculated has been changed more than two dozen times since 1980, and every single time it has been changed the goal was to make the rate of inflation look smaller.

According to John Williams of shadowstats.com, if the consumer price index was still calculated the way it was back in 1990, the official rate of inflation would be above 10 percent right now.

And if the consumer price index was still calculated the way it was back in 1980, the official rate of inflation would be above 15 percent right now.

But 7 percent sounds a whole lot better than 15 percent, doesn’t it?

We can get a better picture of what is really going on out there when we start looking at individual categories.  The following category numbers were posted earlier today by Citizen Free Press

  • Gasoline up 56%
  • Heating oil up 42%
  • Used cars: 37.3%
  • Car rental: 36%
  • Natural gas up 31%
  • Hotels: 27.6%
  • Beef: 18.6%
  • Pork: 15.1%
  • Furniture: 13.8%
  • New cars: 12%

Unfortunately, it looks like the price of gasoline will soon go even higher.

In fact, Reuters is telling us that some analysts are projecting that the price of oil could soon exceed 100 dollars a barrel

Oil prices that rallied 50% in 2021 will power further ahead this year, some analysts predict, saying a lack of production capacity and limited investment in the sector could lift crude to $90 or even above $100 a barrel.

It takes energy to transport virtually all of the goods that we purchase on a regular basis, and so a higher price for gasoline will cause inflationary pressure throughout our entire economy.

Some companies are responding to this crisis by giving their customers less for the same price that they were charging before.

For example, if you order chicken wings from Domino’s Pizza you will only get a package of eight from now on

Domino’s Pizza customers ordering chicken wings will soon get fewer of them for the same price.

The pizza chain said it’s cutting the number of wings in its $7.99 carry out offer from 10 pieces to just eight because of rising food and labor costs. Wings will also become an online exclusive, meaning customers can no longer order them via phone.

All around us, there is evidence that our standard of living is rapidly going down.

The cost of living is increasing much, much faster than paychecks are, and that is an extremely alarming trend.  According to Zero Hedge, real average hourly earnings have now declined for 9 months in a row

Finally, and perhaps most importantly for Main Street, real average hourly earnings fell (down 2.4% YoY) for the 9th straight month…

So the next time a politician tries to tell you to be grateful that your wages are going up or you can move to a new higher paying job, just remind him that the surge in the cost of living is outpacing wage gains, thanks to The Fed’s money-largesse and Congress’ lockdown policies and helicopter money have crushed the quality of life for millions.

In other words, most Americans are getting poorer.

Meanwhile, the appalling nationwide shortages that have erupted continue to make headlines all over the nation.

According to USA Today, the following are some of the most severe shortages that we are witnessing right now…

  • Baby formula shortage
  • Cream cheese shortage
  • Aluminum shortage
  • Cat food, dog food shortages
  • Chicken tender shortage
  • Lunchables shortage
  • Toilet paper shortage
  • Beer shortage

And it turns out that fear of Omicron has also sparked a really bad shortage of cold medicine

Stores in the Dallas-Fort Worth area are facing cold medicine shortages as flu season picks up and the omicron variant of the coronavirus continues.

“The new toilet paper shortage,” an employee at an East Dallas pharmacy told Fox 4 of the empty shelves.

One pharmacist at a CVS location in East Dallas said that customers with symptoms appearing to be the coronavirus or flu have been buying up cold medicine and cough syrup, while others are coming in to just stock up.

So if you were thinking of stocking up on Benadryl for some reason, I would go out and grab some while you still can.

The corporate media seems absolutely stunned that our politicians in Washington and the magicians at the Federal Reserve have lost control of our economy.

But we were warned for years that what they were doing would kill the U.S. dollar, and the death spiral that we have now entered is going to become exceedingly painful.

What we are experiencing now is not just another short-term economic crisis.

This truly is the beginning of the end for the U.S. economy, and I would recommend that you prepare accordingly.

*

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.

Michael Snyder has published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, which are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe. 

Featured image is from TEC

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was interviewed by GEOFOR on US-Russia talks.

GEOFOR: Dear Mr. Roberts, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. So, the Russian-American diplomatic marathon, which lasted for a whole week, is over. And as many, including yourself, predicted, the bilateral meeting and negotiations in the format of NATO and the OSCE ended in nothing. The parties simply fixed their positions. However, some Russian analysts believe that the only result of these contacts was that the united West and, first of all, the United States, for the first time in thirty years, still “condescended” or were forced to condescend to talk with Russia on equal terms. What, in your opinion, prompted Washington and its satellites to do this?

Paul Craig Roberts: Russians are always looking for a silver lining, this time that the US condescended to talk with Russia on equal terms.  The US did no such thing. Washington used the talks to elevate the propaganda against Russia as, for example, Undersecretary of State Nuland’s denunciation of Russia.

The talks did not end in nothing. The talks confirmed the Kremlin’s belief that Washington would not accommodate Russia’s security concern and that Russia would be forced to look for solutions outside of diplomacy.

GEOFOR: It seems that the world is no longer preparing to enter, but is entering a new geopolitical reality, where Russia has learned to quickly resolve crises in different parts of the world, be it Syria, Belarus or Kazakhstan. What do you think is the reason for such transformations – is it a consequence of Moscow’s “muscle building” or the result of a reduction in the capabilities of the United States?

Paul Craig Roberts: It is a consequence of the Kremlin awakening to the fact that Russia’s role for Washington is to serve as the necessary enemy for the profits of the US military/security complex and as the threat that guarantees Washington’s control over Europe. For too long Russians believed all the nice democratic slogans that Washington expresses but does not believe.

GEOFOR: Although Russia has made its position public well in advance, moreover, it has made available a draft document listing Moscow’s demands point by point, as well as the obligations that it is ready to assume, it seems that the United States and its NATO partners have not taken the trouble to familiarize themselves with them. At least, judging by the statements for the press, instead of discussing security issues on the European continent, the American side tried with all its might to reduce the discussion to the issue of Ukraine’s accession to the alliance and the deployment of offensive weapons on its territory. What is the reason for this, if we may say so, misunderstanding? Is it the desire to delay negotiations? If so, for what purposes? Or is the problem something else?

Paul Craig Roberts: It most certainly is not a misunderstanding. It was a propaganda opportunity for Washington and its NATO puppets.  Russia is the necessary enemy. Therefore, Washington will never acknowledge that Russia has a valid case about anything.

GEOFOR: Speaking of the Ukraine, which was the top priority topic for American negotiators. Do you rule out that Washington is playing out a scenario under which Kiev would decide on a military conflict in the Donbas or Crimea, and Moscow would be forced to respond with the use of force? In this case the United States and its allies, on the one hand, would increase the volume of military assistance (this week the Congress authorized the allocation of an additional $ 500 million), but at the same time they have declared that neither the United States nor NATO would go to war for the Ukraine. For the current Ukrainian leadership, with the country going through a deep economic and political crisis, an armed conflict might be the last chance to retain power and regain the favor of the West. Moreover, regardless of who would unleash the conflict, Russia would immediately be declared an “aggressor”.

Paul Craig Roberts: For Washington Ukraine is a tool to be used against Russia. Whether Ukraine becomes a member of NATO and hosts missile bases on Russia’s border or whether Ukraine invades Donbass and causes Russian intervention makes little difference to Washington. If the former, then Washington has more ability to intimidate Russia. If the latter, Washington has a result that proves its propaganda and solidifies its hold on Europe and strengthens  Americans’ belief that Russia is a dangerous threat.

GEOFOR: And now on the background against which the Russian-American discussion took place. Speaking politely, Washington was not shy in their expressions. We are not talking about the press and political pundits, the Lord is their judge. But some officials were not inferior to them. For example, after the talks in Geneva, Victoria Nuland blamed Moscow for fomenting the crisis between Russia and the United States, simultaneously accusing it of lying and misinforming. And after the Brussels meeting, the same lady, who holds the post of Under Secretary of State, said that Washington was working with Germany and the EU to slow down the commissioning of Nord Stream 2. But this did not seem enough for her, so she said that the United States was ready to discuss with Finland and Sweden the issue of their accession to NATO, which, judging by the reaction of Helsinki and Stockholm, caused some consternation in these countries. Why and who needs it? Raising the stakes on the eve of negotiations is a common thing for politicians and diplomats. But why do it when negotiations have already begun? Or is it just a deficit or lack of professionalism and, we are sorry to say, culture and education?

Paul Craig Roberts: Washington cannot make it any clearer that Russia is in the way of US hegemony and that Washington intends to remove the Russian constraint on US hegemony via intimidation and destabilization.  It seems that this has finally been realized by the Kremlin if not by the Russian media.

GEOFOR: Currently, the Russian leadership is waiting for a written response from the American side to its proposals, which, as promised, should be provided next week. Meanwhile, in the Senate, the members of the same party as President J. Biden have prepared a draft of new sanctions, including ones against President Vladimir Putin, as well as the Ministers of Defense and Foreign Affairs, major banks, etc. As the Russian Ambassador to the United States Mr. Antonov noted in this regard, if they are adopted, it will mean the rupture of diplomatic relations between our countries. In these circumstances, what could be the response from the White House and the State Department? Is it possible to expect at least something constructive in it, giving a reason to continue the dialogue that has begun?

Paul Craig Roberts: No dialogue has begun.  Washington used the talks to make completely clear to Russia that Washington could not care less about Russia’s security concern, that Washington wants and intends Russia to be insecure and will be working to make Russia more insecure.

*

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.

This article was originally published on GEOFOR.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, and is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from magyarhirlap.hu

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “No Dialogue Has Begun. Washington Could Not Care Less About Russia’s Security Concern.”
  • Tags:

Get Well Soon Rocco Galati!

January 18th, 2022 by WholeHearted Media

All Global Research articles 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.

***

 

 

Thank you all for your love and prayers, they are working! Please keep them coming.

It took some time but we finally finished editing the “Knowledge is Liberating” course put on in the summer time with Rocco. The course is jam packed with info and real life scenarios. Many people were asking where they could access it. Pls go to WholeHeartedmedia.ca and click on courses for more info or follow this link.

Lastly, thank you for the concern. Please refrain from worrying and sending us personal DM’s asking about Rocco’s condition. That info is private. Keep in mind medical privacy is a large part of what is and has been fought for the last 2 years.

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Get Well Soon Rocco Galati!

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Everyone knows that James Earl Ray shot Martin Luther King, Jr., right? The U.S. government says so. All the school textbooks say so. And it is enshrined as unquestioned gospel in the pages of Wikipedia.

But the official story is full of holes. Instead, mounting evidence suggests that King may have been murdered as part of a conspiracy planned and/or abetted by the FBI in coordination with local Memphis police personnel. In this scenario, Ray served as a patsy, like critics allege Lee Harvey Oswald was in the JFK assassination. The real shooter, according to these accounts, struck King not from the boardinghouse bathroom—allegedly from where Ray shot him—but from bushes behind the Lorraine Motel—the King assassination’s version of the grassy knoll.

This article lays out that evidence—as it may soon be laid out in court and a congressional committee—if the King family’s demands to reopen the murder investigation continue to gain traction. What follows is a reconstruction of the events leading up to King’s murder, and the subsequent purported attempts by local and national government officials to cover up their involvement and pin it on a patsy named James Earl Ray.

At 6:01 p.m. on April 4, 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr., was struck in the face by a bullet as he was leaning over the balcony of his room at the Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee.

An hour later he was declared dead at nearby St. Joseph’s Hospital.

King had come to Memphis as part of his poor people’s campaign to support a sanitation workers strike. The civil rights leader was increasingly promoting socialist views, had become more outspoken in criticizing the war in Vietnam and had been running for president on an anti-war ticket with Benjamin Spock.[1]

MLK and Rev Ralph Abernathy in Memphis, on March 28, 1968 supporting striking Sanitation Workers

King marching with striking sanitation workers in Memphis on March 28, 1968. [Source: ratical.org]

After King had given a speech denouncing the Vietnam War at New York’s Riverside Church one year before his assassination, U.S. Army spies recorded Black radical Stokely Carmichael warning him: “The man don’t care you call ghettos concentration camps, but when you tell him his war machine is nothing but hired killers, you got trouble.”

Carmichael, unfortunately, was right.

Lone Assassin?

Police authorities fingered James Earl Ray—a career criminal from Alton, Illinois, who had escaped from the Jefferson City, Missouri, penitentiary in April 1967—as the lone assassin.[2]

On May 6, 1968, syndicated columnist Drew Pearson wrote that the FBI was conducting “perhaps the most painstaking, exhaustive manhunt ever before undertaken in the United States. Its G-men have checked every bar ever patronized by James Earl Ray, every flop house he ever stopped at, every cantina in Mexico, he ever visited. It has collected an amazing array of evidence, all linking Ray with the murder.”[3]

Ray was supposedly motivated by race hate. He allegedly began stalking Dr. King on the weekend of March 17 in Los Angeles, arriving in Memphis on April 3 with the murder weapon and booking into a seedy rooming house owned by Bessie Brewer above Jim’s Grill right across from the Lorraine Motel.[4]

MLK Crime Scene — TPAAK

Photo of rooming house above Jim’s Grill. [Source: tpaak.com]

Just before 6:00 p.m., Ray barricaded himself in a communal bathroom from where he pointed his rifle outside the window and shot King.

Afterwards in haste, Ray neglected to eject the spent cartridge. Back in his room, he wrapped his rifle along with an overnight bag in a bedspread and ran outside.

Ray was then spotted by another tenant in the rooming house, Charles Quitman Stephens—the state’s chief prosecution witness—who said that he saw Ray running out.

When Ray saw a stream of police cars rushing to the scene, he panicked, and dropped the bedspread with the rifle in the doorway of the Canipe Amusement Company on South Main Street.

A person holding a baseball bat Description automatically generated with low confidence

Bedspread with rifle dropped by Ray allegedly in panic outside the Canipe Amusement Company. [Source: tpaak.com]

He then fled in a white Mustang, making his way first to Atlanta, where he ditched the car, and then to Toronto, where he hid for a month, and then to Portugal and England, where he was apprehended two months later by authorities trying to board a flight to Brussels.

Ray’s fingerprints had been found on the gun that allegedly killed King, scope, binoculars, beer can, and a copy of the Memphis Commercial Appeal dropped in the bundle.

At his trial, Ray pled guilty and was sentenced to 99 years in prison.

House Select Committee on Assassinations and 1999 Civil Trial

The 1979 House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA)—which was convened to investigate the King and Kennedy assassinations—alleged that Ray carried out the killing to collect a bounty from two St. Louis racists, both dead at the time.

A group of people sitting in a room Description automatically generated with low confidence

House Select Committee on Assassinations. [Source: wikiwand.com]

In 2012, G. Robert Blakey, staff director to the HSCA, said, however, that he had been deceived by the CIA—which had failed to inform him that a government liaison to the HSCA, George Joannides, had a CIA background. Blakey told the Jackson, Mississippi,Clarion-Ledger that “thoughtful people today, not just nuts, think that more people than James Earl Ray were involved [in King’s killing].”[5]

In 1999, a mixed-race jury presiding over a wrongful death civil suit by the King family in Memphis reached a unanimous verdict that King was assassinated as a result of a conspiracy involving the U.S. government.

King’s widow, Coretta Scott King, said afterwards that “there is abundant evidence of a major, high-level conspiracy in the assassination of my husband.” The jury found that the mafia and various local, state, and federal government agencies “were deeply involved in the assassination…. Mr. Ray was set up to take the blame.”[6]

Case Not Closed

Three days after his sentencing, Ray fired his mob-connected attorney, Percy Foreman, and said that he was pressured into pleading guilty and had been set up as a patsy.[7] Foreman was given 60% royalty rights on a book about Ray by William Bradford Huie, which would not have sold if it were about a non-assassin.[8]

The FBI was never able to match the bullet that killed King with the rifle allegedly left by Ray on the steps of the Canipe Amusement Company.

A picture containing text, sky, sign, outdoor Description automatically generated

Remington rifle that allegedly killed King; the bullets, however, were never matched to the fatal one that killed King. [Source: gunsamerica.com]

Ray’s fingerprints were also never identified in the room he had rented at the rooming house.

A well-known crime scene investigator determined that the shot from the rooming house bathroom could not have struck King unless Ray had hung out the window or smashed a ten-inch-deep hole in the wall for his rifle to fit into—the angles were all wrong.[9]

Memphis police officer Vernon Dollahite said that he arrived on Main Street within one minute and fifty seconds of King’s shooting and did not see a fleeing Mustang or hear screeching tires, raising doubt that Ray could have gathered his stuff, dropped it in front of the Canipe Amusement Company—a detour from his car—and gotten away to escape notice by Dollahite.[10]

Ray’s decision to drop the bedsheet supposedly resulted from his panic at seeing a parked police car after exiting the boarding house. However, the car would have been blocked by a hedge which was cut down the day after King’s death.[11]

According to Guy Canipe, the bedsheet was dropped on the steps of Canipe Amusement Company approximately two to five minutes before King was shot. Canipe described the person dropping the bundle as having a “chunky build”—which did not match Ray.[12]

Ray’s old prison radio—which could be seen outside the bundle—supposedly fell out when the bundle was tossed in the doorway; however, it was not on its side, visibly cracked or broken.[13]

The rifle was also packed tightly—which a panicked killer in a hurry to get away could not have done.[14]

The prosecution’s main witness, Charles Quitman Stephens, had been arrested 155 times mostly for alcoholism and was dead drunk at the time of the shooting, according to his wife, landlady, a homicide detective who interviewed him (Tommy Smith) and a cab driver who picked him up.[15]

He was looking to obtain a $100,000 reward for identifying the slayer of King. Later, when shown a photo of Ray by a CBS journalist, Stephens said that he was not the man he had observed running out of the boarding house.[16]

Stephens’s cab driver, James McCraw, said the hall bathroom was open and bathroom empty as he approached and left Stephens’s room—indicating that the shots did not come from there.[17]

Stephens’s common-law wife, Grace Walden, also said that she heard the shot come from outside her window in the rooming house, which opened onto the bushy area between the rooming house and motel.[18] The only man she saw coming out of the rooming house was short with “salt and pepper hair,” wearing an open army jacket and plaid sports shirt—which did not fit Ray.[19]

Two Mustangs and Ray’s Alibi

When he was picking up Stephens, James McCraw said he noticed a delivery van and two white Mustangs parked within 50 yards of each other, one in front of Jim’s Grill, the other just south of the Canipe Amusement Company.[20]

Another witness, Charles Hurley, told Ray attorney William Pepper that, after arriving to pick up his wife at the rooming house at 4:45 p.m., he pulled up behind a Mustang with Arkansas plates parked in front of the rooming house and south of the Canipe amusement store.

Ray’s Mustang had Alabama plates and was parked north of the Canipe store.[21]

Ray said that he got into the car between 5:45 and 5:50 p.m. and went to a local service station to have a spare tire repaired—meaning that he was not at the rooming house when King was killed.

However, his brother, John Larry Ray, said that James lied and was waiting in his Mustang for his handler Raoul at the time King was shot, believing he was to be the getaway driver for some job.

Shortly after he heard the shot that killed King, Raoul jumped into the backseat of his vehicle and put a sheet over his head, and Ray drove off. After a few blocks, Raoul jumped out of the car and fled and Ray drove all night to Atlanta.[22]

After making his way to Canada, Ray was assisted financially by a mysterious “fat man,”who provided him with money in Toronto. Researcher Peter Dale Scott suggests that it was planned for Ray to be apprehended after Robert Kennedy’s assassination to enable a restoration of confidence in the government in the wake of such a tragic event and the rioting that had followed King’s killing.

An Unlikely Assassin

Ray did not have a clear motive for killing King apart from a possible financial one. He could never have survived on the lam after his prison escape and in the two months after the King assassination without outside support. Ray had received money not only for travel and lodging, but also for fake identities, plastic surgery, and even dance and bartending classes and hypnosis.

A strong anti-communist who was otherwise apolitical, Ray was painted in the media as a racist. However, people close to him said he had had a Black girlfriend, and that evidence was planted by police to make him appear to be a racist when he was not.[23]

Most significantly, Ray had no expertise in firearms. During a stint in the Army, he was trained with an M-1 and obtained only the lowest level of ability.[24] The salesman who sold him the alleged murder weapon in Birmingham—which he had been told to buy by the mysterious Raoul (discussed below)—said that Ray “did not seem to know anything at all about firearms, I mean nothing.”[25]

Shot from the Bushes

King’s chauffeur Solomon Jones and Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) attorney Chauncey Eskridge, who were both looking at King when he died, said they saw King’s body lurch upwards when he was shot—and not downward—indicating that the shot could not have come from the rooming house bathroom.

Instead, it must have come from the bushes behind Jim’s Grill and between the rooming house and motel.

A picture containing text, outdoor Description automatically generated

View from Lorraine Motel balcony that shows brush area from where witnesses claimed the shots were fired. [Source: tpaak.com]

Ray’s first lawyer, Arthur Hanes, Sr., noticed tree branches that would have been a formidable obstacle to shooting King from the rooming house bathroom—though these branches were cut down the next day by police to try to cover this up.[26]

Several eyewitnesses reported seeing a man crouching in the bushes and running away afterward, and a sound like a firecracker coming from the bushes.[27]

Harold “Cornbread” Carter, who was drinking wine in the bushes, told investigators that he saw a man wearing a high-necked white sweater run away after with a long gun in his handafter he had heard a loud bang from the bushes.[28]

Olivia Catling said that she saw a fireman standing near the wall below the bushes yelling at the police that the shot came from the clump of bushes above the area where he was standing—but the police ignored him.[29]

Diagram, engineering drawing Description automatically generated

Source: muckrock.com

Reverend James Orange said that he saw smoke “rise from the bushes right by the fire station” seconds after the shot.[30] The smoke was most likely sonic dust rising from the bushes caused by the firing of a high-powered rifle in the heavily vegetated area.[31]

Orange and a reporter, Kay Black, also alleged that the brush area was cut and cleared back the morning after the shooting, along with the inconveniently placed tree branch that blocked a clear shot from the rooming house.

The pre-dawn clean-up request, according to Maynard Stiles, deputy director of the Memphis City Public Works Department in 1968, came from the Memphis Police Department early on the morning of April 5.[32]

Suspicious Happenings

The night before King’s killing, the only two Black firemen in the Memphis Fire Department (MFD), Norvell E. Wallace and Floyd E. Newsum, were ordered not to report the next day to their posts at Fire Station No. 2 overlooking the Lorraine Motel.[33]

The Memphis Police Department (MPD) failed to form the usual security squad of black detectives for Dr. King and withdrew other key police security units to a position five blocks away from the Lorraine Motel on April 4—a key factor that enabled the assassin(s) to get away.[34]

Black detective Ed Redditt was removed from his surveillance post about an hour before King’s shooting and placed in home confinement after the FBI had warned MPD of an assassination attempt directed against him—by the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party—which proved to be phony and served as a diversion.[35]

Just before King was shot, someone else called in a hoax from downtown that drew police attention to the northeastern side of the city.[36]

This hoax indicated an organized plot and that Ray could not have been a lone assassin.

Loyd Jowers and Jim’s Grill.

Taxi driver James McCraw told William Pepper that, on the morning after the shooting, Loyd Jowers, the owner of Jim’s Grill, showed him a rifle in a box on a shelf under the counter, which he said he had “found out back after the killing.”

This account was corroborated by Betty Spates, a young Black waitress at Jim’s Grill who implicated Jowers, her former lover, in the murder.

Spates said that, after hearing what sounded like a shot, she saw him run into the kitchen from the brush carrying a rifle. His hair was in disarray, and the knees of his trousers were wet and muddy as though he had been kneeling in the soggy grass or brush areas.[37]

Jowers then wrapped his rifle in a tablecloth, put it under his apron, and slipped into the café behind the counter where he discreetly placed the rifle under a shelf and then asked customer Harold Parker, a taxi driver, if he heard anything.

The shooting had only happened one minute earlier. Subsequently, a sheriff’s deputy came in and ordered Jowers to lock Jim’s Grill and keep everyone inside.

Jowers later admitted to Willie Akins, his right-hand man, that he was the figure in the bushes—though he said someone else was the shooter.[38] Akins said that his job was to kill this shooter who ran off to Florida before he could “pop him.”[39]

Jowers had been a Memphis police officer from 1946 to 1948 who went into business running clubs and then bars and restaurants.

Bill Hamblin, James McCraw’s roommate, testified at the 1999 civil trial that McCraw had told him that Jowers had not only showed him the rifle that killed King but told him to get rid of it. McCraw in turn said that he drove on to the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge and threw it off.[40]

Frank Liberto and Carlos Marcello

In an ABC television interview in 1993, Jowers said he had received $100,000 from Frank Liberto, president of the Liberto, Liberto and Latch Produce Company in Memphis, to arrange Dr. King’s murder.

John McFerren, a civil rights leader in 1968, told William Pepper how he heard Frank Liberto from the back of his store before King’s death say, “I told you not to call me here. Shoot the son of a bitch when he comes on the balcony.”[41]

Liberto—a member of the Carlos Marcello crime family—told the caller he should collect his money—$5,000 was mentioned—from Liberto’s brother in New Orleans.

Frank Holt, a Black produce truck unloader whom Jowers had falsely tried to blame at one point for the murder, heard Liberto say to one of the “big-wheels” at the M.E. Carter Produce Company during the sanitation strike that “King is a trouble-maker and he should be killed. If he is killed, then he will cause no more trouble.”[42]

Lavada Whitlock Addison, the manager of a pizza parlor near Liberto’s home, said that, one day between 1976 and 1982, Liberto leaned forward and told her, “I had Dr. Martin Luther King killed.”[43]

Earl Clark and Marrell McCollough

Jowers identified the assassin as Memphis Police Lieutenant Earl Clark—who was regarded as the best shot on the MPD and was close to Liberto.[44] Afterwards, Clark allegedly scaled down a wall adjacent to the Lorraine Motel before jumping into an escape vehicle.[45]

Clark was involved in planning sessions at Jim’s Grill to prepare for the assassination with five other men, only two of whom Jowers could identify.

One of the men, unbeknownst to Jowers, was an undercover police officer and agent provocateur, Marrell McCollough, who was assigned to the MPD from the 11th Military Intelligence Group.

Born in Mississippi, McCollough had served in the military police in Vietnam and went on to work for the CIA in Central or South America. At the time of King’s slaying, McCollough was posing as a member of the Invaders, a militant Black political group, which gave him access to King and his circle. He was identified as the mysterious figure kneeling over Dr. King after he was shot.[46]

Frank Strausser

In April 2003, Lenny Curtis, a custodian at the MPD shooting range, identified King’s killer to William Pepper as MPD patrolman Frank Strausser. Curtis said that about four or five months before King’s death, he heard Strausser—a Vietnam veteran with a reputation for beating up Black people—say in the lounge of the rifle range that “somebody was going to blow [King’s] motherfucking brains out.”

Curtis identified Strausser as being in the gun range firing a rifle all day the day before and day of King’s assassination. At around 2:30 p.m., Memphis Mayor Henry Loeb (D), MPD Chief Frank Holloman (discussed below) and a number of MPD officers including Earl Clark—whom Curtis identified as the spotter in King’s shooting—went into a meeting in a room in the rifle range. Strausser then left around 3:30 p.m. wearing a white shirt and pair of sunglasses carrying the assassination rifle in a red Chevrolet convertible.[47]

After the killing, investigators identified a size 13 shoe print in the bush behind the Lorraine Motel. In October 2013, Pepper interviewed Strausser and got him to admit that he wore a size 13 shoe.[48]

Ray’s Intelligence Background

Ray’s brother John Larry believes that his brother’s role as a patsy in the King killing had been planned for many years and originated with his Army service at the end of World War II.

After enlisting in 1946 at the age of 17, Ray served in the 7892nd Infantry Regiment and as a military policeman with the 382nd Military Police Battalion in Nuremburg, Germany. Subsequently, Ray was recruited into the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). He told John Larry that, “when you join the OSS, it’s like joining the Mafia, you never leave.”[49]

Researcher Lyndon Barsten was told by an intelligence officer that four-digit Army units like the 7892nd Infantry Regiment were “often used for cover.”[50] The unit was based in Frankfurt, Germany—the European headquarters of the CIA, housed in the old I.G. Farben building which had been spared during the Allied bombing. Ray was given two serial numbers—which further indicated he was involved in something secret.[51]

According to John Larry, James was haunted by an incident when he was in the military police when he shot a Black soldier named Washington who was accused of beating up Jews and raping an officer’s family member—which was not true. James had been given lumbar punctures (or spinal taps) by Army doctors which can be used to administer drugs.

Gaps in Ray’s military record further lead to suspicion that he was an unwitting victim of mind-control drug experiments carried out under the CIA’s MK-ULTRA—which may have caused him to shoot the Black soldier.

FBI documents show that Ray saw two hypnotists in Los Angeles after his Army service was completed, one of whom, Xavier von Koss, had been an Army intelligence officer and was likely brought over under Operation Paperclip (which brought Nazi scientists to the U.S.).[52]

James had told his family that the Feds were “messing with his mind,” and his father felt that he had been drugged.[53]

Between 1949 and 1952, James served as an undercover operator for FBI investigations into communists in Chicago, earning him the nickname “the Mole.”[54]

When Ray was arrested after committing a robbery, an intelligence operative was spotted in the rooming house where he was staying. There is a possibility that he was there because the government wanted Ray locked up so they could use him in a later operation—knowing he was a controllable personality.[55]

Jeff City Escape

There is no better patsy than an escaped prisoner because he cannot go to the police for assistance and is dependent on his contacts for survival.

On April 23, 1967, Ray escaped from the Missouri State Penitentiary at Jefferson City, where he was serving a 20-year sentence, by hiding in a breadbox in the back of a bakery truck.

The director of the Missouri State Prison system at the time, Fred T. Wilkinson, was a U.S. intelligence operative who handled the famous May 1960 spy exchange between U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers, whose plane had been shot down over the Soviet Union, and a Soviet Colonel, Rudolf Abel, who had been imprisoned for setting up a spy network in the U.S.[56]

The warden at Jeff City, Harold Swenson, also had an intelligence background. His predecessor, E.V. Nash, was said to have committed suicide—though the gun that killed him was found in a separate room in his house than his body.[57]

After a failed escape attempt, Ray was seen by Dr. Donald B. Peterson, head of psychiatry for the Army’s Far East Command during the Korean War, the height of the brainwashing era. Peterson prescribed Ray with Librium, a drug listed in government documents as one used to strengthen narco-hypnosis.[58]

Gene Barnes, a former inmate at Jeff City, signed an affidavit in the late 1970s which said that he had been told by Warden Donald Wyrick that Wyrick, Wilkinson and Swenson had allowed James to escape Jeff City so that the feds could later use him as the fall guy in King’s assassination.[59]

The fingerprints the prison sent out after James’s escape were not his; they had been switched by Wilkinson and Swenson with another man’s—meaning that if Ray had been captured, the police would have had to set him free.

When Wilkinson retired, the inmate who talked Ray into escaping, Ronnie Westberg, committed “suicide” by hanging himself, though he was discovered with broken arms and legs, pointing to foul play.[60]

The Mystery of Raoul

After James’s escape, he came in contact with a mysterious figure named Raoul, who provided Ray with phony documents in Montreal, Canada, after the two met at the Neptune Bar.

In exchange for the documents, Raoul had Ray assist him in smuggling contraband across the border and then sent Ray to Birmingham, Alabama, where he purchased a 1966 white Mustang and a telescopic rifle that appears to have served as the fake murder weapon.[61]

In Montreal, Ray was given the identity of Eric St. Vincent Galt—who happened to be a highly placed Canadian operative of U.S. Army intelligence.[62]

Galt ran a warehouse for Union Carbide which housed a top-secret munitions project funded by the CIA, the U.S. Naval Surface Weapons Center, and the Army Electronics Research and Development Command.[63]

At 3 p.m. on April 4, Ray met Raoul at Jim’s Grill where he was told to go to the rooming house next to the Lorraine Motel. He then waited for him after the shooting and helped him flee from the scene, before Raoul jumped out of the car and abandoned him to his fate.[64]

Raoul’s real name may have been J.C. Harden, a man Ray had been in contact with and was believed to be an FBI snitch, or Raoul Coelho, a Portuguese immigrant identified by Glenda Grabow, or Raoul Esquivel whose number Ray called.

Esquivel was tracked by a Los Angeles Times reporter to a Louisiana State police barracks in the New Orleans-Baton Rouge area, a well-known staging ground for CIA-sponsored guerrilla operations against Fidel Castro.[65]

Jules Ricco Kimble, a convicted killer who worked for organized crime, the Klu Klux Klan and CIA in the French separatist struggle in Quebec, told investigators that he flew Ray to Montreal and brought him to a CIA identities specialist who provided Ray with his aliases.

A retired CIA agent later said that the CIA identities specialist in Montreal was named Raoul Miora.[66]

Ewen Cameron and MK-ULTRA

While serving as Ray’s handler in Montreal, Kimble said that the two were ordered to go to McGill University’s Memorial Institute to undergo hypnosis.[67]

The Memorial Institute was the home of subproject 68 of the CIA’s MK-ULTRA brainwashing program run by Dr. Ewen Cameron—the lead CIA mind-control expert in Canada.[68]

An Inside Job

Kimble said that the assassination was carried out by a team of covert intelligence operatives who had an unmarked van with sophisticated electronic radio equipment that could oversee the crime scene and monitor and broadcast on police radio channels.

Two snipers with the team used rifles identical to Ray’s, while other members obtained Memphis Police Department uniforms. The two snipers concealed themselves in the bushes behind the boarding house; one was a backup, the other shot King. The rifles were then concealed in a prearranged hiding place behind the boarding house where they were retrieved by other operatives.

The two snipers afterwards jumped down onto the sidewalk from the bushes and mingled with the other uniformed officers who were rushing about. A voucher had been established for the police imposters. If anyone asked who they were, they were told to call a certain police captain who would vouch for the “new men on the force.”[69]

Secret Army Intelligence Team

The 902nd Military Intelligence Group under the command of Colonel John W. Downie—LBJ’s CIA Vietnam briefer—had been deployed to Memphis at the time of King’s visit with orders to shoot to kill him and aide Andrew Young [later mayor of Atlanta] on command.[70] King was considered “a Negro who repeatedly preached the message of Hanoi and Peking.”

The 902nd Military Intelligence Group had been involved in gun-running with mobster Carlos Marcello; weapons stolen from Army bases were delivered to Marcello and the proceeds were used to help fund black operations.[71] According to two sources, the 902ndincluded “Klan guys who hated niggers.” A Green Beret said that nobody in it had “any hesitancy about killing the two sacks of shit [King and Young].”[72]

Another Green Beret who participated in a clandestine training course in riot control and surveillance identified a CIA/NSA agent whom he had recognized from his time in Vietnam climbing down a wall behind the Lorraine Motel just after King was shot.[73]

A contact in the CIA had given Downie’s team a detailed area of operations map, pictures of cars used by the King group and Memphis police radio frequencies. It carried camera equipment and took up positions overlooking the Lorraine Motel and monitored King’s telephone conversations from Room 306 and other communications. They obtained pictures that caught the shooter as he was lowering his rifle and Jowers running back toward the rooming house. These were given to Colonel Downie and never revealed publicly.[74] The secret agent who snapped the photos said that the shooter was not Ray.[75]

Ties to Dallas ’63?

In the days after King’s killing, FBI agent Don Wilson came across a 1966 Mustang with Alabama plates in Atlanta and opened the car door. An envelope and some papers fell out, which he kept hidden for the next 29 years.

One piece came from a 1963 Dallas telephone directory. The telephone numbers on the page included those of the family of H.L. Hunt and had the name Raul, the letter J, and a Dallas telephone number, which turned out to be the number of the Vegas Club which, at the time, was run by Jack Ruby, the killer of Lee Harvey Oswald.

The second paper was a payoff list and included Raul’s name and a date for payment. A third piece of paper had a telephone number and extension of the Atlanta FBI field office.[76]

FBI’s War Against King

Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg swore in an affidavit that, during a 1978 conversation with Brady Tyson, then an aide to UN Ambassador Andrew Young, Tyson said that a group of off-duty and retired FBI officers, including a sharpshooter, working under the personal direction of J. Edgar Hoover, killed King and then covered it up.[77]

According to Ron Adkins, Hoover’s right-hand man, Clyde Tolson—who allegedly was routinely given money by Hoover to perform criminal deeds including local contract killings—planned King’s assassination beginning in May 1964 on a cruise to Southampton, England, with Russell Adkins, Sr., Ron’s father and a Memphis city engineer, Klansman, and fixer for the Dixie mafia.[78]

Part of the plot involved Tolson’s providing envelopes of money to be paid to informants and $25,000 to the warden of the Missouri state prison, Harold Swenson, to arrange for Ray’s escape.[79]

Hoover had considered King an enemy of the state. In December 1963, less than a month after the assassination of President Kennedy, FBI officials had met in Washington to explore ways of “neutralizing King as an effective Negro leader.”[80]

Hidden microphones were placed in Dr. King’s hotel rooms in an attempt to pick up evidence of extramarital sexual activity, break up his marriage, or blackmail him.

The Bureau also engaged in surreptitious activities and burglaries against Dr. King and SCLC.[81] In a letter sent to King in 1964 calling King a “colossal fraud,” the FBI even encouraged him to commit suicide.

FBI-MPD Links

The FBI enjoyed very close connections with the Memphis PD.

E.H. Arkin founded MPD’s intelligence unit in 1967 under the tutelage of FBI agent William Lawrence, who headed the FBI Memphis Field Office’s domestic intelligence operations which surveilled King.[82]

The head of the MPD at the time of King’s assassination, Frank Holloman, was a 25-year FBI veteran from Mississippiwho was in charge of director J. Edgar Hoover’s Washington office from 1952 to 1959. In the mid-1960s, Holloman headed the FBI’s Atlanta office when it was the nerve center of surveillance and skullduggery directed against King.[83]

A law-and-order conservative who railed against “long-haired, foul-smelling hippies” and “hostile forces in Black Memphis,” Holloman promoted aggressive police tactics against Blacks during the sanitation workers strike whom he accused of adopting “guerrilla warfare” and oversaw an expansion of MPD’s internal security division.[84] The Tri-State Defendercalled Holloman an “advocator of genocide of Black people,” and included a cartoon depicting him firing his pistol under the shelter of hooded Klansmen.[85]

Holloman said that his first priority as police chief was to ensure that “there was always a ‘two-way street in terms of the flow of information’ between the MPD and FBI.”[86] He was the one to move the Black firemen and pull Black detective Ed Redditt away from protecting King—and, according to witnesses interviewed by William Pepper, was involved in numerous other aspects of the planning of King’s death.[87]

FBI Gets King to Stay at the Lorraine Motel—and Switch His Room

On March 29, 1968, the FBI issued from headquarters a COINTELPRO (Counterintelligence Program) memorandum, written by G.C. Moore, chief of the racial intelligence section, to William C. Sullivan, Assistant Director in charge of the intelligence division, that was designed to influence King to stay at the Lorraine Motel when he returned to Memphis on April 3.

The memo recommended placement of a news item with the Bureau’s friendly sources which would read as follows:

The fine Hotel Lorraine in Memphis is owned and patronized exclusively by Negroes but King didn’t go there after his hasty exit [from] the demonstration of March 28. Instead, King decided the plush Holiday Inn Motel, white-owned, operated and almost exclusively white patronized, was the place to “cool it.” There will be no boycott of white merchants for King, only for his followers.[88]

National Civil Rights Museum at the Lorraine Motel – US Civil Rights Trail

The FBI made sure that King stayed at the Lorraine Motel during his visit to Memphis so that the assassination plot against him could be consummated. [Source: civilrightsall.com]

A retired New York Police detective later uncovered that King was initially supposed to stay in a secluded room in the motel, #202, but was moved to Room 306 with an exposed balcony after the concierge received a call supposedly from SCLC in Atlanta asking for the change in room. According to William Pepper and Phillip Nelson, the caller was actually an FBI infiltrator inside SCLC who acted under the orders of police chief Holloman and had been paid through an intermediary. The infiltrator or possibly infiltrators also had the task of getting King out of his room onto the balcony before 6 PM and making sure he was wearing a tie so he could be identified by the assassin.[89]

Coverup

After King’s death, the FBI took charge of the investigation from the MPD, even though the murder was a state and not federal crime. There was an inexplicable 30-minute delay—which enabled the killers to get away. Obvious leads and significant witnesses were subsequently ignored or dismissed, and the Bureau’s files sanitized.[90] An autopsy of King—amazingly—was never conducted.[91]

To help convince the public of Ray’s guilt, the FBI had William Bradford Huie—editor of The American Mercury[92] literary magazine—write a book on Ray that depicted him as a deranged lone gunman.

A conservative Alabaman, Huie had known J. Edgar Hoover since the 1930s. He claimed that Ray was a vicious southern racist who had stalked King, which was untrue. Huie was given access to Ray by his first lawyer, Arthur Hanes, Sr.– a former FBI and CIA agent and the mayor of Birmingham when Eugene “Bull” Connor ordered the use of police dogs and fire hoses against civil rights protesters.[93]

Cartha DeLoach, the FBI agent placed in charge of the investigation, had written a memo to J. Edgar Hoover suggesting that the FBI “quietly sponsor a book” that would tell the “true story of the King case” and “advise friendly newsmen” on a “strictly confidential basis” that Coretta Scott and Ralph Abernathy “were deliberately trying to keep King’s assassination in the news by pulling the ruse of maintaining the King murder was definitely a conspiracy and not committed by one man in order to keep the money coming to Ms. King.”[94]

Captain Ed Atkinson, an aide to Memphis PD chief Frank Holloman, said that he overheard the discussion of two FBI agents at the bathroom window at the rear of the rooming house after the killing in which one of the agents said that the tree branch would have to be cut because no one would ever believe that a shooter could make the shot from that point with the tree in the way.

After undergoing hypnosis, Atkinson identified Memphis police Captain Earl Clark as the one who called for the cutting down of the tree branch.

Drawing King to Memphis

The sanitation workers strike in Memphis started after two Black sanitation workers, Echol Cole and Robert Walker, were crushed to death in the back of a garbage truck on February 1st after taking temporary shelter from a hard rain by kneeling inside the back of the truck.

According to Ron Adkins, whose father Russell ran the Memphis city garbage dump, Cole and Walker did not die because of an accident; “somebody pulled the hammer, pulled the lever on the truck and mashed them up in there.”[95]

The motive behind the killings was to precipitate the strike that would draw King to Memphis—the ideal place for him to be killed. Memphis was ideal because of the close connection between J. Edgar Hoover and Memphis police Chief Holloman and the hostility toward King exhibited by Memphis Mayor Henry Loeb—a segregationist whose family had made a fortune in the dry-cleaning business exploiting Black labor.

Furthermore, Tennessee’s governor, Buford Ellingtone, was a close friend of President Lyndon B. Johnson, a Hoover ally who also wanted King dead.[96]

Ellington’s involvement in the coverup was demonstrated when he fired the state’s commissioner of corrections, Harry S. Avery, after he had begun to investigate King’s death when he came across a letter to Ray typed on McGill University letterhead, which Avery believed might have been related to how Ray was able to obtain his aliases and some Canadian passports.[97]

Ghouls in White Smocks

After more than four decades, Johnton Shelby came forward relaying the story of his mother, Lula Mae, who was a surgical aide at St. Joseph’s Hospital that took part in Dr. King’s emergency treatment.

The morning after King’s death she had gathered her family to tell them that, as doctors were working to save King, one of the orderlies, John Billings, following doctors instructions, left the room to “find the men in charge.” When he returned with them, the doctors said there was nothing more they could do to save King and then instructed the rest of the staff to leave the room and not talk about what had occurred.

According to Lula Mae, who was the last to leave the room, King was still alive at that time. As she made her way out of the room, the head of surgery—Dr. Breen Bland, a pioneer in blood transfusions and polio vaccinations—and a couple of men in suits told the doctors to “stop working on that nigger and let him die.”

She also heard spitting sounds and turned around just in time to see doctors spitting on King and removing his ventilator tube while putting a pillow over his face to ensure that he died.

Ron Adkins, under oath, stated that he had been with his father, and after he died, his older brother Russell Adkins Jr., when his father and brother discussed the plan with Dr. Bland and Frank Holloman regarding the need to take King to St. Joseph’s Hospital if he had not been killed. Ron recalled that Dr. Bland was prepared to give King a certain lethal injection if it became necessary.[98]

Poor Buddy

On the night of April 4, cab driver Louis Ward went straight to the airport after hearing of King’s shooting and met a fellow driver he knew as Buddy, who said he had gone to the Lorraine Motel shortly before 6 p.m. to pick up a passenger with an enormous amount of luggage.[99]

As they finished loading up his taxi in the Lorraine parking lot, Buddy—who was in his early sixties—turned to look to the area of dense brush and trees opposite the motel. The passenger then punched him on the arm to distract him and told him to look up at King on the balcony where he appeared to be a sitting duck for any would-be assassin.

At that precise moment, King was struck by the fatal bullet, Buddy saw a man [thought to be Earl Clark] come down the wall from the balcony empty handed and get into a black and white Memphis PD car which was stopped at the middle of the intersection between Mulberry and Huling.

The passenger at this time became irritable, saying he had to leave immediately because otherwise the ambulance and other cars would box them in, and he had a plane to catch.

When Ward asked about Buddy a few days later, three or four other drivers in the main taxi office told him they understood he had fallen or been pushed from a speeding car from Route 55 on the other side of the Memphis-Arkansas Bridge late in the evening of April 4 and was dead.[100]

A Pile of Corpses

John Larry Ray—who spent 18 years behind bars after being framed for a crime he says he did not commit—wrote that “the coverup of the King assassination left a pile of corpses in its wake.”[101]

Three months after Jimmy Hoffa’s lawyer, Z.T. Osborn, Jr., decided to help James Earl Ray with his case, he abruptly committed “suicide”—which his wife did not believe.[102]

Two judges considering Ray’s request for a retrial—W. Preston Battle and William E. Miller—died of suspicious heart attacks.[103] Just before he died, Battle had received a request for a new trial from one of Ray’s new attorneys, Richard J. Ryan, which was refused by Battle’s successor, Judge Arthur Faquin, Jr., in contradiction to existing Tennessee law.[104]

The Church Committee hearings later revealed that the CIA had developed a “heart attack gun” which could deliver a tiny frozen needle that, upon entering the body, would deliver a toxin that induced a heart attack but then became undetectable at autopsy.[105]

In July 1969, King’s brother, the Reverend Alfred Daniel King, was found dead in his home after an apparent swimming pool accident (“accidental drowning”). By all accounts, he was a fantastic swimmer.[106]

The emergency responders said upon arrival, “Ain’t no water in his lungs, he was dead before he hit the water.” King’s wife, Naomi, said “Absolutely, he was murdered. He was an excellent swimmer. There was no water in his lungs. He was in the fetal position. He had a bruised forehead. Rings around his neck. And he was in his underwear. He was murdered.”

In 1971, Bill Sartor, a 32-year-old writer for Life and Look magazines on the trail of the Marcello/Liberto organized crime connection to King’s death, was murdered in Waco, Texas, the night before he was to interview a nightclub owner linked to Marcello. Sartor was given a lethal dose of methaqualone—slipped into his drink.[107]

Six years after Sartor’s death, former FBI assistant director of intelligence William Sullivan was shot and killed by a man (Robert Daniels) who mistook him for a deer while deer-hunting. The killing occurred shortly before he was scheduled to testify before the HSCA about his former boss, J. Edgar Hoover’s, hatred of King.[108]

Getting Away with Murder

Martin Luther King, Jr.’s assassination was a major negative turning point in American history.

It sparked riots that played into Richard Nixon’s call for law and order, deprived the civil rights and Vietnam anti-war movements of its greatest leader, and destroyed prospects for an inter-racial movement of the poor. Afterwards, two U.S. Army brigades were until 1971 stationed on permanent standby to deal with domestic unrest as part of Operation GARDEN PLOT.

King had prophesied that a world starved of love—in which human caring and the spiritual dimension are de-emphasized—would become one of material scarcity, massive inequality, overly stressed environmental systems, and social disintegration.

The men who killed King were very clearly starved of love. The evidence indicates that they continue to enjoy impunity for their crime because the U.S. government will never admit that it was behind the killing of a national treasure.

*

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.

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

Notes

  1. See Michael K. Honey, Going Down Jericho Road: The Memphis Strike, Martin Luther King’s Last Campaign (New York: W.W. Norton, 2007); Michael Eric Dyson, I May Not Get There with You: The True Martin Luther King Jr. (New York: The Free Press, 2001); William F. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King: The Truth Behind the Assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2016), xvi, xvii. The Johnson administration disbanded the National Conference for New Politics which promoted the King-Spock ticket by having infiltrators adopt an anti-Israel platform that alienated Jewish financiers.
  2. On Ray’s background, see Clay Blair, Jr., The Strange Case of James Earl Ray: The Man Who Murdered Martin Luther King (New York: New York Times Company, 1969); William Bradford Huie, He Slew the Dreamer: My Search for the Truth about James Earl Ray and the Murder of Martin Luther King (W.H. Allen/Virgin Books, 1970); and James Earl Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? The True Story by the Alleged Assassin, with foreword by Jesse Jackson and Mark Lane (Washington, D.C.: National Press Books, 1992).
  3. William F. Pepper, Orders to Kill: The Truth Behind the Murder of Martin Luther King (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1995), 39.
  4. Ray used the alias John Willard and rejected a room in the south of the house for one with a view of the Lorraine Motel.
  5. Phillip F. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? The Case Against Lyndon B. Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover, with new foreword by Edgar F. Tarro (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2018), 210.
  6. William F. Pepper, An Act of State: The Execution of Martin Luther King (London: Verso, 2003). Martin Luther King III holds the same view as his mother, telling reporters in 1986 that “in my opinion it had to be a conspiracy of some kind. It’s probably a fact—but that’s just my opinion—that the intelligence community played a role. I know whatever happened it was a serious, massive effort.” Philip H. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination: New Revelations on the Conspiracy and Cover-up, 1968-1991 (New York: Shapolsky Publishers Inc., 1989), 185.
  7. Foreman told a woman he was attracted to named Gloria that Ray was innocent but “had to be sacrificed.” Pepper, An Act of State, 56. Ray had been subjected to inhumane prison conditions, deprived of access to fresh air, natural light, privacy or basic hygienic or toiletry functions—which was designed to coerce from him a guilty plea.
  8. Jeff Cohen, “The Assassination of Martin Luther King,” in Government by Gunplay: Assassination Conspiracy Theories from Dallas to Today, Sid Blumenthal and Harvey Yazijian, eds., with introduction by Philip Agee (New York: Signet, 1976), 50. Foreman began negotiating for a guilty plea before undertaking an investigation of the evidence in the case.
  9. John Larry Ray and Lyndon Barsten, Truth at Last: The Untold Story Behind James Earl Ray and the Assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. (Guilford, CT: The Lyons Press, 2008), 162, 183. The crime scene investigator was named Herb McDonnell who had also analyzed the murders of Fred Hampton and Robert Kennedy. The bathroom wall was too close to have allowed the Remington rifle enough room to sit at an angle that could fire to Room 306 at the Lorraine. In 2012, during a $27.5 million renovation to the Lorraine Motel and Bessie Brewer’s rooming house, the bathroom was remodeled to make it appear more like a sniper’s nest from where the shot that killed King could have been legitimately fired.
  10. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 169. Memphis PD officer J.E. “Bud” Ghormley also went from Fire Station #2 behind the Lorraine Motel to South Main along with a patrolman named Gross in under two minutes and saw nobody running from the flophouse—even though it surely would have taken Ray longer than two minutes to put his bundle together—containing the rifle, radio, cans of beer and other assorted items—and flee. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 115.
  11. Pepper, An Act of State, 48. Witnesses saw no police cars parked in that spot. The drop would have been a detour of time and motion for Ray who was unlikely to have willfully incriminated himself. Besides the murder weapon, the bedsheet included his prison radio with his inmate number on it. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 113.
  12. Pepper, An Act of State, 227; Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 134; Pepper, Orders to Kill, 137; Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 110, 111.
  13. Harold Weisberg, Frame-Up: The Assassination of Martin Luther King, with a postscript by James Earl Ray, rev. ed. (New York: Skyhorse, 1993), 440.
  14. The bedsheet was filled with beer bottles and some bobby pins, which a fleeing killer would never likely have taken pains to try and preserve.
  15. Pepper, An Act of State, 15, 116; Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 11; Weisberg, Frame-Up, 160, 161.
  16. Pepper, An Act of State, 196. Roy Davis said that “he would not like to rely on him [Stephens] as my only witness.” [NOTE: Who is Roy Davis?]
  17. Pepper, An Act of State, 15; Pepper, Orders to Kill, 153.
  18. Walden said that Ray was not the man who emerged from the bathroom after the shooting, and that she had been offered $100,000 to lie and pinpoint Ray as the man she saw. When she refused to do so, she was whisked away to an insane asylum outside the city, which she claims was an attempt to silence her. She had no history of psychiatric problems and later won release from court after ten years of incarceration. Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 11. Gerald Posner—in Killing the Dream: James Earl Ray and the Assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. (New York: Random House, 1995), 234—claims that Walden was an alcoholic and uncredible witness who was admitted to the psychiatric hospital after she had been taken to the hospital because she hurt her foot. Riddled with anxiety, she was examined by a staff psychiatrist who said she found her to be suffering from psychotic depression and was suicidal. She was diagnosed with schizophrenia, chronic brain syndrome induced by alcoholism and delusional behavior and suffered from confabulations, or a desire to concoct stories to fill a gap in her memory. Lawyer Mark Lane, however, discovered that a series of illegal actions by the police and hospital was the basis of Walden’s confinement and that the real reason, according to her attorney C.M. Murphy, was to “safeguard their case against Ray”—meaning that it was about forcibly preventing exculpatory evidence that would point to Ray’s innocence.
  19. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 94. The man she saw went out the rear door and not front.
  20. Pepper, An Act of State, 15; Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 160.
  21. Pepper, An Act of State, 15.Curiously, Ray’s Mustang getaway car was found overflowing with ashes and cigarette butts though Ray had been a lifelong non-smoker and was a fanatic for cleanliness. Michael Newton, The King Conspiracy (Los Angeles, Calif.: Holloway House Publishing, 1987), 8.
  22. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 113, 114. Two eyewitnesses, William Reed and Ray Hendrix, who had earlier looked at Ray’s Mustang, claimed to have seen it driven by a man resembling Ray turn the corner on South Maine Street in front of them around 5:45 p.m.
  23. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last; Blair, Jr., The Strange Case of James Earl Ray, 97. Posner, Killing the Dream, 91, 135, includes interviews of people Ray was in jail with who said he was a racist and pointed to Ray’s valorization of Hitler during World War II and Northern and Southern Rhodesia to where he tried to escape after King’s killing. The credibility of these testimonies has been put into question, however, and other of Ray’s cellmates in prison and others who knew him insist he was not a racist and could not have killed King. Posner claims that Ray once said, after watching King in the Jefferson City prison on television, that he would kill King. However, it was later confirmed by the warden that prisoners could only watch tv starting in 1970. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 242, 243.
  24. Ray never fired a gun in any of the robberies in which he participated and never upgraded his marksmanship skills from his days in the U.S. Army. Researcher Philip Melanson writes that there was no evidence that Ray “had ever shot at another human being much less killed one, or that he was violence prone. Yet he allegedly became a cold-blooded killer for hire.” Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 123.
  25. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 159.
  26. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 136, 210. Jim Reid, a Memphis Press-Scimitar reporter and photographer, took a picture of the cutting.
  27. Pepper, An Act of State, 12; Jesse Ventura, with Dick Russell, American Conspiracies: Lies, Lies and More Dirty Lies That the Government Tells Us (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2010), 57. One of those witnesses was Andrew Young.
  28. Newton, The King Conspiracy, 50. The man, according to Carter, then threw the gun into the bushes, put the barrel into his jacket and melted into the crowd.
  29. Pepper, An Act of State, 115. Catling said that she was never interviewed by any law enforcement officials. She lived close to the scene of King’s death for 32 years though, inexplicably, nobody knocked on her door until Ray’s attorney, William Pepper, did in November 1999. At the time, she said she was relieved to get the information off her chest and had been burdened all these years because she knew that an innocent man was in prison. Catling also said that right after the shooting she witnessed a white man running from an alley halfway up Huling Street, which ran to a building connected to the rooming house. He arrived at a car parked on the south side of Huling and facing east, got in, and drove quickly away, turning left onto Mulberry and going right past her and the Memphis police officers opposite her who were manning the barricade. She was surprised that the police paid no attention to him and did not try to prevent him from leaving the area. The man, she said, was not Ray, as he was heavier than Ray.
  30. Pepper, An Act of State, 12.
  31. Pepper, An Act of State, 117. Memphis police dog officer J.B. Hodges discovered footprints from the bushes to the rooming house which were never identified or explained.
  32. Pepper, An Act of State, 18, 132, 133.
  33. Mark Lane and Dick Gregory, Code Name “Zorro”: The Murder of Martin Luther King, Jr.(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1977), 279.
  34. Pepper, An Act of State, 18, 193; Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 172.
  35. The FBI had told Redditt that he was under the threat of assassination but then cabled the MPD that this threat was a mistake. Despite being told the latter, the MPD still kept Redditt under home confinement. The source of the alleged threat—the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party—gives indication of the underlying political agenda at play.
  36. Pepper, An Act of State, 18. Something else unexplained was that the Invaders, a black group trying to address local needs in the city, was given an order to leave the motel ten minutes before King was shot.
  37. Pepper, An Act of State. A skeptical view of Spates’s claims about Jowers is found in Posner, Killing the Dream, 282. Posner claims that Spates, who was only seventeen at the time, never worked at Jim’s Grill and was not reported by police as having been at the grill at the time of King’s killing when they had interviewed patrons and staff there just after the killing. He also claims that Jowers was motivated by the potential for financial gain and that his story was false.
  38. Pepper, An Act of State, 23, 32, 33, 47, 160. The customers were talking, drinking and playing shuffleboard and barely noticed Jowers.
  39. Pepper, An Act of State, 26, 214. Akins also allegedly threatened Betty Spates and her sister Bobbi who knew too much about the killing. Posner, Killing the Dream, 282. Jowers told Akins about his involvement in the assassination after he had been drinking. An FBI agent told Bill Hamblin that the CIA had ordered King’s killing.
  40. Pepper, An Act of State, 119.
  41. Pepper, An Act of State, 26. The HSCA inexplicably failed to interview McFerren.
  42. Pepper, An Act of State, 28.
  43. Pepper, An Act of State, 145.
  44. Clark died in 1987. His wife concocted an alibi for Earl that broke down under scrutiny. Pepper, An Act of State, 152, 153.
  45. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King.
  46. Pepper, An Act of State, 13, 94; Pepper, Orders to Kill, 130, 152; Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 171; Honey, Going Down Jericho Road, 405. McCollough supplied Lt. Eli Arkin, his MPD intelligence division control officer, with regular reports on the Invaders. One police officer later said that he was so strident in his statements that officers who did not know he was an agent “would have given their eye teeth to have him locked up.” The Invaders promoted violence and participated in provocative acts during the sanitation workers strike as part of an effort to discredit King.
  47. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King, 223, 224, 227, 228. Curtis was intimidated into silence after the killing.
  48. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King, 232, 234.
  49. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 18, 19, 20.
  50. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 20. Barsten found that some of the men listed as being part of the unit were not actually there. In 1970, when Congressman L. Mendel Rivers (Dem.-S.C.) tried to access Ray’s Army records, he was stonewalled and told there were sensitive medical aspects that could not be disclosed. In Ventura, American Conspiracies, 62.
  51. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 96.
  52. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 23, 103. Barsten found one surviving 7892nd Regiment medical file indicating that a soldier named Neal Thompson was given the hypnotic drug phenobarbital. John Larry Ray believes the shooting of Washington may have been part of a drugging operation and asks whether James’s psychological makeup was the reason he was chosen to be a patsy years later in the murder of Martin Luther King, Jr.
  53. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 27.
  54. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 28.
  55. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 50.
  56. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 53.
  57. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 54. Members of Nash’s family blamed his death on U.S. intelligence agencies.
  58. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 56, 57, 62. Peterson wrote a book on hypnosis. In the early 1970s, Freedom magazine published an article asserting that mind-control operations were being run in the Fulton, Missouri, prison where Ray was treated.
  59. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 62.
  60. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 73; Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr. Ray’s brother John Larry was told through the criminal grapevine that his brother’s escape from prison was orchestrated by Richard Helms and the CIA and its agents, such as Wilkinson, who ran the prison.
  61. Not knowing anything about rifles, Ray bought the wrong one and had to go back. He was also sent by Raoul on undisclosed missions to Los Angeles and Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.
  62. Pepper, An Act of State, 77. Galt had a top-secret security clearance. Union Carbide was, at the time, engaged in high-security research projects controlled by its U.S. parent.
  63. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 435; Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, ch. 5.
  64. Ray had been told to go to Memphis for a gun-smuggling operation that Raoul said would make him rich.
  65. Joe Davis, “The King Assassination: Was James Earl Ray a Patsy?” Ann Arbor Sun, January 22, 1976, https://aadl.org/node/200647; Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 104. Perhaps not coincidentally, Grace Walden identified the man leaving the rooming house as a Louisiana State trooper, who may have been the same Raoul.
  66. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 177, 178, 179; Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 84. When Melanson questioned Ray about Kimble, he became very nervous. Kimble reportedly had contacts with CIA flyer David Ferrie who was allegedly implicated in the Kennedy assassination.
  67. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 28. Kimble’s claims are partially corroborated by his then-girlfriend Marcelle Mathieu. A Canadian reporter, Andy Salwyn found witnesses who placed Kimble in Montreal in the summer of 1967, at the same time as Ray, and he provided this information in a detailed report to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
  68. See Alfred W. McCoy, A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation from the Cold War to the War on Terror (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2005).
  69. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 104. He also said that someone other than Ray dropped the bundle in front of the Canipe Amusement Company. Adding some credence to Kimble’s theory, in 1975, Memphis PD officer Eddie Redditt was flown to Washington to identify Memphis PD officers at the scene—and left to wonder why he had to fly all the way to Washington to do so. The trip would make sense if the FBI was nervous that the identities of the police at the scene of King’s death could be revealed or fraud uncovered.
  70. Stephen G. Tompkins, “Army Feared King, Secretly Watched Him: Spying on Blacks Started 75 Years Ago,” The Commercial Appeal, Memphis, Tennessee, March 21, 1993, https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ArmyFearedKing.html. Army Intelligence opened its file on King in 1947 with a photograph showing him and other Morehouse College students leaving a meeting of Mrs. Dorothy Lilley’s Intercollegiate Council. Lilley was a suspected Communist. In 1917, Army intelligence had spied on King’s maternal grandfather, Reverend A.D. Williams, who was a founder of the Atlanta chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which army intelligence officers believed was “an agitative pro-Soviet organization for propagandizing the Negroes,” according to a 1926 report by Lt. Col. Walter O. Boswell, Army Intelligence executive officer at the War Department.
  71. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King, 135.
  72. Pepper, An Act of State, 68. Downie had advised LBJ to get out of Vietnam, prompting LBJ to pound the table and say, “I cannot get out of Vietnam, John, my friends are making too much money.” These friends included Texas oil barons H.L. Hunt and Clint Murchison and George Brown, CEO of Brown & Root.
  73. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 432. Memphis police who participated in the clandestine training course in riot control and surveillance believed it was a cover for a covert intelligence operation run by its instructor, nicknamed Coop, who dropped out of sight just before King’s assassination.
  74. Pepper, An Act of State, 161; Pepper, Orders to Kill, 419-430. Downie was commander of the 902nd Military Intelligence Group, a unit based inside the Department of Defense. Posner disputes the existence of this team in chapter 32 of Killing the Dream. CIA operative Jack Terrell, a whistleblower in the Iran-Contra scandal, testified at the 1999 civil trial that his friend J.D. Hill was part of an army sniper team deployed to Memphis on April 4, though their mission was canceled. Hill died suspiciously in a murder that was blamed on his wife but had the appearance of a professional killing. Hill was known to drink heavily and may have begun to talk to others about the Memphis operation.
  75. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 434. After the assassination, police picked up a man named Ted Andrews wearing a dark suit who looked like Ray and was staying in Bessie Brewer’s rooming house. He had a background in the U.S. Navy—which the FBI deleted information about. Andrews never established a proper alibi and remains a figure of suspicion. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 117-123.
  76. Pepper, An Act of State, 101.
  77. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 89.
  78. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King, 238; Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 82, 83. Russell Adkins, Sr., died in 1967. His son Russell, Jr., a 30-year Marine Corps veteran, took over in the planning of King’s killing after his death. Ron served six years in the U.S. Marine Corps. He said that, until he was nine years old, his father took him to meetings including with Tolson, Mayor Henry Loeb, and mobsters Frank Liberto and Carlos Marcello.
  79. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 84; Pepper. The Plot to Kill King, 40. Adkins witnessed the $25,000 payoff to Swenson.
  80. Pepper, An Act of State, 11.
  81. Pepper, An Act of State; David J. Garrow, The FBI and Martin Luther King, Jr.: From “Solo” to Memphis (New York: W.W. Norton, 1981).
  82. Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 74.
  83. Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 248; Pepper, Orders to Kill, 14; Melanson, The Martin Luther King Assassination, 74; Lane and Gregory, Code Name “Zorro,” 144. Holloman said he was a good friend of Hoover. When the FBI’s Atlanta office that Holloman had headed, heard news of King’s assassination, they yelled “we got Zorro.”
  84. Honey, Going Down Jericho Road, 388.
  85. Honey, Going Down Jericho Road, 360, 370. The MPD killed a Black teenager, Charles Payne, and mercilessly beat many protesters and looters during the sanitation workers strike, invaded people’s homes and called Blacks the n-word. Holloman said that there was a war in the streets of Memphis and that the police had used restraint.
  86. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 68.
  87. Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 248; Pepper, The Plot to Kill King; Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 162.
  88. Pepper, An Act of State, 186, 187.
  89. Pepper, An Act of State, 190, 240; Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr.,162, 203-206.
  90. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 482, 483. Pepper notes that the drunkenness of the state’s main witness, Charlie Stephens, was concealed. Pepper asks where are: the interviews conducted of yellow cab driver Paul, the photographs of the bullet removed from King’s body, the photographs of the scene of the crime as it was at the time, before the bushes at the back of the rooming house and the hedge between the parking lot and the fire station had been cut down?
  91. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., xxix.
  92. Founded by H.L. Mencken, The American Mercury was once a great magazine that featured essays by luminaries like F. Scott Fitzgerald, Langston Hughes, William Faulkner, W.E.B. DuBois and Carl Sandburg. According to Phillip Nelson, however, Huie managed to turn the Mercury into an FBI/CIA rag whose roster of writers included J. Edgar Hoover. Before its ultimate demise, it became a chronicle of racism and anti-semitism.
  93. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 104, 105, 380, 381. The FBI additionally sponsored Gerold Frank’s book, An American Death: The True Story of the Assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Greatest Manhunt of Our Time (New York: Doubleday, 1972) and a book by George McMillan who had long connections to the CIA.After leaving the FBI in 1959, Hanes became a security officer with the Hayes Aircraft Corporation in Birmingham while doubling as a CIA agent. The CIA recruited Hayes employees as pilots for the 1961 Bay of Pigs fiasco, and when four. of them died in an abortive raid, Hanes drew the assignment of warning their widows to keep eternal silence. Newton, The King Conspiracy, 174.
  94. Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr.? 250; Pepper, Orders to Kill, 53.
  95. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 70. Ron called Clyde Tolson “Uncle Clyde.”
  96. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 77.
  97. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 77.
  98. Pepper, The Plot to Kill King, 261, 274; Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 197, 198.
  99. William Pepper refers to Buddy as Paul. Buddy’s last name was thought to be Butler.
  100. Pepper, An Act of State, 51, 52; Pepper, The Plot to Kill King, 113. Buddy’s killer was reportedly Chester “Chess” Butler, a master killer used sometimes by Russell Adkins, Sr. Ron Adkins observed the scene in which Buddy’s cab was being loaded with heavy bags and said that he heard Butler confess to killing Buddy in front of his wife, Mildred, the night that he killed him. Adkins said that Chess had been told to take care of Buddy by either Holloman or Russell Jr or Earl Clark, one or the other. Clark was concerned because he thought the driver saw him come down from the wall and turned to face him, and therefore could have identified him.
  101. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 136. 137. John Larry believes that the feds may have killed his friend Margie, who died of a heart attack in her mid-twenties. She had been a liaison between him and the FBI. King’s mother, Alberta, was tragically murdered in a church shooting at Ebenezer Baptist Church in 1974 which was also suspicious.
  102. Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 136.
  103. Ray, Who Killed Martin Luther King Jr. 138-140, 163; Ray and Barsten, Truth at Last, 168.
  104. Ryan attributed Faquin’s decision to an FBI-CIA conspiracy.
  105. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 260.
  106. The week after his brother’s death, Alfred had given a powerful sermon at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta entitled “Why America May Go to Hell.”
  107. Pepper, Orders to Kill, 239; Ventura, American Conspiracies, 58. Sartor, who was on the staff of the Birmingham News, had reported on an alleged meeting between Ray and an associate Charles Stein with members of the Carlos Marcello crime family in New Orleans before King’s assassination. Sartor’s original death certificate was evasive, stating that the cause of death was undetermined. After 21 years, it was acknowledged that he died from an overdose when Sartor was not known to use drugs of any kind. The Waco district attorney had characterized his death as a homicide. Louis Lomax, a Black journalist who was investigating the deaths of both Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr., also died in a suspicious car accident.
  108. Nelson, Who REALLY Killed Martin Luther King Jr., 400. Gary Revel, who worked on the HSCA investigation, wrote to author Phillip Nelson that his “brother and cousin’s husband, Ivan Riley, as well as Sullivan and five other FBI officials who could have been valuable to my investigation died mysteriously or were simply killed during 1977.” Sullivan was a liberal Democrat who came to work one day in 1971 to find the lock on his door changed and nameplate removed. He had begun to speak out, saying that Hoover had greatly overemphasized the threat to national security posed by the American Communist Party while devoting less attention than was warranted to violations of Federal civil rights laws in the South.

Featured image: MLK as target. [Source: biography.com] Right: J. Edgar Hoover firing a rifle. [Source: theguardian.com] Artwork courtesy of Steve Brown.

All Global Research articles 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.

***

 

Dr. Meryl Nass is an outstanding medical doctor.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research. To consult her articles click here.

This is a report by London’s Daily Mail presents the facts in a biased way, intimating (without a shred of evidence ) that Dr. Meryl Nass was  involved in malpractice and misinformation regarding Covid-19.

The truth is that she has courageously confronted Big Pharma and the vaccine mandate.

To see her detailed response, click here

What is featured below are the first three paragraphs of the Daily Mail article.

***

A medical board in Maine has suspended the license of an MIT-educated doctor and ordered a psychiatric evaluation after she was accused of treating some of her patients with Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine and spreading misinformation about COVID-19.

Maine’s Board of Licensure in Medicine voted last week to conduct a deeper investigation into Dr Meryl Nass, from Ellsworth. The board also voted to suspend her license for 30 days and have her undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

The board stated in its January 12 order that allowing Nass to continue practicing medicine ‘constitutes an immediate jeopardy to the health and physical safety of the public who might receive her medical services.’

Nass, 70, is an internist who is active in Children’s Health Defense, a group that agitates against vaccines and vaccine mandates.

Read full article here

*

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

Featured image is from Facebook via DMO

All Global Research articles 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.

***

VAERS data released Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention included a total of 1,033,994 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines, including 21,745 deaths and 170,446 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 7, 2022.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,033,994 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 1, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 21,745 reports of deaths — an increase of 363 over the previous week — and 170,446 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 3,840 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 723,042 adverse events, including 9,936 deaths and 64,406 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 7, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 9,936 U.S. deaths reported as of Jan. 7, 19% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 516 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Jan. 7, including 303 million doses of Pfizer, 197 million doses of Moderna and 18 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

From the 1/7/22 release of VAERS data.

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 7, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1975356) from Minnesota who died 11 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when she was found unresponsive by her mother. An autopsy is pending.

  • 14 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).
  • 22 reports of blood clotting disorders.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 7, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 15-year-old girl from Minnesota (VAERS I.D. 1974744), who died 177 days after receiving her second dose of Pfizer from a pulmonary embolus. An autopsy is pending.

  • 62 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases
    attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
  • 589 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 578 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
  • 149 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 7, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:

26-year-old man dies from myocarditis caused by Pfizer COVID vaccine

A 26-year-old South Dakota man died Nov. 12, 2021, of myocarditis, just four days after receiving a booster dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine. Joseph Keating had no idea he was experiencing a rare and supposedly “mild” heart problem after the shot.

His only warning signs were fatigue, muscle soreness and an increased heart rate, family members said.

In an exclusive interview Jan. 11 with The Defender, Joseph’s father, mother and sister said the CDC had not investigated Joseph’s death, nor did the agency contact the pathologist who performed the autopsy or request the documents which confirmed Joseph’s death was caused by the Pfizer vaccine.

According to the autopsy report and certificate of death, Joseph died from severe heart damage from “myocarditis in the left ventricle due to the recent Pfizer COVID-19 booster vaccine.”

Supreme Court strikes down OSHA mandate, allows healthcare mandate to proceed

​​The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday issued two opinions on the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine mandates on whether to stay or to grant temporary injunctions requested by plaintiffs in a number of lawsuits challenging the emergency mandates for millions of Americans.

First, the justices rejected the Biden administration’s mandate requiring employees of large businesses to be vaccinated against COVID or undergo weekly testing and wear a mask indoors while working.

​​The court’s conservative majority said the administration overstepped its authority by imposing the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) vaccine-or-test rule on U.S. businesses with at least 100 employees.

In a second ruling, the justices said the mandates for workers in healthcare facilities that receive Medicare or Medicaid funding could stay in place while the lawsuits work their way through the lower courts.

The mandate is estimated to affect 10.3 million healthcare workers in the U.S., but allows for religious and medical exemptions.

Pfizer CEO says 2 shots offer ‘very limited protection, if any’ against COVID

During an interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Monday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said two doses of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine — initially referred to as a full regimen — “offers very limited protection, if any” against the Omicron variant.

When a third, or booster dose, is administered the vaccine offers only “reasonable protection” against hospitalization and death from Omicron and “less protection against infection,” Bourla said.

Bourla previously claimed a two-dose regimen was “100% effective.”

EU regulators, WHO call for end of boosters

European Union drug regulators on Tuesday warned frequent COVID boosters could risk overloading the immune system and said there are currently no data to support repeated doses.

This comes a month after the regulators said it made sense to “administer COVID-19 vaccine boosters as early as three months after the initial two-shot regimen,” amid concerns over the Omicron variant.

The World Health Organization’s Technical Advisory Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Composition on Jan. 11 also warned, “a vaccination strategy based on repeated booster doses of the original vaccine composition is unlikely to be appropriate or sustainable.”

The group said giving additional doses of already existing vaccines as new strains of the virus emerge is not the best way to fight a pandemic, as currently available COVID vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission and the current composition of COVID vaccines need to be updated.

Djokovic’s visa canceled second time over unvaccinated status

Australian authorities today revoked Novak Djokovic’s visa due to his unvaccinated status, in the latest twist in the ongoing battle over whether the nine-time Australian Open champion will be allowed to defend his title.

As The Defender reported, Australian Minister Alex Hawke used his ministerial discretion to cancel the No. 1 ranked Tennis player’s visa citing “health or good order grounds,” just three days before the Australian Open begins and four days after a federal judge ordered Djokovic be released from hotel detention when his visa was revoked the first time.

Djokovic’s lawyers are contesting the visa cancellation in court, in an attempt to allow him to play in the prestigious tennis tournament. If unsuccessful, Djokovic will face deportation.

*

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.

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

Featured image is from CHD

Violence Increasing in Yemen

January 18th, 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.

***

 

Day after day, the tensions worsen in Yemen. Recently, the Houthi rebels claimed responsibility for a series of explosions that hit the capital of the United Arab Emirates, damaging places of great strategic value, such as Abu Dhabi airport. In response, a new coalition’s offensive began, with violent bombings being operated in Sanaa.

The Arab coalition has launched a major bombing campaign in the Yemeni capital. The attack, according to information provided by the alliance’s spokespersons, is “in response to threat and military necessity”. Such “necessity” refers to recent attacks operated by the Houthis against targets outside the Yemeni territory.

The numbers of dead and injured people so far are imprecise, but it is known that many people have been hurt during the coalition’s maneuvers. According to information provided by Al Masirah, a pro-Houthi Yemeni TV channel, four people died and five were injured during the alliance’s operations. Later, some sources began to report that more than ten people had already died, including women and children. As expected, the pro-coalition media channels point to data in the opposite direction, emphasizing the number of dead left by the Houthis attacks in Abu Dhabi and ignoring the victims of the military actions carried out by the Arab group.

In an official statement this week, coalition’s spokespersons wrote the following words about the attacks: “The coalition air force is conducting a round-the-clock operation in the skies over Sanaa (…) We urge civilians to stay away from military camps and Houthi gatherings for their safety”. Some details about the targets hit by the maneuvers were also provided. Apparently, coalition’s F-15 fighters hit “two ballistic missile launchers that were used on Monday to strike the territory of the UAE”.

Following the coalition’s operations, UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah Bin Zayed contacted his US counterpart Antony Blinken in order to ask the Biden administration to reestablish US recognition of the Houthis as a foreign terrorist organization. This type of measure would help those interested in tightening actions against the Yemeni rebels as it would allow the US government to treat the Houthis as terrorists both in American territory and abroad, making it possible to establish, for example, joint actions between American military and the coalition.

No response has been given on the case so far, and the matter is unlikely to have any relevance to the US government at the present time. Washington revoked the Houthis’ “terrorist organization” status to improve the system for the sending of humanitarian aid to Yemen. Until last year, it was difficult for the US to send humanitarian aid to the country as the Houthis benefited from part of that aid while being considered terrorists. In 2021, Biden revoked terrorist status for the Houthis and improved the humanitarian support system, reinforcing the US image as a humanitarianly committed nation. This measure was very positive for both the US and the Yemeni population and is unlikely to be reversed now.

In fact, the anti-Houthi coalition has a common interest with the West in Yemen: to stop the growth of Iranian influence. Considering that the Houthis are an ethnic minority of Shia faith, their victory in Yemen would represent an immediate alliance with Tehran – which is why Western governments support the coalition. But this support has become increasingly limited. For the pro-humanitarian image that Biden tries to express in his government, it is very serious that the country maintains ties to a conflict that is considered the greatest humanitarian crisis of recent times. European governments follow a similar trend in this regard. And, with that, the coalition loses more and more strength internationally, becoming an isolated group of little global relevance.

The Yemen conflict needs an immediate end as the humanitarian situation in the country has escalated out of control. The civil war has already left almost 400 thousand dead, four million internally displaced and more than twenty million people in need of humanitarian aid. The imminence of a humanitarian collapse is evident, and this creates discomfort for all governments with some degree of involvement in local disputes.

Recommendations from all sides are for the crisis to be resolved as fast and pacifically as possible. Contributing to a humanitarian disaster is extremely harmful and (at least publicly) out of discussion for the West.

Certainly, international coercion through sanctions would be a viable way for the coalition to accept to reduce its incursions, respecting the Yemeni right to self-determination. But that would mean opening the way for an Iranian advance, which the West is also unwilling to deal with. Therefore, the Western position on the coalition’s maneuvers is likely to remain the same that has been so far: a veiled, discreet, and masked support with a humanitarian discourse whose function is to hide the real interest in undermining Iranian expansion in every possible way.

*

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.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Violence Increasing in Yemen
  • Tags:

Confirmed: COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Can Cause Severe Liver Damage

January 18th, 2022 by Paul Anthony Taylor

All Global Research articles 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.

***

A recent Letter to the Editor published on the Journal of Hepatology website adds to the growing evidence that the mRNA vaccines used against COVID-19 can cause severe liver damage. Entitled ‘Immune-mediated hepatitis with the Moderna vaccine, no longer a coincidence but confirmed’, the letter – written by four hospital doctors from the UK – summarizes the case history of a patient who received two doses of the vaccine. The doctors say the case provides “conclusive evidence” that the first dose led to immune-mediated hepatitis, with a rapid onset of liver injury. A second dose resulted in the development of acute severe autoimmune hepatitis. The patient was previously completely well with no other health problems.

The letter describes how the patient, a 47-year-old Caucasian man, received his first dose of the Moderna vaccine in April 2021. He noted malaise and jaundice three days later. Blood tests showed abnormal liver function, with his serum bilirubin around ten times normal and alanine aminotransferase more than twenty times normal. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) and alcohol use were ruled out as potential causes.

The patient’s jaundice and liver function tests had improved by late June but were still abnormal. He was subsequently given a second dose of the Moderna vaccine in early July, despite reporting the jaundice to the vaccination center. A few days later he became deeply jaundiced, with a bilirubin level approaching twenty times normal and numerous other liver abnormalities. The doctors say the pattern of injury was consistent with acute hepatitis, with features of autoimmune hepatitis or possible drug-induced liver injury, triggering an autoimmune-like hepatitis.

As the doctors point out in their letter, the onset of jaundice associated with the vaccine was unusually rapid. Significantly, therefore, and as they also acknowledge, this case is hardly the first in which COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have been associated with liver damage. Even prior to the publication of their letter, the doctors say at least seven cases of immune-mediated hepatitis linked to mRNA vaccines had already been reported in the scientific literature. Three of these cases related to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, and four to the Moderna vaccine.

The doctors say they reported this latest case in order to encourage vigilance for such reactions, as well as to raise awareness for vaccination centers to incorporate them into their routine checks before administering second doses of mRNA vaccines. They stress that long-term follow up of affected individuals will be essential in determining the prognosis of this type of immune-mediated liver injury.

Ultimately, of course, the fact is that liver damage is only one of many serious side effects reported in connection with the mRNA vaccines used against COVID-19. Others include very low platelet counts (thrombocytopenia); high rates of severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reactions (anaphylaxis); inflammation of the heart muscle (myocarditis); blood clots (thrombosis); and even death.

Twenty-four centuries ago, the Greek physician Hippocrates is said to have exhorted the medical practitioners of his time to “first, do no harm.” While in conventional medicine this principle was already widely flouted in the pre-COVID era, with the ultrarapid authorization of mRNA vaccines it has essentially been almost completely abandoned. The time has come for political leaders and medical authorities to suspend the use of these experimental injections, pending a full and independent investigation into their dangers.

*

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.

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 Anthony Taylor is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings.

Featured image is from DRHF

All Global Research articles 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 January 1965, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as the president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) intervened in the voting rights struggle in Selma, Alabama after years of work already carried out by local activists along with organizers from the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC).

These momentous efforts led to a series of confrontations with Dallas County deputy sheriffs and Alabama state troopers which culminated on Bloody Sunday March 7 at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma. By the end of the month the political atmosphere in the United States had shifted in favor of the federalizing of the National Guard to provide protection for the thousands who marched from Selma to Montgomery.

Martin Luther King, Ralph Abernathy and James Foreman during Selma to Montgomery March (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Later that year in August, the then President Lyndon B. Johnson was compelled to sign into law the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This represented the first comprehensive voting rights legislation since the era of Reconstruction during the late 1860s to the mid-1870s, and the Civil Rights Act of 1957, involving the role of the Justice Department in protecting access for African Americans to the franchise.

In the aftermath of the mass demonstrations, voting registration drives and vigorous debates on the nature of racial oppression in the U.S. during 2020, there was a sense of a democratic breakthrough in regard to the large turnouts in states around the country against the previous administration of President Donald Trump. The ascendancy of the current administration of President Joe Biden and the election of two new Democratic Senators from the State of Georgia, where voting restrictions have been well documented since the gubernatorial race of 2018, were realized as a direct result of grassroots political advocacy and organizing.

False charges of massive voter fraud by the Trump administration and its followers did not succeed in the post-election period from November 2020 to the inauguration of the new presidency and Congress nearly a year ago. The January 6 attempted coup by anti-democratic and neo-fascist elements at the Capitol in Washington, D.C. provided a clear view of a right- wing threat to the social interests of the masses of African Americans, Latin Americans, Asian Americans, Indigenous nations and other progressive and genuine working-class segments of the population.

Although the coup failed to overturn the 2020 elections, efforts have been underway since this time period to reverse the capacity of oppressed, working-class and democratic forces to participate in the electoral process. At least 19 state legislative bodies and their governors have passed and signed into law restrictions on the right to vote, the open and objective counting of ballots and the certification of all elections from local institutions to the offices of the federal government.

The failure of the Senate to pass several voting rights bills that would in effect nullify the restrictive laws which were upheld by the conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court, must be met with mass action. All antiracist and mass democratic forces have no alternative than to organize to meet the challenges of the coming months. We as the Detroit MLK Committee are appealing to all of those within our listening and viewing audience to join in this renewed effort to halt the reinstitution of legalized segregation and the denial of fundamental democratic rights for the rapidly emerging majority population within the U.S.

Dr. King and the Struggle for a Just Society

Today we are facing one of the most serious crises in the history of the U.S. and the world. In regard to the compounding economic, social, political, cultural and educational downturns, the public health disaster prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated clearly the contradictions within western capitalist society.

Although the administrations of former President Trump and his successor Joe Biden supported legislation to provide a modicum of relief to those tens of millions of families impacted by the pandemic, these programs have ground to a screeching halt with the inability to pass social spending legislation. The passed infrastructure bill cannot address the social needs of the masses of nationally oppressed peoples and the working-class.

Moreover, here in the city of Detroit and undoubtedly in other regions of the U.S., the funds allocated to assist working families as it relates to housing, utilities, water costs and supplemental funds for households with children, are often not spent on the purposes for which they were allocated. In addition, the bureaucratic structures in many municipal areas have failed to properly disperse these funds to the people in the greatest need.

Even in situations where the administration of American Rescue Plan (ARP) Funds and COVID Emergency Relief Assistance (CERA) have been more efficient, the agencies responsible have run out of resources since the need is so enormous. We call upon the Congress to revisit its own inability to foster legislation which is critical in maintaining social stability.

As Dr. King said during 1968 just prior to his assassination:

“The nation waited until the Black man was explosive with fury before stirring itself even to partial concern. Confronted now with the interrelated problems of war, inflation, urban decay, white backlash, and a climate of violence, it is now forced to address itself to race relations and poverty, and it is tragically unprepared. What might once have been a series of separate problems now merge into a social crisis of almost stupefying complexity. I am not sad that Black Americans are rebelling; this was not only inevitable but eminently desirable. Without this magnificent ferment among Negroes, the old evasions and procrastinations would have continued indefinitely. Black men have slammed the door shut on a past of deadening passivity. Except for the Reconstruction years, they have never in their long history on American soil struggled with such creativity and courage for their freedom. These are our bright years of emergence; though they are painful ones, they cannot be avoided.”

Within the tradition of this commemoration of MLK Day, we seek to continue the actual legacy of Dr. King in the linking of the struggles against racism, poverty and militarism. The speakers and cultural workers all speak to this historical trajectory in which Dr. King was inextricably involved.

The current spiral of inflation which has forced many people into deeper impoverishment, should be immediately addressed by the federal government. An initiative launched by municipal retirees in Detroit to provide a “pension booster” shot for those impacted by the more than 7% annual inflation during 2021, is a relevant demand to be advanced which has national implications. These deteriorating social conditions for broad sectors of the society will not be resolved without political education, mobilizations and organizing.

MLK Day for 2022 should serve as a focal point for the renewed movements seeking the end to racial oppression, class exploitation, gender discrimination, environmental degradation, the collapse of public education and other social ills. Our willingness to study, organize and act will be the most outstanding tribute we can pay to the legacy of Dr. King, the Civil Rights Movement and all campaigns for the betterment and liberation of humanity.

*

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.

Note:

These remarks were prepared and delivered in part to the 19th Annual MLK Day virtual webinar held in the city of Detroit. The event has been held online for the last two years due to the pandemic and its impact on the city and its environs. This webinar was organized by the Detroit MLK Committee chaired by Dorothy Aldridge, veteran Civil Rights and Human Rights activist. Presenters for the webinar included co-host Aurora Harris, poet, lecturer and community organizer; Sarah Torres, musician and MLK Committee member; keynote speaker Catherine Coleman Flowers of Alabama, environmental and Civil Rights organizer; Bilal, spoken word artist and musician; Wardell Montgomery, poet and songwriter; Joe Kidd and Sheila Burke, musicians and songwriters; One Single Rose, poet and singer of the Black National Anthem; Jorge Parra, member of the GM injured workers organization of Bogata, Colombia; Jesus Rodriguez Espinoza, former Counsel General to the United States in Chicago for the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; John Kelly, Museum of Free Derry, Northern Ireland; Iman Saleh, Yemeni Liberation Movement; Darryl Jordan, environmentalist and former Director of EMEAC; Rev. Bill Wylie-Kellerman, author and retired pastor at St. Peter’s Episcopal Church; Lloyd Simpson, Detroit Will Breathe and People Against Corporate Theft (PACT); Toyia Watts, President of the Charlevoix Village Association (CVA); Rev. Edward Pinkney, organizer and former political prisoner in Berrien County, Michigan; BWard, poet and activist; Yasmine Suliman, organizer of the Detroit Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), Frank Hammer, veteran union leader and community activist, provided translation for the Colombian injured GM workers, John Harvey and TJ, American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters; among others.

Featured image is from BelovedSyria

Video: Digital Tyranny and the Rockefeller-Gates WHO “Vaxx-Certificate Passport”: Towards a World War III Scenario

By Peter Koenig, January 18, 2022

Behind its development is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – with support of the Rockefeller Foundation – and others belonging to the sinister all-digitization, depopulation and eugenics agenda. It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society.

“Orders to Kill” Dr. Martin Luther King: The Government that Honors MLK with a National Holiday Killed Him

By Edward Curtin, January 18, 2022

Very few Americans are aware of the truth behind the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Few books have been written about it, unlike other significant assassinations, especially JFK’s. For almost fifty years there has been a media blackout supported by government deception to hide the truth.

The Vaccinated vs. the Unvaccinated: Those Who Refuse the Vaccine and the “Official” Covid-19 Narrative are Categorized as “Psychopaths”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 18, 2022

A diabolical process is underway which consists in “identifying” all those who are opposed to the governments’ management of the coronavirus pandemic. According to ongoing psychological studies, these opponents are categorized as anti-social psychopaths.

Redefining the Meaning of Life and Death

By Julian Rose, January 17, 2022

We need to redefine the meaning of life and death. Re-examine the true significance of their power within our day to day activities on this ever generous planet Earth.  Because that significance has been almost entirely lost.

Video: US Space Militarization Plans Are Same Old “Gunboat Diplomacy”

By Dirk Pohlmann and Kristina Borjesson, January 17, 2022

Investigative reporter Dirk Pohlmann says that far from the Star Trek vision of a cooperative federation of space dwellers, current US plans for militarizing space are the same old gunboat diplomacy of being in charge by being the biggest military threat in space and on earth to other nations also moving into space, and that individual players like Bezos and Musk could be used by intelligence services to bypass international laws and treaties governing the activities of nations in space to ensure American supremacy.

10 Reasons OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro Has to Go

By Leonardo Flores, January 17, 2022

The Organization of American States (OAS) has never been a friend to the peoples of the Americas. This institution, ostensibly a space for multilateralism, has instead always been a tool for the U.S. Department of State. As Fidel Castro said in 1962, it is nothing but the U.S. Ministry of Colonies.

The United Nations and Western Governments Endorse Shocking Vaccine Mandates, Violating Human Bodily Integrity and Autonomy

By Carla Stea, January 16, 2022

Most unconscionable is the fact that the United Nations Secretary-General is mandating this untested and often lethal vaccination for United Nations staff, in violation of every human rights declaration produced by the United Nations in its entire history.

Video: The 2021 Worldwide Corona Crisis. “The Worst Crisis in Modern History”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Ariel Noyola Rodriguez, January 15, 2022

We are living history, yet our understanding of the sequence of events since January 2020 has been blurred. Worldwide, people have been misled both by their governments and the media as to the causes and devastating consequences of the Covid-19 “pandemic”. “Planet Lockdown” is an encroachment on civil liberties and the “Right to Life”.

Count-Down to Apocalypse: Are the US and Russia Finally on Course toward World War III?

By Michael Welch, Pepe Escobar, Glenn Michalchuk, and John Helmer, January 15, 2022

As a meeting of rival delegations came to a close this week, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued an ultimatum to the United States demanding that the West provide a concrete answer to it’s security concerns. These include the threat of NATO embracing Ukraine and of the military alliance moving closer to the Russian border.

The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society

By Dr. Pascal Sacré, January 15, 2022

In the case of certain infections, particularly viral infections, we use the RT-PCR technique to confirm a diagnostic hypothesis suggested by a clinical picture. We do not routinely perform RT-PCR on any patient who is overheated, coughing or has an inflammatory syndrome!

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Digital Tyranny and the Rockefeller-Gates-WHO “Vaxx-Certificate Passport”

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

***

First posted on Global Research on July 19, 2021

.

Introductory Note

This text originally published by the US Department of Justice in September 2009 is of utmost relevance in assessing the current actions of Big Pharma in promoting pharmaceutical products which are detrimental to people’s health.

Pfizer is currently involved in marketing its experimental mRNA vaccine. The FDA in an ambiguous statement has provided an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, while underscoring that the vaccine is “an unapproved product”.  There is something “contradictory” in the FDA statement. The experimental Pfizer mRNA vaccine is “unapproved” by the FDA, yet it is “permitted”. 

In recent developments, a Confidential Pfizer Report released as part of a Freedom of Information (FOI) procedure provides data on deaths and adverse events recorded by Pfizer from the outset of the vaccine project in December 2020 to the end of February 2021, namely a very short period (at most two and a half months).

The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was launched in the US on the 14th of December after the granting of Emergency Use Authorization on December 11, 2020. 

In a twisted irony, the data revealed in this “insider report” refutes the official vaccine narrative peddled by the governments and the WHO. It also confirms the analysis of numerous medical doctors and scientists who have revealed the devastating consequences of the mRNA “vaccine”. 

What is contained in  Pfizer’s “confidential” report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine” on mortality and morbidity. This data which emanates from the “Horse’s Mouth” can now be used to confront as well formulate legal procedures against Big Pharma, the governments, the WHO and the media.

These revelations are beyond “fraudulent marketing”:  they point to crimes against humanity.

For further details see:

Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data

By Global Research, December 23, 2021

Global Research, December 27, 2021

***

Below the text of the US Department of Justice 2009 Settlement with Pfizer, Inc.

Of relevance, the DoJ judgment required that Pfizer Inc. enter into a so-called “corporate integrity agreement” with the Office of the Inspector General of the DHHS.

The integrity agreement included procedures to ensure that Pfizer’s “conduct” would not happen again.

 

 

American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together “Pfizer”) have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products, the Justice Department announced today.

Pharmacia & Upjohn Company has agreed to plead guilty to a felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act for misbranding Bextra with the intent to defraud or mislead. Bextra is an anti-inflammatory drug that Pfizer pulled from the market in 2005. Under the provisions of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, a company must specify the intended uses of a product in its new drug application to FDA. Once approved, the drug may not be marketed or promoted for so-called “off-label” uses – i.e., any use not specified in an application and approved by FDA. Pfizer promoted the sale of Bextra for several uses and dosages that the FDA specifically declined to approve due to safety concerns. The company will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the United States for any matter. Pharmacia & Upjohn will also forfeit $105 million, for a total criminal resolution of $1.3 billion.

In addition, Pfizer has agreed to pay $1 billion to resolve allegations under the civil False Claims Act that the company illegally promoted four drugs – Bextra; Geodon, an anti-psychotic drug; Zyvox, an antibiotic; and Lyrica, an anti-epileptic drug – and caused false claims to be submitted to government health care programs for uses that were not medically accepted indications and therefore not covered by those programs. The civil settlement also resolves allegations that Pfizer paid kickbacks to health care providers to induce them to prescribe these, as well as other, drugs. The federal share of the civil settlement is $668,514,830 and the state Medicaid share of the civil settlement is $331,485,170. This is the largest civil fraud settlement in history against a pharmaceutical company.

As part of the settlement, Pfizer also has agreed to enter into an expansive corporate integrity agreement with the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. That agreement provides for procedures and reviews to be put in place to avoid and promptly detect conduct similar to that which gave rise to this matter. (emphasis added)

To read the entire DoJ document, click here

 

*

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

Note: All Global Research articles are now accessible in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website Drop Down Menu on the top banner of our home page.

 

First published on August 26, 2020.

 

***

 

Author’s Note

This article was written in August 2020 (several months prior to the launching of the Covid-19 vaccine) under the title 

“Collective Narcissism” and the “Dark Triad”: Those Who Protest against the “Official” Covid-19 Narrative are Categorized as “Psychopaths”. Is It A Witch Hunt?

And now we have entered a new phase. The “Vaccine Passport” is being imposed in a large number of countries.

The non-vaccinated are confined to their homes, prevented from travelling, fired from their jobs, prevented from attending schools and universities. They are  accused of being extremists and psychopaths. 

What is unfolding is a despicable political process which consists in creating a social divide  between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

These social divisions are creating conflicts within families and local communities, literally contributing to the disruption of social life, with devastating impacts on economic activity.

Supported by media propaganda, the campaign is proceeding unabated. Those who refuse to get the killer “vaccine” are categorized as “anti-social psychopaths”.

What prevails is a “divide and rule” scenario which is being applied simultaneously in numerous countries. 

Both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated are the victims of  a Worldwide criminal agenda which is endorsed by the United Nations and most of its 193 member states.

Our first task is to immediately halt and cancel the so-called Covid-19 “vaccine” which has triggered a wave of mortality and morbidity Worldwide.

Worldwide Solidarity and Human Dignity is the Driving Force

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 8, 2022


This article has been published in my E-Book  (Chapter XI) entitled:

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

 


 

A diabolical process is underway which consists in “identifying” all those who are opposed to the governments’ management of the coronavirus pandemic. According to ongoing psychological studies, these opponents are categorized as anti-social psychopaths.  

The unspoken objective is to shunt the emergence of an organized protest movement pertaining to social engineering and the decision taken Worldwide at a political level to close down  the national economies of more than 190 members states of the United Nations. 

Peer reviewed psychological “studies” are currently being carried in several countries using sample surveys.

 Accept the “big Lie” and you are tagged as a “good person” with “empathy” who understands the feelings of others.

Protest against the official truth (“big lie”), criticize government guidelines, express reservations regarding the closing down of the global economy, social distancing and the wearing of the face mask, and you will  be tagged (according to “scientific opinion”) as a “callous and deceitful psychopath”.

Psychology: Empirical Studies

A so-called peer reviewed “empirical report” describes those who refuse to wear the face mask or abide by social distancing as having “anti-social personality disorders”.

Those  who “do not adhere  to measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19” are tagged as “anti-social”.  

The findings of the Brazilian study involving a “sample” of 1578 adults was published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences. under the title:

COVID-19 pandemic over time: Do antisocial traits matter? 

“Empathy” versus “Anti-social Traits”

The statistical “methodology” of this study is straightforward. It is intended to serve as a model.

It consists in categorizing a so-called sample of adults from all major regions of Brazil into two distinct groups. It examines:

“..the relationships between antisocial traits and compliance with COVID-19 containment measures. The sample consisted of 1578 Brazilian adults aged 18–73 years … and a questionnaire about compliance with containment measures.

Latent profile analyses indicated a 2-profile solution: the antisocial pattern profile which presented higher scores in Callousness, Deceitfulness, Hostility, Impulsivity, Irresponsibility, Manipulativeness, and Risk-taking, as well as lower scores in Affective resonance;

and the empathy pattern profile which presented higher scores in Affective resonance …

The antisocial and empathy groups showed significant differences. … Our findings indicated that antisocial traits, especially lower levels of empathy and higher levels of Callousness, Deceitfulness, and Risk-taking, are directly associated with lower compliance with containment measures. These traits explain, at least partially, the reason why people continue not adhering to the containment measures even with increasing numbers of cases and deaths. (emphasis added)

The research methodology is built around 3 main questions:

 “Do you think it is necessary to avoid approaching people as much as possible until the coronavirus situation is controlled?” (social distancing),

“Do you think it is necessary to wash your hands and/or use alcohol gel as many times a day until the coronavirus situation is controlled?” (hygiene),

“Do you think it is necessary to use facemask (that protects nose and mouth) in Brazil?” (facemask).

Yes/No Categorization

  • Answer Yes to these Three Questions: you are categorized as having “Empathy” (i.e. the ability to understand and share the feelings of others).
  • Answer No to all Three Questions: you are categorized (according to the study) as having “higher levels of Callousness, Deceitfulness, Hostility, Impulsivity, Irresponsibility, Manipulativeness, and Risk-taking” (as quoted above).
It all sounds very scientific. The unspoken objective of these psycho-studies is to provide governments with a mandate to intimidate as well as to enforce compliance, while smearing the alleged psychopaths who refuse to conform to the official narrative, which is an outright lie.  
.
“The Dark Triad” and “Collective Narcissism” 
.
According to Eric W. Dolan  (PsyPost) the above study consisted in identifying “a measure of maladaptive personality traits… “.   Dolan also refers to a related study focussing on: “the “Dark Triad” of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism associated with ignoring preventative COVID-19 measures.”. The study conducted in Poland is entitled:
.

Adaptive and maladaptive behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: The roles of Dark Triad traits, collective narcissism, and health beliefs

The study refers to the practice of “collective narcissism”, namely a common belief and practice by a so-called ‘In-Group” (aka protest movement, collective of dissident medical doctors, scientists) directed against the official corona virus “truth” (aka the Big Lie). Collective narcissism is embedded in what psychologists call the Dark Triad.

The study is based on “a nationally representative sample from Poland (N = 755)”. It examines:

“the relationships between the Dark Triad traits (i.e., psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism) and collective narcissism (i.e., agentic and communal) … Participants characterized by the Dark Triad traits engaged less in prevention …  The results point to the utility of health beliefs in predicting behaviors during the pandemic, explaining (at least in part) problematic behaviors associated with the dark personalities (i.e., Dark Triad, collective narcissism). …

 The traits, such as the Dark Triad (i.e., narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) and collective narcissism … may have implications for how one copes with the virus…  For example, individuals characterized by the Dark Triad traits may be less likely to follow governmentally-enforced restrictions related to COVID-19

The Term “Agentic” quoted above refers to “goal-achievement”.

And here is the Methodology

We measured the Dark Triad traits (Wave 2) … [also with reference to] the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen scale (Jonason & Webster, 2010). The scale consists of four items assessing individual differences in psychopathy (e.g., “I tend to lack remorse”), narcissism (e.g., “I tend to seek prestige or status”), and Machiavellianism (e.g., “I tend to manipulate others to get my way”). Participants indicated their agreement with each item (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). We averaged responses to create indices of each trait.

Sounds scientific. What are the conclusions?

We advanced the scope of the model by illustrating the relevance of dark personality traits in predicting both adaptive and maladaptive behaviors in response to the pandemic by person-focused (i.e., the Dark Triad traits) and group-focused (i.e., collective narcissism) personality traits.” The read the full report click here emphasis added)

The psychological definition of Dark Triad Traits comprises the combined personality traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. “They are called “dark” because of their malevolent qualities.”

The Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD) consists of a broader “personality inventory” which assesses and measures the three personality components of the Dark Triad. (see image right)

In substance, what this “scientific report” confirms is that people who question the covid-19 official narrative have “malevolent personality disorders”. They are said to suffer from the Dirty Dozen “Dark Triad Traits” (DTDD). 

When they act contiguously within a In-Group or a Protest movement (E.g. The August Mass Rally in Berlin), they are tagged as applying “collective narcissism”.

The framework of the above study is also envisaged for other countries in partnership (with the Warsaw group). Another related study is entitled: “Who complies with the restrictions to reduce the spread of COVID-19?: Personality and perceptions of the COVID-19 situation”

Strong words. “Peer Reviewed”?

Psychology is being used in a pernicious way to provide legitimacy to a Police State with a mandate to “go after” those who allegedly have Dark Triad “malevolent personality disorders”.

It’s an inquisitorial doctrine, which could eventually evolve towards a digital witch hunt, far more sophisticated than the “Spanish Inquisition”.

“In contrast to the Spanish Inquisition, the contemporary inquisitorial system has almost unlimited capabilities of spying on and categorizing individuals.

People are tagged and labeled, their emails, telephones and faxes are monitored, detailed personal data is entered into giant Big Brother data banks. Once this cataloging has been completed, people are locked into watertight compartments. Their profiles are established and entered into a computerized system.

Law enforcement is systematic. The witch hunt is not only directed against presumed “terrorists” through ethnic profiling, etc., the various human rights, affirmative action, antiwar cohorts are themselves the object of the anti-terrorist legislation and so on.

Needless to say, converting or recanting by antiwar heretics is not permitted.

Meanwhile war criminals occupy positions of authority. The citizenry is galvanized into supporting rulers, “committed to their safety and well-being”, “who are going after the bad guys.” (Michel Chossudovsky, The Spanish Inquisition, “Made in America”, Global Research, December 2004)

Francisco Goya: The Spanish Inquisition (1812-1819) Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, Madrid

“Economic Genocide” 

We are living one of the most serious crises in modern history. People’s lives are being destroyed.

These empirical psychology studies are meant to be used against citizens who are opposed to the instructions of their respective governments. In turn these governments obey orders from higher up.

While ordinary citizens are tagged, what is increasingly obvious  is that the billionaires, “philanthropists”, corrupt politicians, et al., who are the unspoken architects of the global economic lockdown are psychopaths in their own right.

While their personality traits are not the motive of scientific investigation, the corrupt billionaires who are behind the corona lockdown and closure of the global economy are mentally deranged. Money and enrichment is the driving force.

However, tagging politicians and financiers as “psychopaths” is in an understatement.  What is a stake is an outright crime against humanity. Calling for the simultaneous closing down of the national economies of 193 member states of the UN is an act of economic genocide.

Economic and social decision-making is criminalized. The legitimacy of  Wall Street, the World Economic Forum (WEF), Big Pharma and the billionaire foundations which ordered the closure of the global economy on March 11, 2020 must be forcefully addressed.

Social distancing has devastating consequences.

At this juncture it is being used to justify the closure of schools, colleges and universities, which deliberately derogate the right to education.

Wearing the face mask is detrimental to a person’s health. It’s known and documented. Enforcing the wearing of the face mask using fake science as a justification is an illegal and criminal act. 
.
Dr. Fauci confirmed it two months ago. He is lying to himself when ordering that the wearing of the mask be applied “universally”. 
.
Now he says exactly the opposite. 
.
The future of humanity is at stake. Millions of people have been impoverished as a result of the closure of the real economy. 
.
Spread the word.
.
* * *The above article is published in my E-Book  (Chapter XI) entitled:

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below.

Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

 

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on The Vaccinated vs. the Unvaccinated: Those Who Refuse the Vaccine and the “Official” Covid-19 Narrative are Categorized as “Psychopaths”

Martin Luther King: Encountered in Algeria…

January 17th, 2022 by Barbara Nimri Aziz

All Global Research articles 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.

***

 

“Mahteen” [Martin], she said, meeting my eyes for the first time while she attended to the papers that I’d set on her desk. I was in Oran, Algeria, being assisted by a clerk in a neighborhood office where I’d come to pay my electricity bill.

She was gazing fondly at the snapshot there of our African American leader. It was the iconic photo of him with Malcolm X taken sometime in the early sixties, before they both left this world.

The woman said nothing else. She asked me nothing about Martin Luther King Jr, nor about the taller man beside him, nor offered her opinion of them.

She would have known Algeria provided succor and inspiration to America’s Black Panther leaders in the 60s. She would have known of Africa’s profound influence on Malik al-Shabazz.

***

On a 2008 visiting professorship in this unattractive but popular seaside city, having rented my own apartment, I had to deal with utility issues myself. My lodging was on Rue d’Hasan ……(a name I’ve since forgotten)– one of Algeria’s tens of thousands of streets, buildings and squares named for martyrs of its painful and costly, never-forgotten and never-recovered-from 1954-1962 war of independence.

I’d placed my daybook on the desk between us as I offered my ID to the woman. Until that remark—the whispered single word, “Mahteen” [Martin]– she hadn’t spoken to me.

Like any underpaid government employee we might encounter anywhere, this lady appeared indifferent to my presence. I had waited in that gloomy place for an hour already and was not in a cheerful mood myself. She made no eye contact with me when I approached her and she seemed uninterested in my visitor status. Algeria is unlike any other Arab place where I’d lived. Here, I had learned to accept the indifference and briskness of Algerians, their caution in public. Some explained this as a lingering aftermath of the decade-long terror war that had ended only seven years earlier.

I said nothing to the clerk as she glanced at my papers. She must be weary of dealing with questions over petty sums and complaints day after day, I thought.

It hadn’t been an easy year for me in Algeria. Relations between the U.S. and Algeria were minimal although cooperative gas exploitation was ongoing. American citizens were advised against visiting here and the U.S. office overseeing my appointment hadn’t laid the groundwork with the university authorities for my stay. If my fellow professors were so unaccommodating, what could I expect from a bureaucrat in a dreary billing office?

This clerk would have known I wasn’t French—few were seen here, although they doubtless lurked behind the scenes and stayed at classy hotels. Other foreigners I occasionally came across were Chinese workers. They kept a low profile. I encountered them only on the train traveling between the capital and Oran as they headed for their outposts.

In the course of my subdued exchange with the clerk, I’d left my daybook open on the desk between us, unconscious of photos exposed on the inside cover. These included a small black and white picture I’d pasted there.

She hadn’t yet looked me in the eye, so when I heard her say “mahteen’, I was puzzled. I looked up to discover her smiling warmly. She looked directly at me, then led my eyes to the open page. “Mahteen”, she repeated.

She was gazing fondly at the snapshot there of our African American leader. It was the iconic photo of him with Malcolm X taken sometime in the early sixties, before they both left this world.

The woman said nothing else. She asked me nothing about Martin Luther King Jr, nor about the taller man beside him, nor offered her opinion of them. She would have known Algeria provided succor and inspiration to America’s Black Panther leaders in the 60s. She would have known of Africa’s profound influence on Malik al-Shabazz.

That whispered name said all that was necessary.

*

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.

Barbara Nimri Aziz whose anthropological research has focused on the peoples of the Himalayas is the author of the newly published “Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal”, available on Amazon

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from the author


“Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal”

By Barbara Nimri Aziz

A century ago Yogmaya and Durga Devi, two women champions of justice, emerged from a remote corner of rural Nepal to offer solutions to their nation’s social and political ills. Then they were forgotten.

Years after their demise, in 1980 veteran anthropologist Barbara Nimri Aziz first uncovered their suppressed histories in her comprehensive and accessible biographies. Revelations from her decade of research led to the resurrection of these women and their entry into contemporary Nepali consciousness.

This book captures the daring political campaigns of these rebel women; at the same time it asks us to acknowledge their impact on contemporary feminist thinking. Like many revolutionaries who were vilified in their lifetimes, we learn about the true nature of these leaders’ intelligence, sacrifices, and vision during an era of social and economic oppression in this part of Asia.

After Nepal moved from absolute monarchy to a fledgling democracy and history re-evaluated these pioneers, Dr. Aziz explores their legacies in this book.

Psychologically provocative and astonishingly moving, “Yogmaya and Durga Devi” is a seminal contribution to women’s history.

Click here to order.

Redefining the Meaning of Life and Death

January 17th, 2022 by Julian Rose

All Global Research articles 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 need to redefine the meaning of life and death. Re-examine the true significance of their power within our day to day activities on this ever generous planet Earth.  Because that significance has been almost entirely lost.

Let’s take Life as our starting point, because we are (most of us) participants in life, so it makes sense to consider what it ‘is’ to be alive. 

Well some might say “That’s obvious; it’s the opposite of being dead.” However we can’t know this unless we have experienced ‘being dead’. We can’t assume that ‘to be dead’ is the opposite of ‘to be alive’. We can only safely say that the human body, nerves and brain have ceased to function; while when one is alive, they do function.

But when we set life and death in the greater context of existence – in the macrocosmic setting which is their true home – a completely different dimension emerges. Suddenly ‘life’ means something dynamic that is moving, exploring, creating, evolving. Whereas ‘death’ alludes to the lack of these qualities, their non-existence.

To be alive, in the mostly three dimensional earthly sense of this experience, is to feel the emotions of love, happiness, joy as well as pain, sadness and various other forms of sensitivity.

Whereas Life, in the deeper/broader holistic meaning of this word, covers the whole spectrum of cosmic expressions. Universal energy in full flow. The true expression of cosmic consciousness taking form as the vast myriad of exigencies that constitute the sum total of all that ‘IS’.

So if this omnipotent exigence is ‘Life’ what can death be?

Once again, explored on the broad cosmic level/dimension, death – defined as a lack of the exigences described above – has no meaning. Since the great cycle that we call life contains within it the process of decay, transformation and rebirth. They are integral to the great wheel of existence.

One cannot describe ‘the lack’ or non-existence of all this, since that implies a state of absolute void. Was there ever a state of absolute void? A state of total ‘non-existence’?

We can conclude that death does not actually exist, because there can be no opposite of life once we recognise that the life process simply integrates dying as a phase of living – not as its opposite – not as an end to life.

Thus the cosmic truth reveals itself. There is no ‘end’. There is no death. The concept ‘death’ was invented so as to cause fear and to thereby facilitate control. Absolute control.

Now I’m going to bring us back to earth, whose evolution has been entrusted in our hands. We are trustees of this planet, gifted this role by the Supreme Creator.

Here on earth, a condition that fits the common but false understanding of the word ‘death’, does exist. It is a distortion – a reversal of the cosmic truth, which as I have said, recognises ‘passing’ as a phase of life, not as a ‘lifeless’ condition.

The green leaves of Spring turn brown and fall to the ground in Autumn, enriching the soil in which their seeds will sprout again during the following Spring. This is the life cycle in action.  Universal, eternal and always in transformative movement.

But a large number of people have displayed blindness to this truth and have unquestioningly accepted the opposite state of affairs. The completely illogical and irrational idea that there is no further evolution of our spirit/soul upon transitioning beyond the aged body.

No transformation of the autumn leaves into fecund soil. Even if we can see it happening in our own garden compost heap, most can’t relate this life cycle to be a mirror of our own soul’s transformative evolutionary onward voyage.

It is because of this same blindness that we accept being governed by those totally unfit to govern. Our failure to accept – and recognise – our own lives as mirrors of universal life causes us to fall for the fake version of reality. A version now imprisoning much of humanity in a web of deception about the true nature of reality.

Thus we choose leaders who have no qualities of leadership. Those who do not in any way represent the ‘living universe’ – but something else. Something totally lacking the vibrant energy and higher aspiration which is the true hallmark of being ‘alive’.

So it seems that after all there is something which fits the description of death. Something that is not alive, yet moves and breathes as though it were. This is a strange phenomenon. Here we have something that actually fits the criteria of being ‘dead’. The only thing in the universe that I can qualify as fitting this description: joyless, emotionless, soul-less – yet existing – and having the general outward appearance of a living human being.

What is this creature? A creature for which ego is all and all is ego – which believes that life belongs to it – not that it belongs to life. This entity has a strange hold over much of humanity today; and it has the ambition to turn all life into a replica of its own state of cyborgian numbness. To rid itself, and the rest of humanity, of any vestige of the life-force – of Life – is its unbending ambition.

Humans have been allowing such a diabolical ambition to play an ever more influential role in setting the direction of life on earth. We humans have been taking instruction from the dead.

We have mistakenly thought that the dead are alive. And this can only be because the majority haven’t yet experienced ‘life’ in its fullness – as it is – and therefore don’t recognise the difference between themselves and those who manifest an anti-life, demonic state of existence.

Humanity is learning this lesson the hard way. The demonic is amongst us right now, on the surface, in full view. It expresses itself as ‘Covid’ which has people wrapped in fear. Its close cohorts on earth turn up the volume so that the fear becomes ‘the pandemic’. And the “demons” feed on this death/fear vibration. Then the silent weapons, devised and designed by the anti-life element, are deployed to play their role in the anti-life depopulation agenda.

But life is unvanquishable. When ignored and spurned for decade after decade it finally reveals to its sleeping subjects exactly what their continual ignoring of it is doing. It manifests the divine shock doctrine!

The Covid demons, it reveals, are sleeping man’s own invention. The anti-life fake leaders who push-on with their ‘new variants’, are nothing more or less than the ghouls that emerge to show humanity what its denial status actually makes manifest. And how things will only get worse until it sees the error of its ways and wakes up out of its self inflicted nightmare.

To put an end to the parade of death, humanity will have to learn to recognise the difference between truth and lie, between reality and deception. And realise that by following the lie for decade after decade after decade, it caused that lie to physically manifest itself right in front of their eyes.

So now humanity is finally witnessing – emerging out of all the main institutions of governance on this planet – exactly what their largely selfish, self centred materialistic life-style has made manifest.

Truth is an uncompromising actor. If one won’t learn by choice, one will have to learn the hard way.

Here we are.

A core element of humanity is on the brink of absorbing this cardinal truth, thereby acquiring the wisdom necessary to alter the entire trajectory of this planet and beyond. An event which will consciously reunite man with his creator and blow the demons into the furthest depths of the universe.

It behoves us, the trustees of life on earth, to grasp this truth and to thereby trigger this great tipping-point. The event so profoundly anticipated by all who have – against the odds – understood and nurtured the great gift of Life.

In this essay I have tried to show how what’s commonly – and wrongly – called ‘death’ is not an ending of our existence, because there is something ‘live’ which carries-on as soul/spirit: our soul ‘I’. Our ‘soul I’ is something which emerges in us once ‘ego’ is finally given a back seat.

In answering the question “What is death?” I conclude that it uniquely applies to those expressing an anti-life position in all words and actions. The true opposition to the flowering of humanity.

By transforming the dominating power of the ego, and by acting according to the direction uniquely provided by that force called ‘intuition’, our deeply subtle and direct connection with the source of all life can be cemented. The one event which will finally open us to the fullness of creation and bring into true perspective the meaning of the word ‘life’ and of the verb ‘to live’.

*

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.

Julian Rose is an early pioneer of UK organic farming, writer, international activist, entrepreneur and holistic teacher.  He is President of The International Coalition to Protect the Polish Countryside. His latest book ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind – Why Humanity Must Come Through’ is particularly recommended reading for this time: see www.julianrose.info

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Redefining the Meaning of Life and Death
  • 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.

***

Investigative reporter Dirk Pohlmann says that far from the Star Trek vision of a cooperative federation of space dwellers, current US plans for militarizing space are the same old gunboat diplomacy of being in charge by being the biggest military threat in space and on earth to other nations also moving into space, and that individual players like Bezos and Musk could be used by intelligence services to bypass international laws and treaties governing the activities of nations in space to ensure American supremacy.

*

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.

This article was originally published on The Whistleblower Newsroom.

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.

***

On 14 January, a breaking news story from the New York Times informed its readers: “U.S. Says Russia Sent Saboteurs Into Ukraine to Create Pretext for Invasion.”

Unsurprisingly, Washington “did not release details of the evidence it had collected.” Why did the NYT not question the withholding of evidence? Why even deign to report what so easily could be dismissed, by definition, as hearsay? Is that because the White House is a paragon of truth-telling? Did its erroneous reporting by disgraced writer Judith Miller that Iraq possessed weapons-of-mass-destruction precipitating a US-led invasion not teach NYT a lesson?

Screenshot from the New York Times

Nevertheless, the NYT chooses to lend credence to the anti-Russia accusation. It sources Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, who “said the Russian military planned to begin these activities several weeks before a military invasion, which could begin between mid-January and mid-February. She said Moscow was using the same playbook as it did in 2014, when Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula, a part of Ukraine.”

What does it say about the NYT when it unquestioningly quotes a person or entity? One might well surmise that the NYT has accorded its imprimatur that what has been said is an unquestionable fact. What about relevant background information that is omitted by the NYT?

Since when does a referendum in which 97% of the population chose to join Russia rather than remain a part of Ukraine? Why does this expression of the democratic will constitute an annexation? The US tried to have the referendum ruled illegal in the United Nations Security Council but this was, predictably, quashed by a Russian veto. China abstained noting that Crimea is not a superficial consideration and that there is a “complex intertwinement of historical and contemporary factors.” And how could the UN go against self-determination for Crimea when that principle is enshrined in Article I of the UN Charter? UN secretary-general António Guterres said the principle of self-determination “remains both a source of pride for the Organization and a crucial pillar of its work going forward.

Why does the NYT not mention how Crimea became a part of Ukraine in the first place? Is it not pertinent that Crimea became a part of the Ukraine as result of a transfer from Russia by the USSR in 1954? When Ukraine departed the USSR did it still merit keeping Crimea and the Sevastopol Naval Base important for Russian security?

Is it not crucial to mention that the Crimean referendum only took place after a US-instigated coup that toppled the elected government in Ukraine and saw Neonazis assume governmental office in Kyiv?

Is it journalism to quote a Pentagon official as saying the intelligence about the operation is “very credible”?

The NYT relates that the refusal to reveal evidence is “for fear of alerting the Russian operatives whose movements are being tracked”? What kind of excuse is that? If indeed any of this “intelligence” is true, then the operatives must now know that they were tracked?

Despite all the aforementioned, the NYT seems cocksure about their reporting: “The American allegations were clearly part of a strategy to try to prevent an attack by exposing it in advance.” Those clever Americans thwarting a Russian attack and saving Ukraine without having to fire a shot. Cough, cough.

Among the Russian demands from the nugatory Brussels talks, the NYT notes, without further comment: “Russia has also demanded that the United States remove all of its nuclear weapons from Europe, and that Ukraine, Belarus and Georgia, three surrounding states that once were part of the Soviet empire, never join NATO.”

The current editors at the NYT should know well the history of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Yet the NYT did not connect the dots to Soviet nukes in Cuba and American nukes in Europe. Why were American concerns about nukes across the pond in Cuba a grave security threat while nukes in Europe on Russia’s front porch are not a security threat to Russia?

As a matter of principle, the US-NATO side ought best to consider the security concerns of all actors. And while all the actors are considering, a suggestion: consider declaring continental Europe a nuclear weapon-free zone. It should help anxious Europeans sleep a bit easier.

*

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.

Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. He can be emailed at: kimohp at gmail.com. Twitter: @kimpetersen.

Featured image: Russian President Vladimir Putin (ID1974/Shutterstock) and President Joe Biden (Stratos Brilakis/shutterstock)

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Australia’s treatment of Novak Djokovic, the tennis world number one, has been revelatory.  Unintentionally, this has exposed the seedier, arbitrary and inconsistent nature of Australia’s border policies.  The approval by the Australian Federal Court of the Immigration Minister Alex Hawke’s decision to re-cancel the prominent Serb’s visa left the country a heaving precedent that will be invoked, in future, with relish.

Djokovic had originally entered the country under the assumption that he had been granted a legitimate vaccine exemption.  As the former Australian Tennis Open director Paul McNamee explained to the ABC, “every player and support member fills in a form, visa 408, and everyone does that, you are guided through it by Tennis Australia, every step of the way, and then you get approval, that is the process.”

On December 30, 2021, Djokovic received a letter from the Chief Medical Officer of Tennis Australia explaining that he had been granted a “Medical exemption from COVID vaccination” on the grounds that he had recently recovered from COVID-19. The exemption certificate had been furnished by an Independent Medical Review panel commissioned by Tennis Australia and approved by the Victorian state government’s independent Medical Exemptions Review Panel.

To cap things off, the Department of Home Affairs informed Djokovic that his Australia Travel Declaration has also been given the nod.  His “responses [i]ndicated that [he met] the requirements for a quarantine-free travel into Australia where permitted by the jurisdiction of your travel.”

The story turned out rather differently.  Such documentation proved insufficient for Djokovic on entering Australia on January 5.  A delegated officer of the Australian Border Force hastily cancelled his visa, giving Djokovic insufficient notice to prepare his explanation on the morning of January 6.  It was this procedural blunder that led to the Serb’s victory in the Federal Circuit Court, where Judge Anthony Kelly stated the following with some pungency: “Here, a professor and a physician have produced and provided to (Djokovic) a medical exemption.  Further to that, that medical exemption and the basis on which it was given was separately given by a further independent expert specialist panel established by the Victorian state government […] The point I am agitated about is, what more could this man have done?”

The Commonwealth, for its part, rejected claims that any deferral of vaccination should not have been read as an excuse not to get vaccinated.  The Tennis Australia exemption letter did not constitute sufficient information for the purpose of entering the country unvaccinated.

Exercising ministerial discretion

The Commonwealth’s defeat in the Federal Circuit Court did not end matters.  Hawke was left to exercise his vast executive discretion in a none-too Solomonic way.  The federal Labor opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, wondered whether the government was conducting a focus group in order to receive “the answer before it responds to the issue”.

As Hawke dithered, Djokovic was ritually torched in media and social media circles for incorrectly filling out the travel declaration.  Much of the kindling had been provided by the tennis player himself.  He had, it transpired, been in Spain; his agent had made a “human error” in stating that he had not travelled abroad in the 14 days prior to arriving in Australia on January 5.

He had also breached Serbian pandemic restrictions by avoiding isolating for 14 days after receiving a positive PCR result on December 16.  Instead, on December 17, he breezily attended a tennis event in Belgrade where he presided over the giving of awards to children and, on the following day, conducted an interview with French journalist Franck Ramella of L’Equipe.  “The instructions were clear,” Ramella subsequently wrote on realising that the tennis star had done the interview after testing positive for COVID-19.  There were to be “no questions about vaccination.”

This was all a bit much even for the otherwise supportive Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić, who told the BBC that, “If you’re positive you have to be in isolation.”  She did, however, leave it to Djokovic to explain the matter. “I do not know when he actually got the results, when he saw the results, so there is some grey area… the only answer to this can be provided by Novak.”

This growing resume of seeming shiftiness did not augur well for Djokovic’s already anaemically thin chances.  The Minister had been furnished with fuel and duly ignited it.  The cancellation came, timed with brutal effect, on January 14.  It had been made“on health and good order grounds, on the basis that it was in the public interest to do so.”  The Australian Open, for which Djokovic had started training for on court, was to commence on January 17.

The threat inflation factor

Within hours, the legal team began proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia in a speedy effort to overturn Hawke’s cancellation.  The government submission was telling, consciously magnifying the Djokovic threat.  He had “indicated publicly that he was opposed to becoming vaccinated against COVID-19”.  He had “acted inconsistently with certain COVID-19 restrictions in the past.”

The second ground drew more attention to the first point, with the Minister insisting that Djokovic was stirring an anti-vaccination insurrection: “[T]here are some media reports that some groups opposed to vaccination have supported Mr Djokovic’s presence in Australia, by reference to his unvaccinated status.”  The ground was barely credible, given that his reservations about vaccination were already known before entering Australia.  As is often the case Down Under, the Australian public is treated as a potentially wayward child who might be tempted by anti-institutional contrarianism.

The third ground followed on from the first: that encouraging such resistance against COVID-19 vaccinations and restrictions “would present a problem for the health of individuals and the operation of Australia’s hospital system”.  What a revolutionary monster the Serbian player was being made out to be.

Djokovic’s submission

The defence outlined, plausibly, that Hawke had engaged in a crude bit of threat inflation.  It was one thing to deport an individual who, posing an individual health risk, had entered Australia lacking a medical exemption and inconsistently with the guidelines of ATAGI (Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation).  It was quite another to do so to a person “who poses negligible individual health risk, enter with an exemption, and consistently with ATAGI guidelines, etc.”

Such reasoning, it followed, was “perverse, illogical, or irrational” and distinctly “out of keeping with the proper exercise of a power the purpose of which is to reduce risk to health”.  This also ignored that the cancellation “creates a much larger health risk (or good order risk).”

The Minister had also not addressed “in express terms” what those dangerous consequences to health and good order Djokovic posed might be.  This was a “counterfactual” that the Minister did not consider.  The “anti-vaccination sentiment” approach was also at odds with the original delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs.

In attempting to hole Hawke’s argument, emphasis was placed on the Minister’s one-sided approach in considering the consequences of Djokovic’s presence, rather than absence. It might very well be that the visa cancellation, the Serb’s detention and deportation, rather than the player’s presence in Australia, could cause unrest.  “Mr Djokovic’s point is that that material [suggesting that anti-vaccination groups were upset at the cancellation and his detention] is not referred to or considered in the Minister’s reasons.”

Valiantly, the defence also argued that Hawke’s discretion to cancel the visa could not be undertaken “on an evidence-free figment of his imagination.”  The point on whether there was evidence supporting the contention that Djokovic’s presence “may foster sentiment against vaccination” was not addressed.  The media reports cited by the Minister to supposedly show anti-vaccination support by groups in Australia failed to even mention Djokovic.

The mess became even more elaborate with the defence salvo that the Minister did not himself know what Djokovic’s actualviews on vaccination were.  This was despite claiming that his anti-vaccination stance was a “well-known” one.  “This,” the submission bluntly states, “is illogical.”  Djokovic’s statement for the record should, the argument went, lead one to an inference that his public views had been “taken out of context” and that he did “not accept the depiction by the ‘international media’ of his views on vaccination”.

All it would have taken was a request by Hawke that Djokovic furnish him with material on the issue.  As the player had previously pointed out in other media reports, he was “no expert” on vaccinations and was keeping an “open mind” on the issue; he simply wanted to have “an option to choose” what was “best” for his body.

Dark consequences, sinister precedents

On Sunday, January 16, the decision of the full court of the Federal Court was handed down.  (Full reasons are yet to be published.)  In finding for the Commonwealth, Chief Justice James Allsop affirmed the traditional reservation shown by Australian judges to challenging exercises of executive power. The grounds made by Djokovic “focus on whether the decision was, for different reasons, irrational or legally unreasonable.  It is not part or function of the court to decide upon the merit or wisdom of the decision.”

The Djokovic precedent presents the authorities with a large tarring brush, one to be used against other notable figures of certain opinions seen to pose a risk to Australia’s public interest.  Hypotheticals will suffice, given that the Minister need only be satisfied that the person might be a risk to health, safety and good order.

Such latitude also grants authorities a heavy hand to target future dissent and protest. The Australian government will be able “to justify,” barrister and president of Liberty Victoria Mike Stanton warns, “the suppression of legitimate political expression because others might engage in unrest.”

With a stunning lack of imagination, the Djokovic precedent promises that the executive will not be accountable for the disorder and disruption arising from deporting individuals who might command a following.  Oppression promises to be twinned with unpardonable stupidity.

*

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.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Melbourne.  Email: [email protected]

Featured image is from Flickr

All Global Research articles 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.

***

2022 seems to be starting right where 2021 left off now we have Prime Minister Justin Trudeau coming out with comments calling people who are unvaccinated racists and misogynists, people who don’t believe in science, and then his Health Minister Mr. Duclos saying that it’s time for “compulsory vaccination”.

So I’m going to take a look at these, frankly, insane pronouncements today on Don’t Talk TV.

Click here to watch the video.

*

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.

JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass by Oliver Stone

January 17th, 2022 by Edward Curtin

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Two of the greatest speeches ever delivered by an American president bookend this extraordinary documentary film.  It opens with President John F. Kennedy giving the commencement speech at American University on June 10, 1963 and it closes with his civil rights speech to the American people the following day.  It is a deft artistic touch that suggests the brevity of JFK’s heroic efforts for world peace and domestic racial equality and justice before he was assassinated in a public execution in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963.

In the former anti-war speech, he called for the end to the Cold War with the Soviet Union, the halt to the arms race, and the abolishment of war and its weapons, especially nuclear.  He said:

What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children – not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women – not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.

In the latter address to the American people, having just sent National Guard troops to the University of Alabama to make sure two black students were admitted despite the racist objections of Governor George Wallace, his words transcended the immediate issue at the university and called for the end to the immoral and illegal discrimination against African Americans in every area of the nation’s life.  He said:

One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free.

Having framed the documentary thus, Oliver Stone and the screenwriter James DiEugenio do a masterful job of explaining what really happened in the years of Kennedy’s short presidency, why he was such a great threat to the CIA and the military industrial complex, what really happened when they killed him, and how the Warren Commission, the CIA, and the corporate media have worked hand-in-hand to this day to cover up the truth.  The current two-hour version of JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass will be followed in a month or so by a more detailed four-hour version.

The importance of this film is twofold:  It establishes an updated historical record since the Assassination Records Review Board (AARB) was established as a result of Stone’s 1991 breakthrough film, JFK, which forced the release of previously hidden documents, and, more importantly, it emphatically shows why JFK’s assassination is crucial for understanding the United States today.  For without a clear and unambiguous accounting of why he was killed and by whom (I do not mean the actual shooters), and who in the government and media has covered it up, we are doomed to repeat the past as this country has been doing ever since.

Because JFK Revisited assiduously documents the essential claims of Stone’s 1991 film and adds to it with the latest factual material released since the ARRB required the release of the previously secret documents, the film, like the JFKfilm before it, will be denounced by the same media/intelligence forces that slammed the earlier movie.  Back then the bogus critiques claimed Stone’s imagination had gone wild and he distorted history, so now the best way for those critics to rip this evidence-filled documentary is to omit mentioning its contents and to continue calling him a conspiracy obsessed guy still intent on promoting his fantasies.

Once it was his “fictions” that were ridiculous; now it is his facts, despite his research colleague and screen writer James DiEugenio’s exhaustive confirmation of the facts that will be released later this year when the annotated script is published.  JFK Revisited proves with facts that Stone was right in 1991.  Even then, but little known, is that JFK was also accompanied by a book of the film that included copious research notes.  But facts don’t seem to matter to Stone’s critics, then or now.  They are too damning.

So let’s examine the documentary.

It opens with Kennedy speaking at American University and quickly switches to a montage of condensed news reports of the shooting in Dallas, Kennedy’s death, people’s reactions, Oswald’s arrest, his claim that he’s a “patsy,”  Ruby’s killing of Oswald, JFK’s funeral, reports that Kennedy was shot from the front and the rear, the formation of the Warren Commission and the naming of its members, including most significantly the former Director of the CIA Allen Dulles whom Kennedy had fired, the Commission’s finding that Oswald alone killed the president, that there was no conspiracy, the Zapruder film, and NBC’s Chet Huntley saying that the assassination is thoroughly documented (in the Warren Commission Report) and it’s all there for anyone who would like to pursue it.

Huntley’s ironically false statement is followed by a jump cut to Oliver Stone in Dealey Plaza telling how it wasn’t all there at all, that The Warren Report was a sham, and how in the intervening years plenty of new information and evidence has been revealed by the Church Commission Hearings in 1975  that uncovered the CIA and FBI’s machinations in assassination plots at home and abroad; followed a decade later by the public showing of the Zapruder film and the subsequent House Select Committee on Assassinations’ (HSCA) finding that there was probably a conspiracy in Kennedy’s murder.

Although the Warren Report came under questioning during these years, the HSCA sealed half a million “dangerous records” until 2029.  But as a result of Stone’s JFK film in 1991, the government was pressured to pass The John F. Kennedy Records Collection Act with its Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB).  The ARRB ordered the release of the secret documents within four years.  Over two million pages were released and they are housed at the National Archives, although certain documents are still being withheld.

One could argue that the truth about the assassination was obvious from the start and that only elements within the U.S. government could have carried out this crime and covered it up. That only simple logic was needed to solve the crime because from the start the Warren Commission made no sense with its magic bullet explanation, and that only national security operatives could have withdrawn the president’s security protection, etc. That new documents are not needed. That arguing any of this is just a pseudo-debate and a waste of time.

There is cogency to that argument, but Stone prefers to take a different route and use the released records to bolster his argument and establish a cinematic record for future generations.  He is making accessible in a two-hour movie a powerful historical lesson that should be seen by everyone; it is one absent from the history books students read in school.

That his enemies will try to dissuade the public from viewing the film is not surprising, for doing so with the supporting testimonies of so many experts and the presentation of the suppressed official documents make these critics look like fools, or simply the tools they are.  For while this film relies on many documents forced out of the government’s own vaults and therefore hoists the critics with their own petard, it is also a reminder that the media is deeply infiltrated with CIA plants and assets, as has been shown by the revelations of Operation Mockingbird, a program that surely never ended but has only intensified today’s propaganda.

One glance at the headlines of reviews of this film since its release two months ago reveals the vituperative personal nature of the attacks on Stone, showing that the film’s evidentiary content is of no interest to the reviewers. Ad hominem attacks will suffice. Even the one review I read previous to writing this – sent to me by someone who considered it to be positive – was a sly piece of disinformation disguised as praise.  The enemies of truth are not just vulgar morons but very sophisticated tricksters.

Let me break down the evidence presented in the film in order of appearance.  First, the so-called three bullets and the magic bullet.  Second, the alleged rifle and new evidence confirming that Lee Oswald was not on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository.  Third, the autopsy, its faked photographs, and the pressure placed on the Parkland Hospital doctors to change what they saw with their own eyes.  Fourth, Oswald’s history working with the CIA and FBI, his fake defection to the Soviet Union, the coverup of the intelligence agencies’ use of Oswald from start to finish, and the other plots to assassinate Kennedy in Chicago and Tampa that follow the same template as Oswald in Dallas.  Fifth, why Kennedy was murdered.

None of these issues are analyzed in some half-assed theoretical way, but are supported by documentary facts – evidence, in other words.  As Stone says, “Conspiracy theories are now conspiracy facts.”  Nevertheless, those writers whose review headlines I mentioned prefer to call Stone “looney,” a “conspiracy quack,” etc. as they ignore the facts, new and old.

The Magic Bullet

The Warren Report claimed that since three empty shells were found on the floor of the sixth floor of The Texas Book Depository that only three bullets were fired, and from that spot.  The FBI claimed that all three bullets hit inside the car, two hitting Kennedy and one Gov. Connolly.  But evidence showed that one bullet missed the car, striking an underpass.

This forced the Commission into a dilemma, and so Arlen Specter, the future long-standing senator, conjured up the so-called Magic Bullet Theory, claiming that one bullet hit and passed through Kennedy only to hit Connolly, zigzagging absurdly and causing seven wounds.  It was ridiculous but conveniently avoided admitting that there had to be more shots and therefore a conspiracy.  The Magic bullet – CE 399 – was said to have been found in pristine condition on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital.  This bullet was foundational to the Warren Commission’s case, but Stone shows with released documents that there was no chain of custody for this bullet and that lies were told about it.  He further shows how this magically found pristine bullet could not have passed through two men and emerge like new.

The film immediately demolishes the Warren Commission’s basic premise.

The “Rifle” with No Oswald on the Sixth Floor

And then this: the film shows that the rifle Oswald is alleged to have used and ordered through the mail with its paper trail (he could have walked into a store and bought one without leaving evidence) does not look like the famous highly questionable photos of Oswald posing with a rifle in the back yard.  But more importantly than various other anomalies concerning the rifle(s-?), such as the absence of Oswald’s hand prints, is the new evidence the film documents about Oswald’s non-presence on the sixth floor.

Researcher Barry Ernest went to the National Archives to find the original testimony of Victoria Adams who worked on the fourth floor and knew Oswald.  He discovered that it was missing and that the Warren Commission had destroyed the tapes.  So he went and found Adams, and what she told him contradicted the Commission’s findings.  It was claimed that after shooting Kennedy, Oswald quickly went down the back stairs to the second floor lunch room.  Adams told Ernest that immediately after the assassination she went down the back stairs from the fourth floor and saw no one. Ernest found corroborating evidence from two other women, Sandra Styles who accompanied Vicki Adams down the stairs and Vicki’s supervisor Dorothy Garner who saw them descend, to back Adams’ testimony, about which the Warren Commission lied.  Further proof that Oswald could not have shot Kennedy from the sixth floor window since he wasn’t there.

The Head Wound and the Autopsy Coverup

With video testimonies from Doctors Perry, Clark, and Crenshaw from Parkland Hospital, Stone shows how the original testimonies placed the neck and head wounds to Kennedy coming from the front, but that pressure was applied to Perry to recant, which he did, only to later to admit his recantation was a lie and that the wound in Kennedy’s neck was an entrance wound.

Then with the autopsy, we learn how it was controlled not by forensic pathologists experienced in doing autopsies on gunshot victims, but by shadowy military and intelligence figures.  We learn of another magic bullet that allegedly was found in Parkland Hospital where it was claimed it fell out of a back wound of the president.  But this bullet later turns out to be The Magic Bullet after further legerdemain by Warren Commission member Gerald Ford.

This stuff is highly comical if it weren’t so sinister, and it is surely “unbelievable” as the eminent  forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht tells the viewer. That one of the autopsy doctors burned his notes and another had his disappear might not be new knowledge, but to learn that two honest FBI agents who witnessed the autopsy and were not called as witnesses by the Warren Commission – James Sibert and Francis X. O’Neill, Jr. – were shown the autopsy photos in depositions taken by the Assassinations Record Review Board in 1997 and claimed that Kennedy’s head had been doctored to conceal his gaping rear head wound is startlingly new evidence.

As is the important diagram Sibert drew of a large head wound in the back of the head supporting a shot from the front.

As is the ARRB’s declassification of forty witnesses’ testimony that they saw a gaping hole in the back of the President’s head consistent with a shot from the front.

As is the White House photographer Robert Knudsen’s admission thirty-years later that the photos he took were after the head had been doctored to conceal the wound.

As is the evidence that the autopsy photos of JFK’s brain in the National archives are fakes.

Thus, the film emphatically shows that the new forensic evidence proves that there were multiple shooters and that Oswald, who was not on the sixth floor, was not one of them.  Oswald, because he was killed by the F.B.I. affiliated Jack Ruby two days later, never had a trial, but if he did, in light of all we know now, he would never be convicted, yet the media, led by The New York Times, Washington Post, CBS, etc., have spent decades covering up the truth and claiming Oswald killed Kennedy, just as they have with their equally bogus claim that Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK.  They can not be so ignorant not to know they are spouting absurdities, so one can only conclude they are lying to protect the killers.  That they are accomplices after the fact.

Oswald the Patsy and his Connections to the CIA and FBI

This section contains much evidentiary information about Oswald that is in the 1991 film.  That he was associated with David Ferrie, Guy Bannister, and Clay Shaw (alias Betrand), all of whom were FBI and CIA affiliated.  That he was a provocateur playing multiple roles, one day an anti-Castro protester and the next day a Castro supporter.  That he was trained as a Marine at a top secret Military base in Japan that ran U-2 spy flights run by the CIA over the Soviet Union. That his defection to the Soviet Union was likely a part of a CIA defector program. That after marrying a Russian wife, he was welcomed back into the U.S. by the government he “betrayed” and greeted upon his arrival by an intelligence asset who got him to Dallas to hook up with another CIA operative, George de Mohrenschildt.

Everything we learn about Oswald makes it clear he was working for the CIA and FBI while simultaneously being on their watch list for years.  The CIA denials that this was true were lies. We learn that the ARRB had a hard time getting the CIA to hand over documents on Oswald, that both the FBI and CIA lifted flashes on Oswald in early October 1963 which allowed him access to the Dallas parade route without attention.  We learn that the Secret Service destroyed their threat sheets for 1963, those being reports of JFK’s prior trips and threats associated with them.

Essentially, we learn again with documentation what was in the earlier film, JFK, and more; all of which proves that Oswald was being run by the CIA and that he was used as a patsy after the assassination.  We see the similarities to the earlier plots on the President’s life in Chicago (see JFK and the Unspeakable by James W. Douglass re the Chicago plot) and Tampa that are eerily alike to that in Dallas.  We learn everything essential, and yet this is just the two-hour version of the film.

Why Was Kennedy Killed, Who Benefited, and Who Had the Power to Cover it Up?

In the conclusion of the film, we are told all the things that Kennedy did that made him an arch-enemy of the CIA and the military. Kennedy, who was hated by the CIA even before the Bay of Pigs disaster, afterwards fired the CIA Director Allen Dulles and his subordinates and promised to splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds after he realized that they tricked him with the Bay of Pigs.

In 1961, they also killed those Kennedy greatly admired and was working with on issues of decolonialization: Patrice Lumumba of the Congo and the Secretary General of the United Nations, Dag Hammarskjöld. Less than eleven months into office, JFK was faced with a savage enemy from within that he didn’t control.  He told the French ambassador that he was in no way involved in the CIA’s attempts to assassinate French President Charles de Gaulle, his ally, and that he had no control over the CIA.

After JFK’s assassination, Allen Dulles told journalist Willie Morris that Kennedy “thought he was a god.”  This from the man who had his henchmen kill with impunity and loved the Nazis with whom he worked and brought into the U.S. government (see David Talbot’s The Devil’s Chessboard).  In a document uncovered by the ARRB called the Northwoods Document, the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended to Kennedy that he approve a false flag operation to start a war with Cuba by blowing up an empty plane over Cuba and blaming it on Castro and setting off bombs in American cities killing Americans for the same purpose.  Of course, Kennedy refused, only intensifying their hatred of him.  Then when he wouldn’t bomb Cuba during the missile crisis in October 1962, gave his American University speech the following June, sought reconciliation with the Soviet Union, and decided to withdraw from Vietnam, the die was cast: He had to die.

Who has benefited from his death?

The war manufacturers first and foremost, for they have been reaping their bloody profits ever since. The war against Vietnam was just the start, for the wars and alarms of war have never stopped.

And the CIA, working as the leading edge for the military around the world, continuing the Pax Americana for Wall St. and the power hungry millionaires and billionaires who hate democracy.

And of course, the media companies that are stenographers for the CIA, the politicians who pimp for them, and the vast interconnected power elites who cash in while playing innocent.

Finally, without having to explicitly say it, JFK Revisited makes it emphatically clear by presenting evidence that the criminals who committed this terrible crime, together with their media accomplices, were the only ones able to cover it up.

Of course, there is more to this powerful and important film than I have mentioned here, all carefully laid out and documented.  Those who criticized Stone’s earlier movie and continue to hurl insults at him rather than consider the evidence he and DiEugenio present are the worst kind of anti-intellectual sycophants.  If they were forced to dispute the content of this film step-by-step, that would simply expose their agendas, something they must keep hidden to safeguard their establishment credentials.

JFK Revisited ends with an important reminder from David Talbot that the truth of this film about an event that took place long ago is so essential to understand because of its contemporary relevance. It is not dead history. The “horror show” we are now experiencing has its roots in JFK’s public execution on the streets of Dallas, when the killers sent the most obvious message:

Obey or you will suffer the same fate.

The United States is still controlled by the forces that killed President Kennedy – the CIA and those who comprise the national security state that wage war at home and abroad in contradistinction to everything JFK was trying to accomplish. Their cowardly allies in the media are everywhere.

There is a reason why, as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. tells the viewer near the film’s end, that all across the world there are streets named and statues erected to honor President Kennedy: for people know that he was a brave man of peace and human reconciliation and that he died at the hands of scoundrels intent on stopping his work.

With JFK Revisited, Oliver Stone has truly honored this fallen hero.  Like Jim Garrison in JFK, he offers this film as his closing statement to the jury, which is all of us.  Here is the evidence.  Consider it closely.  Render your verdict.

By doing so, we may yet take back the country from the forces of evil.

Bravo to Stone and DiEugenio!  They have created a tour de force.

*

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.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

Featured image is from the author

Video: Nicaragua Towards Final Emancipation

January 17th, 2022 by Dr. Gustavo Porras Cortés

All Global Research articles 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.

***

 

Comrade Daniel Kovalik interviews Dr. Gustavo Porras Cortés, president of the National Assembly of Nicaragua a few days after the takeover of President Commander Daniel Ortega and the companion Vice President Rosario Murillo on Monday, January 10 2022.

In Spanish and English

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Nicaragua Towards Final Emancipation
  • 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.

***

An investigation of Office for National Statistics data has revealed that since the Covid-19 vaccine began to be rolled-out to teenagers there has been a 53% rise in the number of deaths due to all-causes among males aged 15-19, and each spike in deaths correlates perfectly with a spike in administration of the first, second, and third doses of the Covid-19 injection to this age group.

Further investigation has also found that whilst Covid-19 deaths remained low among this age group following Covid-19 vaccination, they were still considerably higher than the negligible amount of deaths that had occurred before the Covid-19 vaccination was introduced.

Suggesting Covid-19 vaccination may have in fact had a negative effect on the immune systems of the teenage boys, or deaths may have been misattributed as Covid-19 deaths, as has been so easily done since March 2020, to cover up the fact that the Covid-19 injections may have played a roll in the deaths.

The above graph has been plotted from data found within the 2020 edition of ‘Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales’, which can be downloaded here, and accessed on the ONS website here, and the 2021 edition of ‘Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, which can be downloaded here, and accessed on the ONS website here.

The graph shows the number of deaths registered each week throughout 2020 and 2021 among teenage boys aged 15-19, and we can clearly see that from week 18 onwards in 2021 there was a noticeable rise in deaths due to all causes among teenage boys compared to 2020, with things taking a turn for the worse from week 23.

For instance in week 26, despite the Covid-19 virus allegedly reaking havoc throughout the UK, there were just 2 deaths registered among male teens aged 15-19 in England and Wales. But fast forward one year and we can see that there were 19 deaths registered among male teens aged 15-19 in England and Wales during week 26. That represents a 850% increase.

The reason the increase in deaths among male teens occurring from week 18 onwards is concerning is because according to the following chart provided by the UK Health Security Agency in the Vaccine Surveillance reports, this is the point where a spike in vaccinations of 18 and 19 year-olds began, and around the same time some 16 and 17-year-olds began to be given the Covid-19 injection.

Source

Overall, according to the ONS reports there were a total of 434 deaths due to all causes among males aged 15-19 in England and Wales between week 1 and week 52 in 2020. However, between week 1 and week 52 in 2021 there were a total of 577 deaths among males aged 15-19 in England and Wales.

But what’s concerning here is that the number of deaths between week 1 and 17 in both years are almost identical, with 170 deaths occurring in 2020, and 172 deaths occurring in 2021.

The concerning difference in deaths only occurred after the Covid-19 vaccine was introduced to this age group. With 264 deaths occuring among males aged 15-19 between week 18 and week 52 in 2020, but 405 deaths occuring among males aged 15-19 between week 18 and week 52 in 2021.

This means deaths among males aged 15-19 increased by 53% following the introduction of the Covid-19 vaccine to this age-group compared to the same period in 2020.

Many people may try to shoot this statistic down by claiming Covid-19 was actually to blame, so we also analysed the number of Covid-19 deaths registered weekly among Males aged 15-19 in England and Wales throughout the whole of 2020 and 2021.

The following graph has again been plotted from data found within the 2020 edition of ‘Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales’, which can be downloaded here, and accessed on the ONS website here, and the 2021 edition of ‘Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, which can be downloaded here, and accessed on the ONS website here.

As we can see the number of Covid-19 deaths among males aged 15-19 in England and Wales has been pretty scarce over a period of two years. No more than 3 deaths have been registered in a single week. So therefore we can clearly see that Covid-19 does not play a major part in the 53% increase in deaths between week 18 and week 52 in 2021.

But this data does show something rather concerning, in that whilst Covid-19 deaths remained low they did actually increase significantly following the introduction of the Covid-19 vaccine to this population.

Between week 12 (start of Lockdown 1 in 2020) and week 17 in 2020 there were a grand total of 4 Covid-19 deaths among males aged 15-19 in England and Wales. During the same period in 2021 there was only a single death registered.

However, look at the difference between week 18-52 in 2020 and in 2021.

There were 2 Covid-19 deaths registered between week 18 and week 52 during 2020, but there were 11 Covid-19 deaths registered between week 18 and week 52 during 2021, despite the Covid-19 vaccination being introduced to this age group.

Therefore, following Covid-19 vaccination, Covid-19 deaths increased 450% compared to the number of Covid-19 deaths during the same time-frame in 2020 when there was no Covid-19 vaccine available.

This data therefore suggests that the Covid-19 vaccines have either had a negative effect on the immune systems of 15-19-year-old males, or deaths among this age-group have wrongly been misattributed as Covid-19 to cover-up the fact the Covid-19 vaccine may have had a roll in the deaths, and we can safely conclude that the Covid-19 vaccine is to blame for those deaths because of the following correlation we have unearthed.

The following three charts are taken from the UK Health Security Agency’s Vaccine Surveillance Report – Week 1 – 2022, and they show the cumulative weekly vaccine uptake by age for dose 1, dose 2, and dose 3 of the Covid-19 vaccine.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-117-1024x629.png

What we can see here is that there was a clear spike in 1st doses administered among 18 and 19 year-olds between week 22 and week 27, and a clear spike in 1st doses administered among 16 and 17-year-olds between week 31 and week 36.

What we can see here is that there was a clear spike in 2nd doses administered to 18 and 19-year-olds between week 31 and week 37, as well as the start of 2nd doses being administered to vulnerable 16 and 17-year-olds from week 18 onwards.

We can also see a clear spike in 2nd doses being administered to 16 and 17-year-olds between week 39 and 46, and between week 46 and 51.

What we can see here is a clear spike in 3rd doses being administered to 18 and 19-year-olds, between week 49 and 51, as well as the start of 3rd doses being administered to 16 and 17-year-olds from wek 49.

This is concerning because of the fact there were clear spikes in deaths among males aged 15-19 in England and Wales between week 23-30, week 33-36, week 39-46, and week 48-51.

Therefore the spikes in doses of Covid-19 vaccine being administered correlate perfectly with the spikes in deaths among males aged 15-19 during 2021, as we have shown in the following chart –

We’re sure there will be those who argue that correlation does not equal causation, but if you are going to argue that then please explain in as much depth as we have why deaths among teenage boys were virtually the same between week 1 and 17 in 2020 and 2021 but then increased by 53% between week 18 and 52 following the introduction of the Covid-19 vaccine to this age group.

*

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

Featured image is from The Last Refuge

After Kazakhstan, the Color Revolution Era Is Over

January 17th, 2022 by Pepe Escobar

All Global Research articles 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 year 2022 started with Kazakhstan on fire, a serious attack against one of the key hubs of Eurasian integration. We are only beginning to understand what and how it happened.

On Monday morning, leaders of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) held an extraordinary session to discuss Kazakhstan.

Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev framed it succinctly. Riots were “hidden behind unplanned protests.” The goal was “to seize power” – a coup attempt. Actions were “coordinated from a single center.” And “foreign militants were involved in the riots.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin went further: during the riots, “Maidan technologies were used,” a reference to the Ukrainian square where 2013 protests unseated a NATO-unfriendly government.

Defending the prompt intervention of CSTO peacekeeping forces in Kazakhstan, Putin said, “it was necessary to react without delay.” The CSTO will be on the ground “as long as necessary,” but after the mission is accomplished, “of course, the entire contingent will be withdrawn from the country.” Forces are expected to exit later this week.

But here’s the clincher: “CSTO countries have shown that they will not allow chaos and ‘color revolutions’ to be implemented inside their borders.”

Putin was in synch with Kazakh State Secretary Erlan Karin, who was the first, on the record, to apply the correct terminology to events in his country: What happened was a “hybrid terrorist attack,” by both internal and external forces, aimed at overthrowing the government.

The tangled hybrid web

Virtually no one knows about it. But last December, another coup was discreetly thwarted in the Kyrgyz capital, Bishkek. Kyrgyz intel sources attribute the engineering to a rash of NGOs linked with Britain and Turkey.

That introduces an absolutely key facet of The Big Picture: NATO-linked intel and their assets may have been preparing a simultaneous color revolution offensive across Central Asia.

On my Central Asia travels in late 2019, pre-Covid, it was plain to see how western NGOs – Hybrid War fronts – remained extremely powerful in both Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan.

Yet, they are just one nexus in a western nebulae of Hybrid War fog deployed across Central Asia, and West Asia for that matter. Here we see the CIA and the US Deep State crisscrossing MI6 and different strands of Turkish intel.

When President Tokayev was referring in code to a “single center,” he meant a so far ‘secret’ US-Turk-Israeli military-intel operations room based in the southern business hub of Almaty, according to a highly placed Central Asia intel source.

In this “center,” there were 22 Americans, 16 Turks and 6 Israelis coordinating sabotage gangs – trained in West Asia by the Turks – and then rat-lined to Almaty.

The op started to unravel for good when Kazakh forces – with the help of Russian/CSTO intel – retook control of the vandalized Almaty airport, which was supposed to be turned into a hub for receiving foreign military supplies.

The Hybrid War west had to be stunned and livid at how the CSTO intercepted the Kazakh operation at such lightning speed. The key element is that the secretary of Russian National Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev, saw the Big Picture eons ago.

So, it’s no mystery why Russia’s aerospace and aero-transported forces, plus the massive necessary support infrastructure, were virtually ready to go.

Back in November, Patrushev’s laser was already focused on the degrading security situation in Afghanistan. Tajik political scientist Parviz Mullojanov was among the very few who were stressing that there were as many as 8,000 imperial machine Salafi-jihadi assets, shipped by a rat line from Syria and Iraq, loitering in the wilds of northern Afghanistan.

That’s the bulk of ISIS-Khorasan – or ISIS reconstituted near the borders of Turkmenistan. Some of them were duly transported to Kyrgyzstan. From there, it was very easy to cross the border from Bishek and show up in Almaty.

It took no time for Patrushev and his team to figure out, after the imperial retreat from Kabul, how this jihadi reserve army would be used: along the 7,500 km-long border between Russia and the Central Asian ‘stans’.

That explains, among other things, a record number of preparation drills conducted in late 2021 at the 210th Russian military base in Tajikistan.

James Bond speaks Turkish

The breakdown of the messy Kazakh op necessarily starts with the usual suspects: the US Deep State, which all but “sang” its strategy in a 2019 RAND corporation report, Extending Russia. Chapter 4, on “geopolitical measures”, details everything from “providing lethal aid to Ukraine”, “promoting regime change in Belarus”, and “increasing support for Syrian rebels” – all major fails – to “reducing Russian influence in Central Asia.”

That was the master concept. Implementation fell to the MI6-Turk connection.

The CIA and MI6 had been investing in dodgy outfits in Central Asia since at least 2005, when they encouraged the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), then close to the Taliban, to wreak havoc in southern Kyrgyzstan. Nothing happened.

It was a completely different story by May 2021, when the MI6’s Jonathan Powell met the leadership of Jabhat al-Nusra – which harbors a lot of Central Asian jihadis – somewhere in the Turkish-Syrian border near Idlib.

The deal was that these ‘moderate rebels’ – in US terminology – would cease to be branded ‘terrorists’ as long as they followed the anti-Russia NATO agenda.

That was one of the key prep moves ahead of the jihadist ratline to Afghanistan – complete with Central Asia branching out.

The genesis of the offensive should be found in June 2020, when former ambassador to Turkey from 2014 to 2018, Richard Moore, was appointed head of MI6.

Moore may not have an inch of Kim Philby’s competence, but he does fit the profile: rabid Russophobe, and a cheerleader of the Great Turania fantasy, which promotes a pan-Turk confederation of Turkic-speaking peoples from West Asia and the Caucasus to Central Asia and even Russian republics in the Volga.

MI6 is deeply entrenched in all the ‘stans’ except autarchic Turkmenistan – cleverly riding the pan-Turkist offensive as the ideal vehicle to counter Russia and China.

Erdogan himself has been invested on a hardcore Great Turania offensive, especially after the creation of the Turkic Council in 2009.

Crucially, next March, the summit of the Confederation Council of Turkic-speaking States – the new Turkic Council denomination – will take place in Kazakhstan. The city of Turkestan, in southern Kazakhstan, is expected to be named as the spiritual capital of the Turkic world.

And here, the ‘Turkic world’ enters into a frontal clash with the integrating Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership, and even with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) that, crucially, does not count Turkey as a member.

Erdogan’s short term ambition seems at first to be only commercial: after Azerbaijan won the Karabakh war, he expects to use Baku to get access to Central Asia via the Caspian Sea, complete with Turkey’s industrial-military complex sales of military technology to Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

Turkish companies are already investing heavily in real estate and infrastructure. And in parallel, Ankara’s soft power is on overdrive, finally collecting the fruits of exercising a lot of pressure, for instance, to speed up the transition in Kazakhstan from Cyrillic script to the Latin alphabet, starting in 2023.

Yet both Russia and China are very much aware that Turkey essentially represents NATO entering Central Asia. The organization of Turkic states are cryptically called the Kazakh operation ‘fuel protests’.

It’s all very murky. Erdogan’s neo-Ottomanism – which comes with massive cheerleading by his Muslim Brotherhood base – essentially has nothing to do with the pan-Turanic drive, which is a racialist movement predicating domination by relatively ‘pure’ Turks.

The problem is that they are converging while becoming more extreme, with Turkey’s right-wing Grey Wolves deeply implicated. That explains why Ankara intel is a sponsor and, in many cases, a weaponizer of both the ISIS-Khorasan franchise and those Turan racists, from Bosnia to Xinjiang via Central Asia.

The Empire handsomely profits from this toxic association, in Armenia, for instance. And the same would happen in Kazakhstan if the operation is successful.

Bring on the Trojan Horses

Every color revolution needs a ‘Maximum’ Trojan Horse. In our case, that seems to be the role of former head of KNB (National Security Committee) Karim Massimov, now held in prison and charged with treason.

Hugely ambitious, Massimov is half-Uyghur, and that, in theory, obstructed what he saw as his pre-ordained rise to power. His connections with Turkish intel are not yet fully detailed, unlike his cozy relationship with Joe Biden and son.

A former Minister of Internal Affairs and State Security, Lt Gen Felix Kulov, has weaved a fascinating tangled web explaining the possible internal dynamics of the ‘coup’ built into the color revolution.

According to Kulov, Massimov and Samir Abish, the nephew of recently ousted Kazakh Security Council Chairman Nursultan Nazarbayev, were up to their necks in supervising ‘secret’ units of ‘bearded men’ during the riots. The KNB was directly subordinated to Nazarbayev, who until last week was the chairman of the Security Council.

When Tokayev understood the mechanics of the coup, he demoted both Massimov and Samat Abish. Then Nazarbayev ‘voluntarily’ resigned from his life-long chairmanship of the Security Council. Abish then got this post, promising to stop the ‘bearded men,’ and then to resign.

So that would point directly to a Nazarbayev-Tokayev clash. It makes sense as, during his 29-year rule, Nazarbayev played a multi-vector game that was too westernized and which did not necessarily benefit Kazakhstan. He adopted British laws, played the pan-Turkic card with Erdogan, and allowed a tsunami of NGOs to promote an Atlanticist agenda.

Tokayev is a very smart operator. Trained by the foreign service of the former USSR, fluent in Russian and Chinese, he is totally aligned with Russia-China – which means fully in sync with the masterplan of the BRI, the Eurasia Economic Union, and the SCO.

Tokayev, much like Putin and Xi, understands how this BRI/EAEU/SCO triad represents the ultimate imperial nightmare, and how destabilizing Kazakhstan – a key actor in the triad – would be a mortal coup against Eurasian integration.

Kazakhstan, after all, represents 60 percent of Central Asia’s GDP, massive oil/gas and mineral resources, cutting-edge high tech industries: a secular, unitary, constitutional republic bearing a rich cultural heritage.

It didn’t take long for Tokayev to understand the merits of immediately calling the CSTO to the rescue: Kazakhstan signed the treaty way back in 1994. After all, Tokayev was fighting a foreign-led coup against his government.

Putin, among others, has stressed how an official Kazakh investigation is the only one entitled to get to the heart of the matter.

It’s still unclear exactly who – and to what extent – sponsored the rioting mobs. Motives abound: to sabotage a pro-Russia/China government, to provoke Russia, to sabotage BRI, to plunder mineral resources, to turbo-charge a House of Saud-style ‘Islamization’.

Rushed to only a few days before the start of the Russia-US ‘security guarantees’ in Geneva, this color revolution represented a sort of counter-ultimatum – in desperation – by the NATO establishment.

Central Asia, West Asia, and the overwhelming majority of the Global South have witnessed the lightning fast Eurasian response by the CSTO troops – who, having now done their job, are set to leave Kazakhstan in a couple of days – and how this color revolution has failed, miserably.

It might as well be the last. Beware the rage of a humiliated Empire.

*

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.

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 from The Cradle

 

 

 

 

 

One day,

Youngsters will learn words they will not understand,

Children from India will ask: “What is hunger?”

Children from Alabama will ask: “What is racial segregation?”

Children from Hiroshima will ask: “What is the atomic bomb?”

Children at school will ask: “What is war?”

You will answer them, you will tell them: “Those are words not used any more,

Like ‘stage-coaches’, ‘galleys’ or ‘slavery’,

Words no longer meaningful,

That is why they have been removed from dictionaries.”

Martin Luther King

10 Reasons OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro Has to Go

January 17th, 2022 by Leonardo Flores

All Global Research articles 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 Organization of American States (OAS) has never been a friend to the peoples of the Americas. This institution, ostensibly a space for multilateralism, has instead always been a tool for the U.S. Department of State. As Fidel Castro said in 1962, it is nothing but the U.S. Ministry of Colonies. That is truer now than ever before under the leadership of Secretary General Luis Almagro, who has been at the helm since March 2015. He is quite possibly the worst leader since the OAS was founded in 1948.

Here are ten reasons Almagro has to go:

1. Almagro and the OAS lit the fuse for the 2019 coup in Bolivia. They falsely claimed the presidential results showing Evo Morales being re-elected were “inexplicable”, which set off unrest and activated a plot that overthrew him. These claims were so thoroughly debunked that members of the U.S. Congress requested an investigation into the OAS’s role in the coup. Almagro immediately recognized the coup government, which committed “summary executions and widespread repression” during its year in power. After saying nothing about the coup regime’s victims, the OAS issued a statement condemning Bolivia’s judicial system the day after coup leader Jeanine Añez was arrested. This blatant interference in the domestic affairs of a member state runs counter to the OAS charter and led Mexico to chastise the OAS for its behavior towards Bolivia.

2. Almagro’s cravenness helped legitimize four more years of the Honduran narco-dictatorship led by Juan Orlando Hernández. The 2017 elections in Honduras were actually riddled with fraud, and initially, Almagro and the OAS did the right thing: they denounced the fraud and called for new elections. But the Trump administration was happy with the results and recognized the elections. Within a month, Almagro backtracked, which “called his own credibility into question” according to diplomat Sir Ronald Sanders. Despite the documented crimes of the Juan Orlando Hernández regime, Almagro embraced and legitimized the Honduran government.

3. Almagro continued the OAS’s long history of interfering in Haiti. In 2020, when President Jovenel Moïse ruled without a parliament and gave himself an extra year on his term, the OAS issued a press release telling Haitians they should “comply.” Almagro, acting without the approval of OAS member states, sent a delegation to Haiti (which was in the country for just five hours) to prop up the Moïse government in the face of intensifying protests. Just before Moïse’s assassination in 2021, the OAS recommended that he appoint a new prime minister and set elections before the end of the year – precisely what the majority of Haitians did not want.

4. Almagro embraced the 2016 coup and the Temer regime in Brazil. Right after a meeting with Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff before her impeachment, Almagro denounced the proceedings against her as politicized and without merit. But once the coup happened, he had nothing to say about it and was quick to accept the Temer regime, visiting his government less than two months after the coup. When wildly popular former President Lula da Silva was arrested in 2018 and barred from upcoming elections, Almagro and the OAS did nothing. This paved the way for right-wing extremist Jair Bolsonaro to win the presidency. Almagro has had little to say about Bolsonaro’s horrible treatment of Indigenous peoples, Afro-Brazilians, peasants and the environment, among others.

5. Almagro ignored human rights abuses by security forces during massive protests in Haiti, Honduras, Ecuador, Colombia and Chile. Almagro visited Ecuador in 2019 to congratulate the government of Lenin Moreno for its handling of protests that left 11 dead, over a thousand injured and hundreds arrested. He would later say that Chilean President Sebastián Piñera “efficiently defended public order” – the same Piñera who declared war on his country’s protesters and whose police forces targeted their eyes. Regarding the protests in Colombia that left at least 80 dead, dozens disappeared and thousands assaulted by police, Almagro limited his criticism to a tweet condemning both the excessive use of force by police and protester violence, drawing a false equivalence between extrajudicial killings and vandalism. Almagro has yet to say anything about the 171 social leaders murdered in Colombia or the 96 massacres the country had in 2021 alone. While ignoring violations in member countries, Almagro and the OAS condemned the Cuban government over the July 2021 protests, despite the fact that Cuba isn’t a member of the OAS.

6. Almagro is waging a hybrid war against Venezuela. Under his watch, the OAS violated its own charter and procedures time and time again to attempt to intervene in Venezuela. He tried to invoke the Inter-American Democratic Charter against Venezuela, a tool meant to be used as a response to coups, not to spur coups. He immediately recognized fake “interim president” Juan Guaidó and accepted his fake diplomats into the OAS, although Venezuela had formally left the organization by then. Almagro also tried to invoke the Rio Treaty, a defense pact that could have opened a path for a regional invasion of Venezuela, and has said “all options” should be considered for overthrowing the Venezuelan government. He told former Spanish President José Luis Zapatero “Don’t be stupid” when Zapatero pushed for a negotiated solution to the crisis in Venezuela.

7. Almagro is also one of the main drivers behind the attempts at regime change in Nicaragua. Almagro and the OAS strongly supported the attempted coup in 2018, in which the U.S. was heavily involved. The violence of the protesters (who killed at least 60 people, including 22 police as well as government officials and supporters) was deliberately ignored to frame a narrative around government human rights abuses and justify intervention. Almagro smeared Nicaragua’s presidential elections as part of a campaign to delegitimize President Daniel Ortega. Just like in Venezuela, he has been a cheerleader for illegal U.S. sanctions meant to cripple the economy.

8. Similar to Trump and Bolsonaro, Almagro lashes out at the media and punishes those who criticize him. In response to questions raised about OAS allegations of fraud in Bolivia’s 2019 elections, Almagro published a bizarre rant that invoked Nazis, attacked scholars and made absurd allegations against the New York Times. He failed to respond to letters sent by members of Congress, demonstrating a total lack of accountability. Almagro denounced two OAS electoral observers as “spies” for disagreeing with his false claims of fraud in the 2019 Bolivia elections. He essentially fired Paulo Abrão, the head of the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights (IACHR), because under Abrão the IACHR denounced the Añez regime’s human rights abuses in Bolivia.

9. Plus, he’s likely corrupt. In 2018, Juan Jiménez Mayor, spokesperson for the Mission to Support the Fight against Corruption and Impunity in Honduras (Maccih), resigned from his post because of lack of institutional support from Almagro and alleged corruption in the anti-corruption campaign. Prosecutor Julio Arbizu also resigned from the commission, claiming that “conversations between Almagro and [President Juan Orlando] Hernández” were about using the Maccih to divert criticism from Hernández. The Mission lined the financially broke OAS’s pockets with millions of dollars in dedicated aid from the U.S. and EU. Arbizu alleges that Almagro had “arbitrary use” of these funds and that he hired two unqualified friends to work at the Maccih, one of whom was openly racist and classist towards Maccih staff. Almagro promised to serve only one term as OAS Secretary General, but his reelection in 2020 prompted an anonymous source to publish a widely-circulated letter that detailed cronyism and conflicts of interest in Almagro’s hires for important OAS positions, as well the deep divisions within the OAS caused by Almagro’s decisions.

10. Almagro apparently has nothing to say about the statue of Queen Isabella in front of the OAS. At a time when governments all over Latin America are taking down statues that pay tribute to perpetrators of genocide, racism and colonialism, Almagro has ignored a July 2021 request from CODEPINK to meet to discuss removing this symbol of the centuries-long holocaust unleashed on the indigenous people of the Americas. He will also likely ignore an upcoming open letter from prominent figures throughout the Americas calling for the statue’s removal.

Have more reasons why Almagro has to go? Post them on Twitter with #AlmagroRenuncia #AlmagroResign.

*

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.

Leonardo Flores is a Latin American Campaign coordinator with CODEPINK. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 10 Reasons OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro Has to Go
  • 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.

***

 

 

 

 

American opposition to expensive, hazardous, and privacy invasive utility “Smart” Meters (electric, gas, and water) has been ongoing since companies first started deploying them.  A free online documentary was produced about these horrible devices in 2013 and then updated in 2017.  Adding insult to injury, the high costs associated with purchasing, installing, and replacing them are usually passed on to customers (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21).

Despite all the problems associated with these meters – including fires, explosions (see 1, 2, 3) and health risks to humans and pets (see 1, 2, 3) – smart meter deployment has already reached 65% in the U.S.  Over the years, the state of Virginia had repeatedly rejected smart meter deployment (see 1, 2).  That seems to have changed.

From Utility Dive:

Virginia okays Dominion’s plan to deploy 1.1M smart meters

Published Jan. 11, 2022

Dive Brief:

  • The Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) on Friday approved Dominion Energy’s proposal to deploy roughly 1.1 million smart meters as part of a $776 million grid transformation plan. The plan also includes investments in security, customer education and telecommunications.
  • Deploying the advanced meter infrastructure will cost $198.3 million, according to the plan, which also includes $203.9 million for a customer information platform. The spending approved last week is the second part of Dominion’s 10-year plan to add more renewable energy and increase energy efficiency in the state.
  • The SCC had previously rejected Dominion’s smart meter installation proposal twice, citing the high cost and speculative nature of the plan. The smart meter rollout was approved in part because of a new proposal for a time-varying rate and experimental time-of-use rate, which the commission said could reduce the cost impact on ratepayers.

Dive Insight:

Dominion Energy Virginia’s 10-year Grid Transformation Plan, designed in response to Virginia’s 2018 Grid Transformation & Security Act, envisions a broad restructuring of the electricity grid in order to integrate more solar, wind and battery storage technology. The company had argued that as more distributed energy resources come online in response to state and federal policy, it will be necessary to create a more nimble distribution system with responsive rates in order to ensure reliability and cut down on costs.

The second phase of the plan approved by the SCC covers $666.5 million in capital spending for 2022 and 2023, which the company can seek recovery of in a future proceeding. The plan will allow Dominion to spend $194.4 million in grid technologies, including intelligent grid devices and fault location, isolation and service restoration projects targeted at grid segments with below-average reliability. It also includes $27.7 million on grid infrastructure spending for corridor improvements and voltage island mitigation.

As we bring more renewable energy onto our grid to build a cleaner future, and focus on increasing resiliency, we must modernize the way the system works,” said Charlene Whitfield, senior vice president of Power Delivery at Dominion Energy Virginia, in a statement. Whitfield added that the decision “ensures that we can remain agile as a company to deliver the reliable, affordable, and increasingly clean energy that our customers want and expect.”

SCC had denied the smart meter proposal in previous filings, saying it was based on speculation and would impose heavy costs on Dominion’s customers. However, the modified proposal includes incentives for customers to reduce electricity use at times of high demand and a timeline to implement those rates system-wide. Dominion had installed roughly 715,000 smart meters by the end of 2020 and envisions full deployment of smart grids for its 2.3 million residential customers by 2024.

However, environmental and consumer advocate group Appalachian Voices continued to argue against the plan, saying in a November filing that the request “falls woefully short of a reasonable and prudent standard.” The group said that smart meter approval should have been conditioned on a requirement “to implement a universal peak-time rebate” as well as inclusion of the Connect-My-Data standard required in five other states, which enables standardized data collection.

In August 2021, Dominion Energy filed a $1.5 billion clean energy investment, including up to 1,100 MW of solar, in Virginia, part of a planned $26 billion in spending on emissions reduction technology over five years. The Virginia Clean Economy Act requires Dominion to procure a combined 16 GW of solar and onshore wind by the end of 2035.

Activist Post reports regularly about utility “Smart” Meters and other unsafe technology.  For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 1.1 Million More Utility “Smart” Meters to be Deployed in Virginia; $203.9M to be Spent on “Customer Information Platform”
  • Tags:

Enduring Stain: The Guantánamo Military Prison Turns Twenty

January 17th, 2022 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

Anniversaries for detention centres, concentration camps and torture facilities are not the relishable calendar events in the canon of human worth.  But not remembering them, when they were used, and how they continue being used, would be unpardonable amnesia.

On January 11, 2002, the first prisoners of the absurdly named “War on Terror”, declared with such confused understanding by US President George W. Bush, began arriving at the newly constructed Camp X-Ray prison at the US naval base in Guantánamo Bay.  Structurally crude, it was intended as a temporary facility, remote and out of sight.  Instead, it became a permanent and singular contribution of US political and legal practice, withering due process and civil liberties along the way.

After two decades, 779 prisoners have spent time there, many of whom were low level operatives of minimal importance.  Prior to being sent to the camp, the detainees endured abductions, disappearances, and torture in US-operated centres in allied countries.  The previous director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Gina Aspel, had more than a nodding acquaintance with this process, having overseen operations at a black site in Thailand specialising in interrogating al-Qaeda suspects.

Guantánamo Bay was a mad, cruel experiment about how legal limbos and forged purgatories of the law can function to dehumanise and degrade.  It was developed by people supposedly versed in a liberal legal tradition but keen to make exceptions in battling a supposedly novel enemy.  The detainees were deemed “unlawful enemy combatants” – as if there was such a thing – thereby placing them outside the formal protections of humanitarian law.  They were subjected to sleep deprivation, forced feeding, lengthy detainment, beatings, stress positions and an assortment of other torture methods.

In 2005, Vice President Dick Cheney sneered at suggestions that the inmates were being mistreated.  “They’re living in the tropics.  They’re well fed.  They’ve got everything they could possibly want.  There wasn’t any other nation in the world that would treat people who were determined to kill Americans the way we’re treating these people.”

The closure of the facility has been constantly urged with minimal return.  It was one of the electoral messages of the presidential campaign in 2007.  Barack Obama and his rival, Hillary Clinton, endorsed the idea.  As did the Republican contender for the White House, John McCain.  As Obama declared at the time, “In the dark halls of Abu Ghraib and the detention cells of Guantánamo, we have compromised our most precious values.”

A joint US-European Union statement from June 15, 2009 noted, with welcome, the decision by President Obama to affect a closure by January 22 the following year.  But it also acknowledged what has been a persistent problem: returning detainees to their countries of origin or a third country that might be willing to accept them.

In the dying days of the Obama administration, the facility, despite a reduction in the inmate population, remained functional.  Congress proved recalcitrant and obstructive on the issue but there was also opposition to the closure from various arms of government, including the Pentagon.  Lee Wolosky, formerly Obama’s Special Envoy for Guantánamo Closure, could only marvel darkly at this seemingly indestructible piece of legal infrastructure.  “In large part,” he wrote, this mess had been “self-inflicted – a result of our own decisions to engage in torture, hold detainees indefinitely without charge, set up dysfunctional military commissions and attempt to avoid oversight by the federal courts.”

In 2016, Donald Trump, the eventual victor of that year’s presidential contest, repeatedly insisted that he would “load it with some bad dudes”.  In 2018, he signed a new executive order keeping the military prison open, reiterating the line that terrorists were not merely “criminals” but “unlawful enemy combatants”.  Releasing any such individuals from Guantánamo had been, he observed gravely, a mistake.  “In the past, we have foolishly released hundred and hundreds of dangerous terrorists only to meet them again on the battlefield, including the ISIS leader, [Abu Bakr] al-Baghdadi, who we captured, who we had, who we released.”

On the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of the camp’s opening, Agnès Callamard, secretary-general of Amnesty International, was yet another voice to urge its closure.  “President Joe Biden, like President Barack Obama before him, has promised to close it, but so far has failed to do so.”  She insisted that each detainee’s case be resolved, be it through transfer and release, or via “a regularly constituted federal court without recourse to the death penalty.”

Despite being an enduring blot on the country’s credibility, the facility remains ingloriously open, a reminder that there are legal provinces where the US is willing to detain people indefinitely, without trial or scrutiny.  Thirty-nine men remain, thirteen of whom are in indefinite detention.  This is despite the latter having had their transfers out of the facility approved a decade ago.  The calls for the military prison’s closure reach occasional crescendos, but these eventually diminish before the machinery of stifling bureaucracy.  Tragically, there is every risk that the Guantánamo experiment will be replicated rather than abolished.  Such creations, once brought into being, can prove deathless.

*

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.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Enduring Stain: The Guantánamo Military Prison Turns Twenty
  • Tags:

The Right to Healthy Food: Comorbidities and COVID-19

January 17th, 2022 by Colin Todhunter

All Global Research articles 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 early 2020, we saw the beginning of the COVID-19 ‘pandemic’. The world went into lockdown and even after lockdowns in various countries had been lifted, restrictions continued. Data now shows that lockdowns seemingly had limited if any positive impacts on the trajectory of COVID-19 and in 2022 the world – especially the poor – is paying an immense price not least in terms of loss of income, loss of livelihoods, the deterioration of mental and physical health, the eradication of civil liberties, disrupted supply chains and shortages.

The mortality rate for COVID-19 patients is linked to their comorbid conditions. In the US, the Center for Disease Control provides a list of comorbid conditions in COVID-19 patients, which includes cancer, chronic kidney disease, heart disease, Down syndrome, obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Research conducted in a German hospital shows that for those who died after SARS-CoV-2 infection the median number of chronic comorbidities was four and ranged from three to eight. Arterial hypertension was the most prevalent chronic condition (65.4%), followed by obesity (38.5%), chronic ischemic heart disease (34.6%), atrial fibrillation (26.9%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (23.1%). Of all patients, 15.4% had diabetes type II and chronic renal failure was noticed in 11.5%. The data suggests severe chronic comorbidities and health conditions in the majority of patients that had died after COVID-19. 

The meta-analysis Prevalence of comorbidities in patients and mortality cases affected by SARS-CoV2: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2020) found that hypertension was the most prevalent comorbidity (affecting 32% of patients). Other common comorbidities included diabetes (22%) and heart disease (13%). The odds ratio of death for a patient with a comorbidity compared to one with no comorbidity was 2.4. The higher the prevalence of comorbidities the higher the odds that the COVID-19 patient will need intensive care or will die, especially if the pre-existing disease is hypertension, heart disease or diabetes.

In 2020, just 1,557 people aged 1-64 with no underlying co-morbidities were listed as having died from COVID in England and Wales out of a population of about 59 million. For the tens of thousands who were categorised as dying with COVID, co-morbidities were a major factor. UK data for 2020 shows that for ages 1-64 years, those who died with COVID had on average 1.71 co-morbidities. For those aged 65 and over, the figure is 2.02.

Patients with rare autoimmune rheumatic diseases have a 54% increased risk for COVID-19 infection and more than twice the risk for COVID-19 death, versus the general population, according to data published in the journal Rheumatology (2021). 

In the paper ‘COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune diseases: characteristics and outcomes in a multinational network of cohorts across three countries’ (2021), which also appeared in Rheumatology, researchers compared influenza with COVID-19 and concluded that the latter is a more severe disease for people with these conditions, leading to added complications and higher mortality. 

Of deaths in England and Wales where COVID-19 is listed, official government data shows the most common pre-existing condition recorded on the death certificate is diabetes (July to September 2021). This was identified in almost a quarter (22.5%) of ‘COVID deaths’.

Emerging data also suggests that obesity is a big risk factor for the progression of major complications such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), cytokine storm and coagulopathy in COVID-19.

A paper posted on the Center for Disease Control website provides an overview of factors associated with Covid-19 deaths for a 12-month period. The study, Underlying Medical Conditions and Severe Illness Among 540,667 Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19, March 2020–March 2021, looked at records of hospitalised adults and found that 94.9% had at least one underlying medical condition. The authors conclude that certain underlying conditions and the number of conditions were associated with severe COVID-19 illness. Hypertension and disorders of lipid metabolism were the most frequent, whereas obesity, diabetes with complication and anxiety disorders were the strongest risk factors for severe COVID-19 illness.

Based on the findings, Dr Peregrino Brimahdata (a molecular biologist, medical doctor, college professor and a published researcher) notes that obesity by itself gave a 30% increased death risk, anxiety disorders gave a 29% increased risk of death and diabetes led to a 26% increased risk of death.

Brimahdata concludes that about two thirds of ‘COVID deaths’ were patients who may be regarded as grossly unhealthy.

From the data presented above, it is clear that the vast majority of ‘COVID deaths’ (dying with COVID) are people who has serious, ongoing health conditions, the prevalence of which among the population has been rising year on year for decades and accelerating.

Food system

Although hereditary factors are involved, scientists at the Francis Crick Institute in London believe the growing popularity of Western-style diets is a major reason why autoimmune diseases are rising across the world by around 3% to 9% a year.

Professor James Lee from the institute recently told The Observer newspaper that human genetics has not altered over the past few decades, so something is changing in our environment that is increasing predisposition to autoimmune disease. His research team found that Western-style diets based on processed ingredients and with a lack of fresh vegetables can trigger autoimmune diseases.

Lee says that numbers of autoimmune cases began to increase about 40 years ago in the Western countries but are now also emerging in countries that never had such diseases before. These diseases include rheumatoid arthritis, type 1 diabetes, celiac disease, lupus, inflammatory bowel disease and multiple sclerosis.

It is estimated that approximately four million people in the UK have an autoimmune disease.

A Western-style diet is characterised by highly processed and refined foods with high contents of sugars, salt, and fat and protein from red meat. It is a major contributor to metabolic disturbances and the development of obesity-related diseases, including type 2 diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease – the top comorbidities where ‘COVID deaths’ are concerned.

But it goes beyond that because a lot of the health-related problems we see can also be traced back to modern farming methods and how food is cultivated, not least the toxic agrochemicals used. Michael McCarthy, writer and naturalist, says that three generations of industrialised farming with a vast tide of poisons pouring over the land year after year after year since the end of the Second World War is the true price of pesticide-based agriculture, which society has for so long blithely accepted.

Professor Carola Vinuesa, who heads another research team at the Francis Crick Institute, argues that fast-food diets can negatively affect a person’s microbiome – gut microorganisms which play a key role in controlling various bodily functions. 

The gut microbiome can contain up to six pounds of bacteria and agrochemicals and poor diets are disturbing this ‘human soil’. Many important neurotransmitters are located in the gut. Aside from affecting the functioning of major organs, these transmitters affect our moods and thinking.

Findings published in the journal ‘Translational Psychiatry’ provide strong evidence that gut bacteria can have a direct physical impact on the brain. Alterations in the composition of the gut microbiome have been implicated in a wide range of neurological and psychiatric conditions, including autism, chronic pain, depression and Parkinson’s Disease. Gut bacteria are also important for cognitive development in adolescence.

Changes to the gut microbiome are also linked to obesity. Increasing levels of obesity are associated with low bacterial richness in the gut. Indeed, it has been noted that tribes not exposed to the modern food system have richer microbiomes. Environmental campaigner Rosemary Mason lays the blame squarely at the door of agrochemicals, not least the use of the world’s most widely used herbicide, glyphosate.

Mason has written to the two professors from the Francis Crick Institute mentioned above, making it clear to them that it would be remiss to ignore the role pesticides play when it comes to the worrying rates of disease we now see. She brings their attention to concerning levels of glyphosate in certain cereals in the UK.

Based on an analysis of these cereals, Dr John Fagan, director of Health Research Laboratories, has concluded:

“The levels consumed in a single daily helping of any one of these cereals… is sufficient to put the person’s glyphosate levels above the levels that cause fatty liver disease in rats (and likely in people).”

Mason also refers the two academics to the paper Genetically engineered crops, glyphosate and the deterioration of health in the United States of America in Journal of Organic Systems (2014).

It notes:

“The herbicide glyphosate was introduced in 1974 and its use is accelerating with the advent of herbicide-tolerant genetically engineered (GE) crops. Evidence is mounting that glyphosate interferes with many metabolic processes in plants and animals and glyphosate residues have been detected in both. Glyphosate disrupts the endocrine system and the balance of gut bacteria, it damages DNA and is a driver of mutations that lead to cancer.”

The researchers searched US government databases for GE crop data, glyphosate application data and disease epidemiological data. Correlation analyses were then performed on a total of 22 diseases in these time-series data sets. The Pearson correlation coefficients were highly significant between glyphosate applications and a wide range of diseases, including hypertension, stroke, diabetes prevalence, diabetes incidence, obesity, Alzheimer’s, senile dementia, Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis, inflammatory bowel disease, intestinal infections, end stage renal disease, acute kidney failure and various cancers. The Pearson correlation coefficients were also highly significant between the percentage of GE corn and soy planted in the US and most of the conditions listed above.

In 2017, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and hazardous substances and wastes, Baskut Tuncak, said

“Paediatricians have referred to childhood exposure to pesticides as creating a ‘silent pandemic’ of disease and disability. Exposure in pregnancy and childhood is linked to birth defects, diabetes and cancer. Because a child’s developing body is more sensitive to exposure than adults and takes in more of everything – relative to their size, children eat, breathe and drink much more than adults – they are particularly vulnerable to these toxic chemicals.”

Consider that little is being done to address the food-related public health crisis which, according to the data on co-morbidities, seems to be a major contribution to increased risk where COVID is concerned. Then consider that governments are going all out to vaccinate children for a virus that poses minimal or virtually no risk to them. There is no logic to this approach.

While there is currently much talk of the coronavirus placing immense strain on the NHS, the health service was already creaking due to spiralling rates of disease linked to the food we eat. But do we see a clampdown on the activities or products of the global agrochemical or the food conglomerates? Instead, we see that successive governments in the UK have worked hand in glove with them to ensure ‘business as usual’.

The UK government is going out of its way under the guise of a health crisis to undermine the public’s rights in order to manage risk and to ‘protect’ the NHS but is all too willing to oversee a massive, ongoing health crisis caused by the chemical pollution of our bodies.

The unvaccinated are being cast as irresponsible or much worse if we listen to the recent reprehensible outbursts from leaders like Macron or Trudeau for having genuine concerns about vaccine safety, waning efficacy and the logic behind mass vaccination across all ages and risk groups.

Given that underlying health conditions substantially increase risk where COVID-19 is concerned, it is clear where the real irresponsibility lies – with government inaction for decades in terms of failing to tackle the corporations behind the health-damaging food they produce.

*

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.

Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) in Montreal.

Featured image is from New Eastern Outlook

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

.

First published by global Research on August 31, 2021

***

People are dying from the mMRNA Covid Vaccine.

There is a worldwide upward trend in vaccine deaths and injuries. 

The latest official figures (August 30, 2021) point to approximately: 

38,488 mRNA vaccine reported and registered deaths in the EU, UK and US (combined) and

6.3 million reported “adverse events”.

These are the official figures. Less than 10% of deaths and injuries are reported. For vaccine adverse events approximately one percent of the injuries are registered and reported.

The order of magnitude of vaccine related deaths is AT LEAST 380,000 for a combined population (EU, UK, US) of 830 Million.

Most unconscionable is the fact that the United Nations Secretary-General is mandating this untested and often lethal vaccination for United Nations staff, in violation of every human rights declaration produced by the United Nations in its entire history.

 

***

August 25, 2021 more than three thousand hospital workers, sanitation workers, MTA workers, teachers, artists and police rallied at New York’s City Hall to protest the mandate for Covid-19 vaccine, which has been proven unsafe, with many horrific long-term “side-effects” of the vaccine, multiple deaths, deadly, often chronic heart damage,  a “vaccine” which it is feared changes both the dna of the vaccinated, and as the future will demonstrate, may cause sterility.   Yes, this vaccine will reduce the population.

This mandate changes the relationship between the state and the individual, as the slogan “no jab, no job” threatens the livelihood and the lives of workers throughout the United States and all countries mandating a vaccine generating enormous profits for the “Big Pharma,” now guaranteed immunity from liability for the often lethal consequences of the vaccine.  According to British legal authority Francis Hoar, this mandate violates the Nuremberg Code, International Human Rights Law, the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights, and, of course, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 

 

 

The United Nations Secretary General is Co-opted

Most unconscionable is the fact that the United Nations Secretary-General is mandating this untested and often lethal vaccination for United Nations staff, in violation of every human rights declaration produced by the United Nations in its entire history.

United Nations Staff members refusing the vaccination are threatened with six months leave WITHOUT pay!   On August 13, the UN Secretary-General issued mandated requirements, which included:

“Vaccination requirement for certain categories. Vaccinations will be mandated for staff performing certain tasks and/or certain occupational groups at UNHQ whose functions do not allow sufficient management of exposure…Those staff who will be required to be vaccinated must receive the final dose of a vaccine no later than 19 September 2021……All staff at UNHQ in consideration of the need to protect one another will be required to report their vaccination status including through EarthMed with immediate effect.”

Whatever happened to medical privacy?

Although there is massive “major” media attempt to obscure the often lethal consequences of this vaccine, the enormous significance of the issues involved is indicated by the fact that every major media outlet in New York City was present at the August 25 demonstration, and quoted and televised many of the protest speeches by New York City teachers, sanitation workers, MTA workers, and other professional  and non-professional employees of public and private organizations.

CBS, NBC, AP, Channel 1, the New York Post, News 4, are among the many media covering this historic protest, the awakening of the public conscience that those citizens and workers upon whom the actual functioning of society depends are infuriated that they are reduced to chattel servitude by the so-called government, and their lives are wantonly put at risk by those government officials whose salaries are paid by the taxes of these workers: teachers, sanitation workers, police, artists, and all those indispensable categories of workers without whom society will collapse. Government workers are public servants, and should not be permitted to dictate the lives of those whom they serve. This is forgotten by these so-called “public servants” who behave like a combination of parasites and dictators.

Obscured in this grotesque travesty of government “concern” for public health is the infamous “revolving door,”  the fact that the government agencies obligated to guarantee the safety of this vaccine are often instead, obsequiously guarding the profits of the lucrative pharmaceutical industries, the “big pharma,” signing into laws protections for the profits of “big pharma,” (which provides vast campaign contributions to many of these government workers) and when the government staff of the NIH, FDA, WHO,  and the other alphabet soup of government agencies tasked with protecting the public, (whose taxes pay their salaries), retire from government “service,” they are then guaranteed enormous salaries working for the private pharmaceutical companies.  Obviously, these government staff have huge incentive to ensure the profits of “big pharma,” upon whom their enormous future salaries will depend.

This unconscionable arrangement is not unknown by the public at large, who are now revealing distrust and disgust at the grossly hypocritical motives of this government mandate which risks causing irreparable damage to their lives, and possibly their untimely deaths.

  • “The NYPD Police Benevolent Association Vows to Sue if Officers are Required To Get Covid Vaccines” headlined by Cory James of CBS.
  • “They’re using us as lab rats” City employee Kim Williams of Queens said.”
  • “I’m not taking the vaccine,” MTA train operator Evangaline Byars said.”
  • “We don’t have the long-term side effects or risks yet,” one parent said.

School teacher Katherine Class of Brooklyn told

“CBS Cory James she quit her job day ago because she refuses to be forced into getting the vaccine.”

Further discrediting the Mandate requirement which attempts to justify this dictate with the fraudulent argument that the person vaccinated is protecting others, is the absolutely contrary and now acknowledged fact that the spike protein of the vaccination has a “scatter” component which in fact SPREADS the infection to others, and does NOT protect either the vaccinated person from a virulent “break through” of the covid virus infection, but, in fact endangers the healthy people who are not vaccinated, and often infects them with the disease. The vaccine is a super-spreader. But perhaps that is the underlying intention.

On August 23, 2021, The New York Times published an article entitled: “A Hospital Finds an Unlikely Group Opposing Vaccination: ITS Workers”

“New York – Their movement started discreetly—just a handful of people communicating on encrypted apps like WhatsApp and Signal. But in just days, it had ballooned tenfold. And within two weeks, it had turned into a full-blown public protest, with people waving picket signs to denounce efforts to push them to receive coronavirus vaccines. But these were not just any vaccine resisters. They were nurses, medical technicians, infection control officers and other staff who work at a hospital in Statin Island, which has the highest rate of Covid-19 infection of any borough in New York City. Outside Staten Island University Hospital last week, as passing cars and fire trucks honked supportively, employees chanted ‘I am not a lab rat!’”  “Yolanda Mozdzen, 43, a medical assistant, was eager to be one of the first among staff to get the vaccine. But less than five minutes after getting a shot of the Moderna vaccine in December, a rash spread across her body, and she started having a seizure. The adverse reaction triggered an autoimmune disorder, according to a letter from her doctor, and eight months after receiving the vaccine, Mozdzen said she still suffers ailments including short-term memory loss and vertigo. Mozdzen said she had to fight to get properly compensated. ‘I was left penniless,’ she said………..Last week, Mozdzen quit her job.”

On Saturday, August 28, there was a huge peaceful demonstration against the vaccine mandate at Columbus Circle in New York City, and participants marched downtown past Times Square, Herald Square and toward Battery Park.

On August 28  huge peaceful public demonstrations throughout TWO HUNDRED cities in France denounced the vaccine mandate, and demanded autonomy for their body and their lives.

In Berlin on August 28, a huge peaceful demonstration against the vaccine mandate was met with police brutality.

In Athens, an enormous peaceful protest demonstration against the vaccine mandate was met by police violence.

This evening another huge demonstration at City Hall protesting the vaccine mandate is scheduled to be held.

“Workers Rally for Medical Freedom  #NO MANDATES”

On September 1, 2021 another extremely important rally is scheduled from 11:00AM to 1:00PM at New York Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center, entitled: “Heroes to Zeroes.” This rally, at 1300 York Avenue, East 69 Street @newyorkfreedomrally is extremely significant, because it signals that the outrage against vaccine mandates is reaching the core of the medical establishment, Cornell Medical Center, which trains the most elite medical students and health care professionals in the United States, and is one of the most prestigious medical centers in the world. (Indeed, Anthony Fauci was a graduate of Cornell Medical School).

It indicates that skepticism, the essence of science, is now, we can hope, reaching the hitherto dogmatic attitudes toward Covid, and its so-called “vaccines” about which no adequate testing has been done, nor the often deadly consequences of vaccination studied, or ultimately even known or anticipated.  The United Nations is also, to its shame, guilty of this dogmatic attitude, and recalls the Vatican, 500 years ago when Galileo challenged religious dogma, for which he was threatened to be tortured to death. Shortly before, Giordano Bruno had been burnt alive at the stake by order of the Pope, for contradicting Vatican dogma that the sun revolved around the earth. 500 years later, the Vatican acknowledged the falsity of their dogma.

Two days ago two people in Japan died immediately after being vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, causing the Japanese government to demand the recall of huge doses of the Pfizer vaccine contaminated with a metal substance, and probably other toxic components. A Ukranian man died of myocarditis immediately after being vaccinated with the Moderna vaccine. And the big pharma companies have been guaranteed and insured from any liability as a result of injury resulting from their vaccines.  They are protected by rulings  by US government agencies, and other organizations, and big pharma cannot be held responsible or liable for anything.

One can only hope that the burgeoning worldwide outrage against vaccine mandates continues and escalates to a point where it is sufficiently powerful to force retreat by the vaccine dictatorship endangering the human species with its ignorance- and arrogance – and greed.

*

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.

Carla Stea is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research’s Correspondent at UN headquarters, New York. 

All images in this article are from the author

It has been two years since people worldwide were dragged into this whole COVID-19 cult. Up until now, many countries implement universal health protocols such as social distancing and wearing of face mask in public spaces. Draconian measures have also been executed such as prolonged lockdowns and vaccine mandates. 

Several reports of courageous people blowing the whistle on COVID vaccines and vaccine deaths surface online, sending a hopeful message worldwide that resistance is key to ending this totalitarianism.

Protests against forced vaccinations are also happening globally, blasting the medico-establishment for curtailing informed consent and medical freedom. Are these events directing us toward mass awakening from COVID hypnosis and stand in the truth against disinformation?

Send this selection to your friends, family and community. Spread the word.

***

Lawmakers Blast Biden Pandemic Response, Experts Question Vaccine Mandates Strategy

By Dr. David Charbonneau, January 14, 2022

Lawmakers on Tuesday attacked what some called the Biden administration’s “confusing” messaging and disastrous rollout of COVID booster shots. Meanwhile scientists raised questions about the administration’s mandates strategy.

Parents of College Kids Fed Up with ‘Shut Up and Comply’ Mandates

By Megan Redshaw, January 13, 2022

In an interview Wednesday with “Fox & Friends,” parents of university students expressed growing concerns that mandatory vaccines, facemasks and discriminatory practices far outweigh the risks of getting COVID.

“Political Power to Silence and Penalize Physicians who Question Certain Views on COVID-19”: Open Letter to Dr. Harmon and the American Medical Association (AMA)

By Dr. Shibrah Jamil, January 13, 2022

In an ideal world, we expect societies and organizations that have been the vanguard of the medical profession to hold true to the ideals of medicine. In reality, we find many of these organizations to be compromised, having significant undisclosed conflicts of interest which bring their impartiality into question.

Louisiana Nurse Blows the Whistle: “We Have Had More Children Die from the COVID Vaccine Than of COVID Itself”

By The COVID World, January 12, 2022

Collete went on to say that vaccine-injury report databases like VAERS are so little used that most doctors and nurses don’t even know that it exists, let alone how to file a report.

Serious Health Risks of Covid-19 Vaccines: Open Letter to Cornell University Board of Trustees and President Martha Pollack

By Cornell University Community, January 12, 2022

We are students, parents, alumni, faculty, and staff of Cornell University. We are grateful for Cornell’s efforts at keeping students and the Ithaca community safe during this pandemic. As concerned members of the global Big Red family, we write this open letter to express our strong opposition to Cornell’s Covid-19 booster mandate.

“Bastille 2022”: Building a Worldwide Movement Against “Corona Tyranny”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 11, 2022

Our intent is to confront the powerful actors behind this criminal endeavor which is literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide, while creating divisions within society. The impacts on mental health on population groups Worldwide are devastating.

4,000 Health Freedom Advocates Tell New York Lawmakers: ‘We Will Not Comply’

By Children’s Health Defense, January 10, 2022

The “We Will Not Comply Rally” marked the kickoff of the People’s Coalition of New York, a coalition of more than 40 groups that oppose medical mandates and are working to restore the civil liberties of all New Yorkers.

Video: The Corona Crisis: Is the Tide Turning? Reiner Fuellmich on Nuremberg 2.0

By Peter Koenig, Reiner Fuellmich, and Maria Zeee, January 09, 2022

In this latest and perhaps so far most revealing and comprehensive – and foremost – hopeful interview with Maria Zeee on Rumble (MUST SEE – 57 min. video), Dr. Fuellmich of the German Corona Investigative Committee explains in detail what the Committee’s first lawsuit will do.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Global Research Weekender: Will 2022 be the Year of Mass Awakening and the End of COVID-19?

First released on February 22, 2021

We bring to the attention of our readers this Global Research Video documentary produced by Ariel Noyola Rodriguez, featuring Prof. Michel Chossudovsky.

We are at the crossroads of one of the most serious crises in World history.

We are living history, yet our understanding of the sequence of events since January 2020 has been blurred.

Worldwide, people have been misled both by their governments and the media as to the causes and devastating consequences of the Covid-19 “pandemic”. 

“Planet Lockdown” is an encroachment on civil liberties and the “Right to Life”.

click the bottom right hand corner to view in full screen

.

.

Entire national economies are in jeopardy. In some countries martial law has been declared.

Small and medium sized capital are slated to be eliminated. Big capital prevails.

A massive concentration of corporate wealth is ongoing.

Its a diabolical “New World Order” in the making.

Red Zones, the facemask, social distancing, the closing down of schools, colleges and universities,

no more family gatherings, no birthday celebrations, music, the arts: no more cultural events,

sport events are suspended, no more funerals, no more weddings, “love and life” is banned outright.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The 2021 Worldwide Corona Crisis. “The Worst Crisis in Modern History”

First published by Global Research on January 23, 2021

Nine Potential and Proven Dangers to Muzzling Yourself

1. Cavities: New York dentists are reporting that half their patients are suffering decaying teeth, receding gum lines and seriously sour breath from wearing masks. “We’re seeing inflammation in people’s gums that have been healthy forever, and cavities in people who have never had them before,” Dr. Rob Ramondi told FOX News.

2. Facial Deformities: Masking children triggers mouth breathing which as been shown to cause “long, narrow faces, narrow mouths, high palatal vaults, dental malocclusion, gummy smiles, and many other unattractive facial features,” according to the Journal of General Dentistry.

3. Acne Vulgaris: Moisture and germs collecting in the mask cause “facial skin lesions, irritant dermatitis… or worsening acne” (according to Public Health Ontario) which stresses the immune system, can lead to permanent scarring and has been linked to depression and suicidal thoughts (according to the Journal of Dermatologic Clinics). Children also develop impetigo, a bacterial infection that produces red sores and can lead to kidney damage (according to the Mayo Clinic).

 

 

4. Increased Risk of COVID-19: “Mask use by the general public could be associated with a theoretical elevated risk of COVID-19 through… self-contamination,” states Public Health Ontario in Wearing Masks in Public and COVID-19. “By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain,” theorizes nationally recognized board-certified neurosurgeon, Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD (in an article at The Centre for Research on Globalization).

5. Bacterial Pneumonia: At an Oklahoma Press Conference, Dr. James Meehan, MD testified: “Reports coming from my colleagues all over the world are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise” as a result of moisture collecting in face masks.

6. Immune Suppressing: Masks are often worn by criminals trying to hide their identity while perpetuating an offence (theft, violence, rape, murder, etc.). They produce subconscious anxiety and fear. Fear and anxiety activate the fight-or-flight nervous system which down-regulates the immune system, as shown in a study by the American Psychological Association.

7. Germophobia: Masks create an irrational fear of germs and a false sense of protection from disease, leading to antisocial (or even hostile) behaviour towards those not wearing a mask. (See the paper in the Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders titled “COVID-19, obsessive-compulsive disorder and invisible life forms that threaten the self”).

8. Toxic: Many (if not most) masks and face coverings (including cloth) are made with toxic and carcinogenic chemicals including fire retardant, fibreglass, lead, NFE, phthalates, polyfluorinated chemicals and formaldehyde that will outgas and be inhaled by the wearer. (See “5 main hazardous chemicals in clothing from China named” by Fashion United).

9. Psychologically Harmful: “I believe the real threat right now is what we’re doing to sabotage the mental, emotional and physical health of… our children, whose development is dependent on social interactions, physical contact and facial expressions,” writes Dr. Joseph Mercola of Mercola.com. “Between mask wearing and social distancing, I fear the impact on children in particular may be long-term, if not permanent.”

Six Proofs Masks Do Not Reduce Infections

1. Insubstantial: A CDC-funded review on masking in May 2020 came to the conclusion: “Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza… None of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group.” If masks can’t stop the regular flu, how can they stop SAR-CoV-2?

2. Unreasonable: “Evidence that masking as a source [of] control results in any material reduction in transmission was scant, anecdotal, and, in the overall, lacking… [and mandatory masking] is the exact opposite of being reasonable,” ruled a hospital arbitrator in a dispute between The Ontario Nurses’ Association and the Toronto Academic Health Science Network.

3. Ineffective: “Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections,” write Belgian medical doctors in an open letter published in The American Institute of Stress, September 24, 2020.

4. Unsanitary: “It has never been shown that wearing surgical face masks decreases postoperative wound infections,” writes Göran Tunevall, M.D. in the World Journal of Surgery. “On the contrary, a 50% decrease [in bacterial infection] has been reported after omitting face masks.”

5. No Protection: “There were 17 eligible studies.… None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask ⁄ respirator use and protection against influenza infection,” concludes a research review in the journal Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses.

6. Unproven: Dutch Minister for Medical Care, Tamara van Ark, asserted that “from a medical perspective there is no proven effectiveness of masks” after a review by the National Institute for Health on July 29, 2020 (according to Reuters).

Five Ways Forced Masking is Immoral

1. Reckless: “By making mask-wearing recommendations and policies for the general public, or by expressly condoning the practice, governments have both ignored the scientific evidence and done the opposite of following the precautionary principle,” writes Denis Rancourt, PhD in his 2020 paper Masks Don’t Work.

2. Manipulative: Dr. Andreas Voss, member of the World Health Organization expert team and head of microbiology at a Dutch hospital in Nijmegen, on July 24, 2020, told I Am Expat that masks were made mandatory “not because of scientific evidence, but because of political pressure and public opinion.”

3. Fear-Mongering: “In fact, there is no study to even suggest that it makes any sense for healthy individuals to wear masks in public,” write Drs. Karina Reiss, Phd and Dr. Sucharit Bakdi, MD in Corona, False Alarm? “One might suspect that the only political reason for enforcing the measure is to foster fear in the population.”

4. Totalitarian: “If you look at the history of totalitarian regimes… they all do the same thing, which is they try to crush culture, and crush any evidence of self-expression…” explains Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in an interview regarding face masks. “And what is the ultimate vector for self-expression? It’s your facial expressions…. [Yet] we’ve all been told to put on the burqa and be obedient.”

5. Virtue-Signalling: “Masks are utterly useless,” testified Dr. Roger Hodkinson, a pathologist, certified with the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, at a city council meeting. “…masks are simply virtue-signalling… It’s utterly ridiculous seeing these unfortunate, uneducated people — I’m not saying that in a pejorative sense — walking around like lemmings, obeying without any knowledge base, to put the mask on their face.”

You can download, print and distribute a two-page printable handout of this article here.

Special thanks to artist Allen Forest for use of his Masked Mona Lisa cartoon.

John C. A. Manley has spent over a decade ghostwriting for medical doctors, naturopaths and chiropractors. Since March 2020, he has been writing articles that question and expose the contradictions in the COVID-19 narrative and control measures. He is also completing a novel, Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story. You can visit his website at MuchAdoAboutCorona.ca.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Twenty Reasons Mandatory Face Masks are Unsafe, Ineffective and Immoral

All Global Research articles 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.

First published by Global Research on January 8, 2022

***

A. Consensus of World’s Foremost Experts

Globally renowned experts, including Dr. Paul Alexander, Dr. Byram Bridle, Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, Prof. Dolores Cahill, and Drs. Sucharit Bhakdi, Ryan Cole, Richard Fleming, Robert W. Malone, Peter McCullough, Mark Trozzi, Michael Yeadon, Wolfgang Wodarg, and Vladimir Zelenko, among many others, consistently warn the world about the adverse effects resulting from Covid-19 experimental injections; they also warn about their longterm effects, which cannot be known at this time since most clinical trials will be not completed until 2023, and some as late as 2025.

In June 2021, Dr. Tess Lawrie, co-founder of the World Council for Health and member of the Council’s Steering Committee, courageously described the global crisis and called for urgent action: “There is now more than enough evidence on the [UK] Yellow Card system to declare the COVID-19 vaccines unsafe for use in humans. Preparation should be made to scale up humanitarian efforts to assist those harmed by the COVID-19 vaccines and to anticipate and ameliorate medium to longer term effects.”

B. Declaration

The World Council for Health declares that it is time to put an end to this humanitarian crisis. Further, the Council also declares that any direct or indirect involvement in the manufacturing, distribution, administration and promotion of these injections violates basic principles of common law, constitutional law and natural justice, as well as the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Declaration, and other international treaties.

C. Uncensored Facts

We now know that children are over one hundred times more likely to die from these experimental injections than Covid-19.

Injected athletes, globally, are collapsing before our very eyes.

In spite of the fact that reporting systems are limited and passive, millions of adverse effects have been recorded, which include death, paralysis, blood clots, strokes, myocarditis, pericarditis, heart attacks, spontaneous miscarriage, chronic fatigue and extreme depression.

See: coronavirus-yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk

See: vaers.hhs.gov

See: ema.europa.eu/en/human-regulatory/researchdevelopment/pharmacovigilance/eudravigilance

See: vigiaccess.org (search covid-19 vaccine)

D. Victim Testimonies

The World Council for Health acknowledges and respects the experiences and testimony of the victims of this worldwide medical experiment. We also declare and confirm that safe, effective and affordable treatments for Covid-19 exist and should be made available to all who need them.

See: wewanttobeheard.com

See: nomoresilence.world

See: vaxtestimonies.org/en

E. Not Safe, Not Effective

Recent studies confirm the risks associated with Covid-19 experimental injections. Emerging research establishes that the injections are neither safe nor effective, and, in fact, are toxic. While some of the known ingredients of the injections cause biological harm, it is even more concerning that the unknown and undisclosed ingredients may present an even greater threat to human health.

F. Cease and Desist

The World Council for Health is ethically and lawfully bound to issue this Declaration, demanding that governments and corporations cease and desist from direct or indirect participation in the manufacturing, distribution, administration or promotion of Covid-19 experimental injections.

The Council declares that every living man and woman has a moral and legal duty to take immediate and decisive action to halt this unprecedented medical experiment, which continues to cause unnecessary and immeasurable harm.

G. Notice of Liability

The right of bodily integrity and the right to informed consent are inalienable and universal human rights, which have been trampled by government mandates and corporate imperatives.

Thus, the World Council for Health declares that any person or organization directly or indirectly participating in the manufacturing, distribution, administration or promotion of Covid-19 experimental biologics will be held liable for the violation of principles of justice grounded in civil, criminal, constitutional and natural law, as well as international treaties.

Signed November 29, 2021

Charles Kovess
Dr. Jennifer Hibberd
Dr. Naseeba Kathrada
Dr. Robert J McLeod
Dr. Vince Vicente
Dr. Tess Lawrie
Dr. Mark Trozzi
Dr. Maria Hubmer Mogg
Michael Alexander
Dr. Tracy Chandler
Dr. Zac Cox
Dr. Stephan Becker
Karen McKenna
Shabnam Palesa Mohamed

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


Annex: Document

All Global Research articles 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.

First published by Global Research on January 5, 2022

***

An alliance of more than 500 independent Canadian doctors, professors, scientists and health care practitioners have come together to form the Canadian COVID Care Alliance. Throughout this pandemic they’ve been committed to providing an evidence-based approach with regards to informing the Canadian public about all things COVID.

Their list of representatives include PhDs in Immunogenetics, Immunology, Molecular Virology, Viral Immunology, Pharmacology, Biomedical Research, Biochemistry, Bioanalytics, practicing family doctors, MDs and more.

The alliance recently released a PDF showing that, according to them, the Pfizer 6 month data shows that their COVID inoculations “cause more illness than they prevent.” The PDF is called “The Pfizer Inoculations For COVID-19: More Harm Than Good”

They also released a video summarizing the PDF, which is embedded at the end of this article if you’d like to scroll down and watch.

The PDF contains all of the data and reasoning as to how these academics came to their conclusion. It’s very detailed and goes into several different important factors that are not adequately addressed within the mainstream despite the fact that they are so important.

As you know, data is interpreted differently, but it’s important in this day in age to be able to share the work of these academics openly and transparently. Fact-checkers who work with Facebook and other organizations should recognize this, even if they have academics who interpret the data differently. Science is about transparency, discussion and the freedom to share information. Censorship doesn’t help. There is existing data showing that vaccines can prevent the severity of illness and chances of death for a period of time, especially in older and more vulnerable populations.

The PDF shows that the data from Pfizer’s six month report showed that vaccinated people experienced an increase in illness and deaths compared to the placebo group. There is no benefit to a reduction in cases if it comes at the cost of increased sickness and death.

The report also showed that “3 participants in the BNT162b2 group and 2 in the original placebo group who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died.” Furthermore, Approximately 50 percent of vaccine injuries reported to VAERS in the last 30 years are all from COVID vaccines.

What’s not mentioned in the report is the fact that the FDA is refusing to release specific data from Pfizer regarding their COVID inoculations. A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made by the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, also an independent group of many doctors and scientists, allowed them to get their hands on a fraction of the documents so far.

The documents reveal that Pfizer was aware of more than 50,000 serious adverse reactions that may have been a result of their vaccine within the first 90 days of its rollout. The FDA is currently fighting the group of academics to allow until 2096 to release all the data, which is comprised of nearly half a million pages.

Why don’t independent scientists have access to this data? Why has it not been made transparent?

It was good to see the Canadian COVID Care Alliance bring up the fact that on November 2nd, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) released an article about their investigation into Ventavia, one of the research companies Pfizer hired to conduct the trials. The BMJ received dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings, and emails showing the falsification of data.

Facebook actually censored the story and their “fact-checkers” even labelled it a “false news.” The editor-in-chief of The British Medical Journal (BMJ), Fiona Godlee, and soon to be editor-in-chief Kamran Abbasi have criticized Facebook and their “fact-checkers” for labelling the BMJ investigation as false news, and referred to them as “incompetent.”

I first became aware of the Canadian COVID Care Alliance alliance through the work of members Dr. Bryam Bridle, PhD, a viral immunologist and professor at the University of Guelph as well as Dr. Steven Pelech, a professor of neurology and immunology at the University of British Columbia.

Pelech is currently petitioning the Canadian government to stop the rollout of COVID inoculations in Canada.

Below is the video summarizing the PDF put together by the Canadian COVID Care Alliance.

*

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

Featured image is from 123RF

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pfizer 6 Month Data Shows COVID Shots May “Cause More Illness than They Prevent”: Canadian Doctors and Scientists
  • Tags:

On Parliament Hill, John Brassard, the Conservative critic for ethics and accountable government discussed the Public Health Agency of Canada’s decision to collect data from millions of mobile devices to understand travel patterns during the COVID-19(84) pandemic.

This is being done without parliamentary approval and also unbeknownst to the Canadian people.

In this video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth proves that this agenda to track trace and database everyone during Covid-19(84) is nothing new and that the big brother surveillance control grid has been the plan all along while also most importantly explaining what you can do right now to help mitigate the presence of big brother in your life.

 

Video

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 33 Million Canadian Devices Monitored, 87% of Canadians Movements Spied On. This is Covid 19, (1984)?

All Global Research articles 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 @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published on December 21, 2021

Lockdowns, mandates and passports are the major issue of the day with millions of people protesting against them worldwide. In fact, what has become known as the “medical freedom” movement is arguably the biggest and most diverse international movement in world history. 

Vaccine mandates and vaccine passports are among the most vile, unconstitutional, immoral, unscientific, discriminatory and outright criminal policies ever enforced upon the population and goes against everything GPUS stands for under social justice.

These policies are coming from an out-of-control government at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry. 

The mainstream media and social media are also working in lock-step to censor any and all doctors, scientists and investigative journalists who have an opposing view or who even question the current mainstream media orthodoxy. 

Workers are being forced out of their jobs, many with medical exceptions from their doctors, students are being denied entrance to educational institutions, needed medical treatment is being denied, medical privacy is being violated, constitutionally protected rights to movement and assembly (including the right to travel) are being threatened, rights to normal societal participation are being decimated.  

It has taken a while, but more recently many medical professionals, elected officials and federal judges have come out fully against lockdowns, vaccine mandates, vaccine passports and of course massive censorship.

There is a growing clarity among many that these measures have nothing to do with health and everything to do with a power-grab at levels never before seen in the history of the world.

The National Black Caucus of the GPUS adheres to the principle that informed consent in all personal health and medical decisions is an inalienable human right.  

Under no circumstances shall any medical treatment or procedure — including psychotropic medications, vaccines and/or other injectable treatments — be mandated or coerced.

Individuals should be allowed to protect/heal themselves in a manner that best supports their medical and spiritual beliefs.

The coercive methods we oppose include:

  • Threats to personal health information privacy at every level.
  • Discrimination and/or lack of access to public education, public housing or other public services.
  • Removal of minors from their guardians.
  • Any travel restrictions and/or restrictions from public spaces based on a requirement for “vaccine passports” or any other proof of “compliance” with any medical intervention.
  • Vaccine requirements that target specific populations based on ethnicity/race, even if positioned as correcting disparities.
  • We further oppose the use of privacy-invasive technology and artificial intelligence (AI) monitoring systems (including facial recognition, fingerprint apps, tracking cell phones or any other personal electronic devices and credit score systems) as a way to monitor and track the movements and/or restrict the rights of individuals to freely exist and assemble as they choose, especially when applied to personal health care choices.” 

(National Black Caucus of the US Green Party, 16 December, 2021 )

Litigation and Mandatory Injections

The wellbeing of society has taken many disastrous dives for the worse since the fateful instruction almost two years ago that we should shelter in place in order to “lower the curve of hospitalizations.” Since then, most of our governments have morphed into demented tyrannies. In recent months their thuggishness has been expressed by giving dubious forms of legal backing to nonsensical systems of mandatory injections pressed coercively on entire categories of recipients.  

Many groups of workers are being pushed into taking pathogenic clot shots in order to keep their jobs and all the good things that come from paid employment.  Millions of college and university students are facing similar Faustian bargains if they want to gain and retain access to higher education. In the United States, however, the draconian jobs-for-jabs tradeoff is starting to lose some ground. This same pattern, however, is not yet readily ascertainable in Canada, at least so far. 

The vaccine obsessives in the Biden plutocracy have run into a wall of judicial non-compliance with the determination that the number of forced injections must be increased towards the point of universality. A federal judge in Missouri began the process by pulling the legal rug out from beneath a federal executive order directing healthcare workers to submit to mandatory vaccines in a number of states.   

This ruling was upheld without comment by the 8th Circuit court of Appeals.

 More recently a federal judge in Georgia, R. Stan Baker, put the brakes on the Biden government’s attempt to compel all federal contractors to press gene-modifying clot shots on all their employees.  

Judge Baker’s ruling caused a stampede of corporate leviathans away from the federal infatuation with mandatory shots. For instance General Electric, Verizon, 3 M, Oracle and Boeing began to distance themselves from the US Executive branch’s pathological preoccupation with forcing jabs into as many American arms as possible.   

The judicial blocks put in place by the federal courts in Georgia and Missouri are part of a larger pattern of politics and litigation that seems to be turning the momentum against mandatory vaccines.   

The hostility to federally-mandated injections is growing even in Congress where a majority of Senators, including some Democrats, voted 52 to 48 against the principle of inflicting jabs on workers in companies with more than 100 employees.

Outside of Washington DC the governments of 27 states, some of them with Democratic Party Governors, are lining up to oppose vaccine mandates through policy, statute, and litigation. They are mobilizing to protect the provisions outlined in the1st amendment of the US Constitution. They are mobilizing to safeguard freedom of speech, assembly, religion, and bodily autonomy.   

Brain Freeze Afflictions 

Canada is not yet subject to anything like the political firestorms ignited by US Officialdom’s hot interactions with both sides on the issue of mandatory injections. In Canada the introduction of mandatory vaccines by both levels of government did not immediately arouse harsh antagonisms in either Parliament or in federal-provincial interactions. Indeed, in Canada the manufactured COVID crisis has generated a pretty pervasive brain freeze reflected most conspicuously in the intellectual complacency of most politicians, judges, and academics. 

By and large, most of the leading practitioners in these professional fields have opted not to conduct independent research on their own but to take their signals instead from the bought-and-paid-for media. The consistent uniformity of the deceptive messaging conveyed by the censorious media is at the forefront of the most aggressive and traumatizing saga of psychological warfare ever mounted. 

The steady stream of seriously inaccurate and unbalanced reports emanating from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation forms an especially irritating reminder that, in Canada, there no longer exists any credible venue of national public broadcasting. See this.

The boast of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that he successfully pays off the media in return for softball questions and consistently positive coverage has resonated as very applicable to this propaganda-driven plandemic.

Video: Just Trudeau Braging About Bribing the Media

Video: Justin Trudeau on the Need to Violate Fundamental Rights 

 

 

In the United States, in Canada and many other countries, the main consortium pushing the COVID Con sees mandatory vaccines as necessary steps along the way to so-called vaccine passports. These “passports” are meant to provide new domestic keys for the participation of vaccine-compliant individuals in the mainstream of social, commercial and cultural interactions. 

How are we to interpret the denial of permission to engage in “permitted” interactions in the arbitrary tyranny being imposed on us all in the name of vaccine passport systems? How are we to interpret the exclusion of the so-called “unvaccinated” from a broad array of freedoms and civil liberties that were, until recently, assumed to be integral to citizenship? What is to become of the controlled demolition of our supposed liberal democracies now that the ideals of citizenship are being vanquished? This obliteration of the rights and responsibilities of citizenship is to make way for arbitrary rule by secretive cartels run ultimately by international bankers along with their multi-billionaire protégés?

 The extent of wreckage wrought in Europe through the proliferation of mandated systems of vaccine passports is now becoming clear. Dr. Mike Yeadon, the former Vice-President of Pfizer Corporation, has highlighted the subject. He has observed

 “Europe is all but gone. The lights are going out. Austria and Germany now subject their unvaccinated to house arrest. In Greece, the unvaccinated are subject to escalating fines, non-payment of which is converted into prison time. In Lithuania, the unvaccinated are excluded from society. The booster campaigns are running full-pelt everywhere.” See this.

From the introduction of the celebrity virus in early 2020, the plandemic’s main promoters have aimed at the goal of imposing universalized injections on all of humankind. The promoters prominently include Bill Gates and his longtime friend, Justin Trudeau. According to cybersecurity expert, David Hawkins, the famous fathers of both Justin Trudeau and Bill Gates Jr. were also friends and collaborators in their shared advocacy of eugenic approaches for the control of human reproduction. 

The vaccine obsessives driving the exploitation of the manufactured COVID crisis engaged large-scale academic fraud to advance their opposition to all natural remedies for coronavirus infection. Remedies like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin have been lied about and defamed by the COVID Officialdom, with Anthony Fauci as its chief point person.   

For more than a generation Fauci has been a chief promoter of “public-private partnerships” that integrate the federal government and the military-industrial complex with the pharmaceutical companies. Chrystia Freeland, the real behind-the-scenes, hands-on leader of the federal Liberals, has accelerated Canada’s adoption of the US model of political economy over many jurisdictional spheres including “health care.” 

The crackdown on alternative remedies for coronavirus infection has been intense. One revealing illustration of the severity of the crackdown highlights a fraudulent study of Hydroxychloroquine by a fake company named Surgisphere. The incident illustrated the deep corruption of the academic peer review system when it comes to the process of assessing pharmaceutical products. The journals, Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine, were exposed as dishonest publishing venues as corrupt as the tainted industry that contains them. 

As Robert F. Kennedy Jr has documented in great detail, government regulators including the NIH, the FDA, and the CDC have been captured by businesses to do the bidding of the drug companies. The government as personified by Fauci makes it a priority to help makers of pharmaceutical products priorize the making of money over the protection of public health. 

This corporatist bias in governance is epitomized by the grant of legal immunity to vaccine makers. Since 1986 the companies in this commercial sector cannot be sued for damages caused by faults in their products.

This immunization of the makers of vaccines exempts them by law from being held responsible for causing death and injury with their sometimes toxic and improperly-tested products. This exemption from the normal requirements of doing business highlights a deep systemic problem in the proliferation of public-private partnerships that dominate the US pharmaceutical industry.

The federal government has extended to vaccine makers the kind of sweetheart deal removing the incentive for companies to take the required time and expense to make their injections truly safe and effective. The consequent breakdown in standards has given rise to a flood of illness-inflicting results that show up in the meteoric increases in chronic disease that have swept over the United States since 1989. See this.

The preferential treatment directed by the federal regulators at their favorite vaccine companies is reflected in the unfounded prohibitions sidelining cheap natural cures for coronavirus illnesses. As Dr. Vladimir Zelenko has emphasized, these politically-motivated prohibitions have resulted in many hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths. See this. 

The cheap, unpatented and readily-available natural remedies have been banned or defamed to preserve the emergency measure approvals for the much-anticipated Warp Speed shots. From what has been published about the flagrantly incompetent and dishonest medical experiment still-underway, the emergency measure shots have been shown to be far too deadly and injurious to qualify as being anywhere near safe and effective. 

The Future of a Bio-Digital Database 

One important incentive that has been shown to be driving the attempt to universalize COVID injections, is to bring about the global universalization of a bio-digital database more powerful, comprehensive and adaptable than any previously-existing platform. The strategic importance of this objective should help explain the pathological push to demonize and even criminalize those that refuse to allow themselves to be injected with the gene-altering jabs. 

Dr. Mike Yeadon was one of the first major scientists to blow the whistle on the deeper implications of the data-collecting initiative that is integral to the manufactured COVID crisis. See this.

For months Dr. Yeadon has been warning that one of the main purposes of the COVID scam is to empower and enrich those seeking to become the proprietors of a new system of data collection, transmission and manipulation. The envisaged database would encompass many different categories, themes, topics, vectors, and searches. 

Dr. Yeadon explains how the real agenda of the promoters of vaccine passports goes far beyond a means of recording the vaccination histories of individuals. Rather, the envisaged objectives are far more broad-ranging, extending to information in individuals’ finances, police records, contact lists, travel histories, sexual proclivities as well as collections of detailed digital data on the distinct genetic characteristics of every human on the planet. 

Many human genomes are already being mapped. This vast new fund of bio-digital data is susceptible to being archived, monitored, shipped and analyzed through elaborate networks devoted to the Internet of people, things and services on the fast-expanding frontiers of Artificial Intelligence (AI).   

The proliferation of well-funded entities like Bill Gates’ GAVI form a big part of these developments, including on the engineered interfaces linking human biology and digital technology. One of the motives driving Gates in bringing about the mass vaccination of children, is depopulation. See this.

It is also to incorporate the survivors early into systems of mass digital surveillance. See this.

In 2009 the government of Switzerland recognized in GAVI a long list of state-like powers and jurisdictions. Describing itself as a public-private partnership, “the Geneva-based GAVI Alliance enjoys privileges and immunities similar to those enjoyed by other intergovernmental organizations [including the UN] in Switzerland.” See this.

The Frankenstein-esque projects being pushed by promoters of transhumanism figure prominently among those engaged in engineering the COVID crisis. These would-be makers of the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution are deadly serious in their quest to implement and exploit massive schemes for unlimited bio-digital experiments in the process of transforming humans into transhumans.

The goal is nothing less than to alter the very form and genetic character of Homo sapiens. See this.

The goal of transhumanism is to marry mechanical devices and computational capacity with the natural attributes that humanity has inherited from God and from millions of years of evolution. In this way the survivors of the so-called “Great Reset” currently underway would be made to integrate more readily into the robotization of society through the secretive and sometimes competitive operations of many different initiatives in AI. See this.

Presently obstacles are being removed to the aggressive reconstitution of human beings including through the genetic modification of human attributes. See this.

The way is being prepared for new forms of experiment on human subjects that go far beyond the atrocities currently being committed in this round of forced mass injections. The way is being cleared, it seems, for laissez-faire approaches to conducting medical research on human stand-ins for the role once assigned to rats and guinea pigs. This spectacle of degradation exposes that the value of human life is being subjected to a precipitous decline that might very well prove to be more draconian than anything we have seen so far in history.

How else are we to interpret the future implications of the decisive blow against constitutionally guaranteed protections for bodily autonomy and for the security of the person? Once governments have backed the act of compelling individuals to accept the coercive injection of known pathogens into their bodies as conditions for keeping their jobs, what can we expect next? Is there any facet of human rights that will continue to be respected as sacrosanct after the imposition on large population groups  of mandatory injections?

*

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.

Dr. Anthony Hall is editor in chief of the American Herald Tribune. He is currently Professor of Globalization Studies at the 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 frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Edmonton police are among the city employees fighting against COVID-19 shot mandates.
Kaytoo / Shutterstock.com