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 @crg_globalresearch.

***

The fragility of the American democracy seems to be already visible even to pro-Western analysts. Recent studies and reports indicate that the American state is among the most politically vulnerable to internal threats in the world. This diagnosis is currently shared even by some of the biggest supporters of Washington. The internal reality of the US is showing itself as a major source of concern for the American government, which, on its part, should decline some of its international interests in order to improve its domestic scenario.

In November, the Stockholm-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance named American democracy as one of the most backward in the world. The institute emphasized the emergence of several authoritarian tendencies in the US, which can be perfectly understood when we look back on some recent events, such as the electoral violence last year,  the constant allegations of electoral fraud, and others. However, this negative and “pessimistic” opinion about the future of the US now seems shared even by CIA advisers.

Barbara F. Walter, a CIA executive consultant and expert in analyzing scenarios of political instability, pointed out in a recent publication that the US is on the brink of a civil war. Barbara has written a book on this topic, which has been reviewed by The Washington Post. According to her, the process of polarization of American society has already surpassed the stages of “pre-insurgency” and “incipient conflict”, making it literally on the brink of starting an internal armed conflict.

These are some of Barbara’s words:

“We are closer to civil war than any of us would like to believe (…) the one wants to believe that their beloved democracy is in decline, or headed toward war. […] If you were an analyst in a foreign country looking at events in America — the same way you’d look at events in Ukraine or the Ivory Coast or Venezuela — you would go down a checklist, assessing each of the conditions that make civil war likely (…) We are no longer the world’s oldest continuous democracy (…) That honor is now held by Switzerland, followed by New Zealand, and then Canada. We are no longer a peer to nations like Canada, Costa Rica, and Japan, which are all rated at +10 on the Polity index”.

The author believes that her country has entered a very dangerous stage of political security, especially after the events earlier this year, when protesters invaded the Capitol during the height of popular demonsrations. For her, this event seems to have paved the way for Washington to enter the stage of “open insurgency”, which is a dangerous step towards a civil war. According to her, this entire scenario is a consequence of the anti-democratic process that advanced during the Trump administration, making the American state a sort of intermediary between an autocracy and a real democracy.

Considering all these factors and pointing to several indices from previous polls, the CIA consultant concludes that her country’s current political status can be defined as “high risk of civil war”, something truly similar to the internal scenario of polarization in the 19th century, before the beginning of the only civil conflict in American history. A combination of bad governance with undemocratic policies and institutional weakening makes Washington vulnerable to all internal threats.

Walter appoints Trump and the Republicans who for her have pushed the US into an “abyss” as culprits. She believes that Joe Biden’s government and the Democrats’ hegemony would be a hope for the American, but at the same time points out that the Trump administration left such a negative legacy that it makes it practically impossible to achieve the Democrats’ goals – materialized in Biden’s Build Back Better agenda, which becomes more and more unachievable.

In fact, much of the data pointed out by Barbara Walter is true, but in the end, the aim of her work seems to be just an attempt to legitimize the actions of Democrats and condemn all aspects of the Trump administration. While it is undeniable that Trump represented several setbacks for American democracy, it seems a real exaggeration to point him as the culprit in this entire process.

The first mistake is to idealize American democracy as the most perfect example of a political regime to be followed. Structural problems such as racism, social inequalities and public security crisis are nothing new in American history, but a reality that has been with the country for decades. The main problem that Trump represented for American democracy was precisely to damage its image, as the Republican president was explicit in its authoritarian and right-wing tendencies, while Democratic praxis consists of disguising such tendencies by promoting an agenda in defense of ethnic, sexual and social minorities. Trump has been explicit and Biden has been more moderate, but both represent the same advanced stage of US democratic decadence.

The arguments exposed in Barbara’s book seem like a true apology for Biden and his model of governance, as well as an attempt to highlight, from a strategic perspective – considering Barbara’s position at the CIA – the importance of implementing the Build Back Better agenda, which currently faces strong rejection in American political society. However, despite her overly pro-Biden stance, Barbara deserves special attention for correctly diagnosing the danger that currently most affects American society.

Civil war is no longer a distant scenario for the world’s greatest power. Social polarization in the country has reached really high levels. Racial tensions, political conflicts, separatist groups and several other factors have contributed to the increase in the country’s internal crisis. The uncontrolled immigration that began with the Biden government makes the situation even worse, escalating social problems and racist and xenophobic reactions. Amidst a scenario of weak democracy, polarization and totalitarian tendencies gain space and, with this, future scenarios such a civil war, Balkanization or even the beginning of a dictatorship are expected.

The best thing for the American government to do is to interpret Barbara Walter’s book as a true warning, a report by a CIA consultant about the problems that affect America, and not as a simple apology for the Biden administration. Washington’s problems are serious and it is no longer a matter of “Republicans vs. Democrats” but of “democracy vs. civil war”.

*

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 wtop.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 @crg_globalresearch.

***

With Julian Assange now fighting the next stage of efforts to extradite him to the United States to face 18 charges, 17 of which are based on the brutal, archaic Espionage Act, some Australian politicians have found their voice.  It might be said that a few have even found their conscience.

Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce was sufficiently exercised by the High Court judgment overturning the lower court ruling against extradition to demand an end to the matter.  In his opinion piece for the Nine newspaper group on December 14, he argued that rights were “not created in some legal sonic boom at one undefined point of our existence nor switched off like the power to a fridge because of a fear or a confusion as to the worth of their contents.”

The deputy PM proved mature enough to admit that “whether you like him or despite him”, the importance of the case transcended his situation.  “So we must hope for the British courts to do so, and we will judge its society accordingly.” (They have not and, accordingly, should be judged.)

The Nationals leader has little time for the role of whistleblowing or disclosing egregious misconduct by a State; less time for Assange as the publisher in history, the exposer of crimes by a great power.  “They are a separate matter to the key issue: where was this individual when he was allegedly breaking US law for which the US is now seeking his extradition from London?”

Joyce’s reasoning, while jejune on the historical contributions of WikiLeaks, has the merit of unusual clarity.  He argues that the UK “should try him there for any crime he is alleged to have committed on British soil or send him back to Australia, where he is a citizen.”  Assange never pilfered any US secret files; did not breach Australian laws and was not in the US when “the event being deliberated in the court now in London occurred.”  To extradite him to the US would not only be unjust but bizarre.  “If he insulted the Koran, would he be extradited to Saudi Arabia?”

The move by the Nationals leader also brought a few voices of support from the woodwork.  Liberal backbenchers Jason Falinski and Bridget Archer are encouraging diplomatic intervention.  Falinski suggested that the Morrison government “do what it can to get an Australian citizen back to Australia as quickly as possible” though he refused to entertain “a public spat with America”.  Archer believed that “he should be released and returned to Australia”.

The announcement that Caroline Kennedy would be heading Down Under as the new US ambassador to Australia was also seen as an opportunity.  Former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr suggested to that Prime Minister Scott Morrison take the chance to discuss the Assange case with Kennedy.  (This, from a man who once claimed that Assange “has had more consular support in a comparable time than any other Australian” while admitting that he did not “know whether this is the case.”)

Morrison might, suggests Carr, point out that Australia had its own challenges in facing war crimes allegations, notably “war crimes trials pending for Australian troops in Afghanistan who might have done the very things Assange exposed in Iraq.”  Washington’s treatment of the publisher could well “turn this guy into a martyr.”

Carr sees such advice as part of the capital of trust between allies.  It was a “small transaction under the architecture of what each sees as a mutually beneficial relationship.”  It might even show that Australia was capable of behaving “like a sovereign nation” in “one tiny corner of our alliance partnership”. If Canberra were unable to “take up the cause of an Australian passport holder, what scope for any independent action do we allow ourselves?”

The former foreign minister shows, at stages, flashes of ignorance about aspects of the proceedings (the US prosecution, for instance, made a special point in not mentioning the Collateral Murder video in its proceedings), he is at least cognisant of the monstrous defects in the case, not least the fact that a good deal of the indictment is based on falsified accounts from former WikiLeaks volunteer, Sigurdur “Siggi” Thordarson.

The latest stirring of principled awareness in Australia should be treated warily.  Australian governments tend to protect their citizens with a begrudging reluctance, except in the rarest of cases.  They are notorious in playing the game of surrender and capitulation.  In the context of the US-Australian alliance, one given an even more solid filling with the AUKUS security pact, the hope that Australia would ever be able to exercise sovereign choices on any issue that affects US security is almost inconceivable.

The lamentable behaviour from Canberra regarding Assange’s welfare has also been brought to light by the tireless exploits of lawyer Kellie Tranter.  Using Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, Tranter developed a timeline revealing how Australian officials were updated on Assange’s condition (legal and physical) yet did little in the way of addressing it.  Kit Klarenberg, making use of Tranter’s findings, also discusses the extent Australian officials knew about Assange’s plight.

In April 2019, for instance, the lawyer Gareth Pierce, acting for Assange, wrote to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) warning that the publisher’s possessions were being held by the Ecuadorian authorities.  These included a stash of privileged legal documents.  DFAT, while claiming it would chase the matter up, concluded in May 2019 that Assange’s possessions were “under the authority and jurisdiction of the Judicial System of the Republic of Ecuador”.  Australian diplomats, it followed, were unable to intervene.  The result: Assange’s documents, held by the Ecuadorians, were seized by the FBI.

As extradition proceedings were taking place, Peirce wrote to the Australian High Commission that consular representatives would have “undoubtedly noted what was clear for everyone present in court to observe” – that the publisher was “in shockingly poor condition … struggling not only to cope but to articulate what he wishes to articulate.” DFAT’s report of those proceedings, intentionally or otherwise, was stonily silent on the issue.

Throughout, DFAT maintained that Assange had refused consular assistance or support.  This was a point the publisher took up in a meeting at Belmarsh prison with consular officials on November 1, 2019, claiming that to be misguided nonsense.  He also noted concerns by the prison doctor about his state, being “so bad that his mind was shutting down”, the appalling state of isolation which made it impossible for him “to think or to prepare his defence.”

Little then, can be expected from the compliant minions in Canberra desperately keen not to soil or sour relations with Washington.  But it is at least mildly heartening that a few members of the Morrison government have woken up to the fact that this grotesque act of persecution against a publisher should end.

*

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 frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

Featured image: Julian Assange in Belmarsh Prison in 2019 (Source: WSWS)

All Global Research articles 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.

***

The Austrian government is hiring people to “hunt down vaccine refusers,” according to a report published by Blick.

Yes, really.

The burden for enforcing the fines unjabbed Austrians will have to pay as part of their punishment will fall to their employers, necessitating a new army of ‘inspectors’ to ensure that process is running smoothly.

The city of Linz, which is home to 200,000 inhabitants, has a relatively low vaccination rate of 63 per cent.

In response, “Linz now wants to hire people who are supposed to hunt down vaccine refusers,” reports Swiss news outlet Blick.

The role of the inspectors will be to check on “whether those who do not get vaccinated really pay for it.”

The vaccine refusenik hunters will receive a wage of 2774 euros, which will be paid 14 times a year, making an annual income of 38,863 euros.

Nice work if you can get it.

“The job includes, among other things, the creation of penal orders as well as the processing of appeals,” according to the report, adding that workers need to be “resilient” and willing to work a lot of overtime.

The jobs are only open to Austrian citizens, all of whom will either have to be vaccinated against or fully recovered from COVID.

As we previously highlighted, the unvaccinated in Austria could find themselves imprisoned for a year under a new administrative law that would force them to pay for their own internment.

Austrians who don’t get vaccinated by February face fines of up to €7,200 ($8,000) for non-compliance, and those who refuse to pay would also face a 12 month jail sentence.

*

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 Pandemic.news

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia has returned from the frontline in the battle to halt the advances of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF).

TPLF rebels launched an attack on the Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) during early November of 2020 triggering a conflict which has resulted in the deaths of thousands and the displacement of several million people inside the country and in neighboring Sudan.

Abiy, who was elected to a full term of office in 2021, had already declared a unilateral ceasefire in June. Nonetheless, the TPLF continued the conflict by sending its rebel forces into the Amhara and Afar populated areas of Ethiopia.

Ethiopia, a vast country of over 115 million people, the second most populous state on the African continent, is composed of numerous ethnic groups and nationalities. Since the ascendancy of the Abiy administration in the aftermath of a national uprising against the TPLF-led Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) regime in the early months of 2018, the prime minister has sought to unite the country under the political banner of the Prosperity Party (PP).

The TPLF grouping which maintained control of the Tigray province after 2018 in the north of the country has consistently refused to participate in efforts aimed at building national unity in Ethiopia and Pan-African solidarity throughout the Horn of Africa region. The rebels held provincial elections in 2020 despite the call by the central government in Addis Ababa to postpone voting across the country due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Obviously, the central government was taken unawares after its forces were attacked in the Tigray provincial capital of Mekelle. In the first few months of the war, the ENDF retook Mekelle and other areas of the province prior to announcing a unilateral ceasefire in June for the purposes of allowing humanitarian assistance and the agricultural production of the farmers.

In recent weeks, after the prime minister visited the frontline, the character of the conflict has shifted once again. The Ethiopian military has been able to retake land from the TPLF in the most contested areas of the country.

United States media outlets apparently working in collaboration with the State Department and the Pentagon, began to spread misinformation about the purported “imminent collapse” of the Abiy government in Addis Ababa in November. These reports were contradicted by the Ethiopian government along with visitors to the country who repeatedly stated that the capital city was calm even with the prime minister’s declaration of a state of emergency.

The claims of mass starvation, sexual assault and accusations of ethnic cleansing and genocide flourished within the western governmental and corporate press agencies. The Ethiopian administration of Prime Minister Abiy was identified by the U.S. and its allies as the perpetuator of these crimes. However, the government denied these allegations saying the charges were solely being leveled by the TPLF and its supporters to further isolate Addis Ababa.

Eyewitness reports related to the war crimes committed by the TPLF’s Defense Forces (TDF) went largely ignored by the western media. TPLF forces took trucks and other equipment sent to the area for humanitarian purposes. The Abiy government accused elements working within the United Nations framework in Ethiopia as being collaborators with the rebels. In the modification of their allegations of war crimes committed by the central government, in recent weeks the western-backed agencies are now saying that abuses have occurred on both sides of the conflict. The prime minister and his government have categorically rejected any accommodation of the TPLF and its demands which often solidarizes with imperialist interests in the Horn of Africa.

An Ethiopian-oriented news agency, Borkena.com, reported on the recent situation on the battlefront noting that:

“Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) forces retreated to the Tigray region of Ethiopia after facing devastating military defeats in the Afar and Amhara regions of Ethiopia over the past three weeks.  Six prominent TPLF military generals whose names are still undisclosed were killed in the Kasagita Front in the Afar region of Ethiopia, as reported by local Ethiopian sources about three weeks ago. After losing a fortified military stronghold in the areas, whose objective was said to be to cut off the supply route to Djibouti and hold Ethiopia in a choke position, losing battles became pervasive in the areas it controlled.  In a span of less than two weeks, TPLF was forced to leave cities after cities in the western, Eastern and Wollo front in the center. Shewarobit, Debre Sina, Ataye, Kemissie, Kombolcham Batie, Dessie, Haik, Wuchale, Wurgehsa, Mersa, Woldia and Kobo were freed from TPLF forces one after the other.”

The Role of the U.S. and United Nations in the Conflict

Under the previous administration of President Donald J. Trump, threats against Addis Ababa were made related to the construction and operations of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam Project (GERD). The project, which is the largest hydroelectric plant in Africa, has been planned for years by the Ethiopian government to enhance its own internal power supply and to assist other states within the broader region known as the Nile Basin Initiative. (See this)

Neighboring Egypt has sought to sabotage the GERD under the guise that it will severely curtail access to the waters of the Blue Nile which is shared by both countries. The current arrangements imposed by British imperialism during the early 20th century favors Egypt, its then colonial subject. Ethiopia, although occupied by the Italian fascist forces between 1936-1941, has never been subjected to direct colonial control by European powers.

Trump had urged Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to “blow up” the GERD after Ethiopia rejected a deal imposed by Washington. The statement was made to Sudanese interim Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok during 2020, at the time of Khartoum’s illegal “recognition” of the State of Israel.

Unfortunately, the United Nations humanitarian agencies have taken a position similar to the U.S. in regard to the war. Ethiopia has set strict limits on access to conflict areas which have been utilized by certain UN agencies to make accusations against the government in Addis Ababa.

However, what has created even more tension is the declaration by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to conduct an investigation into the claims of war crimes since November of 2020 in the north of Ethiopia. The government in Addis Ababa has rejected the plans for an investigation saying it will not cooperate since these issues are internal matters.

A press briefing was held on December 21 in Addis Ababa featuring the spokeswoman for Prime Minister Billene Seyoum who addressed the announcement by the UNHRC. Borkena.com in an article on the briefing emphasized:

“Ethiopia says the resolution was politically motivated. Politically motivated because it discredited the efforts by the Ethiopian government to investigate rights abuses in the Tigray region. Earlier this year, the Ethiopian government martial court looked into cases of violations by members of the Ethiopian Defense Forces. Those who were found to be guilty were punished in accordance with the martial court. In regard to claims of genocide in Tigray by the TPLF surrogates and some state actors tacitly supporting the designated terrorist group, a joint investigation by the United Nations Human Rights Commission and Ethiopian Human Rights Commission ruled that there was no genocide in Tigray. The press secretary on Tuesday (Dec. 21) reflected a view that the UN Human Rights Council should stop practices that sound as partisanship and consider the importance of investigating rights abuses in the Afar and Amhara regions of Ethiopia where the TPLF carried out multiples of atrocities during the months of occupation in parts of these regions.”

The attacks on Ethiopia have generated mass demonstrations domestically and internationally known as #NoMore. Thousands of Diasporic Ethiopians and Eritreans have held joint demonstrations across the world including the U.S. These actions intensified after the announcement of sanctions by Washington against Ethiopia. In addition, a leaked videotape of a secret meeting involving the U.S., UK, European Union and TPLF officials where plans were being discussed for the imposition of a new government after the removal of Prime Minister Abiy. (See this)

These developments illustrate clearly the real aims and objectives of the war being waged against the Ethiopian government. Anti-imperialists throughout the world, with specific to the western capitalist states, must be in solidarity with the Ethiopian people in these attempts to destabilize and overthrow the legitimate administration inside the country.

*

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 frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

Israel was involved in the assassination of Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force Commander Qassem Soleimani, the former head of Israel’s military intelligence said yesterday.

Soleimani, who was considered the mastermind of the pro-Iran proxies in the region, was killed in an American drone strike near the Iraqi capital Baghdad in January 2020.

According to Israeli daily Haaretz, former Israeli army intelligence chief Major General Tamir Hayman told the Israel Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Centre that the killing of Soleimani was one of “two significant and important assassinations” during his tenure.

The other assassination, he said, was that of the military leader of the Islamic Jihad in Gaza, Bahaa Abu Al-Ata.

“Soleimani’s assassination is an achievement, since our main enemy, in my eyes, are the Iranians. Two significant and important assassinations can be noted in my term,” Hayman said.

Several days after Soleimani was killed, NBC News reported that Israeli intelligence helped the United States target him.

Hayman’s tenure as Israeli army intelligence chief ended in October. He has said that Israel has carried out multiple operations to disrupt the spread of Iranian weapons and funds throughout the region.

Important article by Jane M. Orient, M.D. published by the AAPS

***

In addition to being subjected to various forms of censorship, for the first time in living memory American doctors are getting threat letters from licensure boards warning them against distributing “harmful misinformation.” Medical boards in 12 states have disciplined doctors because of this allegation. While it is claimed that there’s an epidemic of misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic, the warnings don’t spell out what that means.

We don’t have an epidemic of patients dying because doctors told them to refuse treatment or to drink Clorox or aquarium cleaner.

In fact, no patients need to have suffered any harm at all for the medical board to investigate a doctor’s no-longer-free speech. All it takes is an anonymous complaint

Pharmacists who were converted into the overseers of physicians’ prescribing practices will complain that a doctor had prescribed ivermectin for COVID-19.

Or an employer might complain that a doctor supported a worker’s request for a medical exemption that wasn’t on the CDC’s list of acceptable reasons.

Or the doctor might have spoken at a political meeting at which mask mandates were being challenged.

Or a patient might complain that a doctor wasn’t wearing a mask in his private consulting room, even when no COVID-19 patients were anywhere near and the doctor had demonstrated immunity.

Or a pathologist might have stated publicly that his busy lab was seeing a higher percentage of cancers in vaccinated patients.

“Harmful misinformation” appears to mean anything that contradicts or asks questions or raises doubt about the dogma that “vaccines are safe and effective,” or suggests a treatment not endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), and their corporate sponsors.

One source of the allegedly “harmful misinformation” is a database created and maintained by the CDC, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Anybody can enter a suspected vaccine adverse reaction, and the public can access it. So, “it can be abused by people trying to sow fear,” write Shayla Love and Anna Merlan in VICE News. One person filed a fraudulent report, promptly removed, claiming that an influenza vaccination had turned him into the “Incredible Hulk.”

Flawed as it is, VAERS is the best CDC has to offer for looking for “danger signals.” Of course, correlation doesn’t prove causality. As Lindy McGee from Texas Children’s Hospital correctly pointed out, “I can report if I get hit by a truck after I’ve gotten a vaccine and that would be reported as associated with a vaccine. It does not make any implication of causality.” However, there is a double standard. If you get hit by a truck, but test positive for COVID-19, the hospital will get paid for counting you as a COVID death.

Adverse reports to VAERS are many times higher for COVID-19 vaccines than for all other vaccines combined since the database was established in 1988. The website vaers.hhs.gov clearly states: “Knowingly filing a false VAERS report is a violation of Federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1001) punishable by fine and imprisonment.” So, presumably most of the approximately 20,000 reports of death concern people who really did die soon after getting the jab, most within a few days. It could be 20,000 coincidences, but the count is not “misinformation.”

Love and Merlan call the compilers of VAERS information at openvaers.com/covid-data “dumpster divers.” Matt Motta of Oklahoma State University and Dominik Stecuła of Colorado State University refer to that January article favorably in their Aug 25 essay that says VAERS is only good for researching “vaccine hesitancy.” They don’t mention that the featured VAERS death count of 329 from Jan 22, 2021, has steadily increased.

Also viewed as “misinformation” is the opinion of physicians and researchers that hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, and other “repurposed” drugs are beneficial in COVID-19, as shown in more than 1,000 studies. Reports of dying patients who recovered when hospitals were legally forced to step aside and allow off-protocol treatment are ignored.

The safe option for doctors is to promote the jab or keep silent, and not to suggest anything different from what Anthony Fauci approves. By silencing doctors who are ethical professionals, one opens the gates for the reckless charlatans.

Recall that in Orwell’s Newspeak, the meaning of words is inverted. The Ministry of Love is in charge of torture; the Ministry of Plenty, of starvation; and the Ministry of Truth, of propaganda.

Is the Minitrue defining “misinformation” today?

The top eight Pfizer and Moderna shareholders saw their combined wealth rise by $10 billion in a seven-day windfall after the Omicron variant was discovered, according to a report in the Daily Mail.

The European (EEA and non-EEA countries) database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, verified by European Medicines Agency (EMA), and they are now reporting 32,649 fatalities, and 3,003,296 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.

This database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.

The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50. (There are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.)

So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured following COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.

The EudraVigilance database (EEA and non-EEA countries) reports that through December 4, 2021 there are 32,649 deaths and 3,003,296 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:

• COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE MODERNA (CX-024414)
• COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE PFIZER-BIONTECH
• COVID-19 VACCINE ASTRAZENECA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19)
• COVID-19 VACCINE JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S)

From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,409,643) are serious injuries.

“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”

A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. It is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.

Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.*

Here is the summary data through December 4, 2021.

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 15,061 deaths and 1,399,513 injuries to 04/12/2021

• 38,170   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 217 deaths
• 43,454   Cardiac disorders incl. 2,204 deaths
• 404        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 38 deaths
• 18,886   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 10 deaths
• 1,330     Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
• 21,574   Eye disorders incl. 35 deaths
• 115,450 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 602 deaths
• 354,635 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 4,251 deaths
• 1,589     Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 78 deaths
• 15,371   Immune system disorders incl. 77 deaths
• 57,255   Infections and infestations incl. 1,605 deaths
• 22,928   Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 261 deaths
• 34,691   Investigations incl. 464 deaths
• 9,568     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 256 deaths
• 172,420 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 187 deaths
• 1,254     Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 122 deaths
• 236,435 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,609 deaths
• 2,000     Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 60 deaths
• 215        Product issues incl. 3 deaths
• 25,493   Psychiatric disorders incl. 182 deaths
• 4,981     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 236 deaths
• 49,076   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 5 deaths
• 60,177   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,664 deaths
• 65,710   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 128 deaths
• 3,007     Social circumstances incl. 19 deaths
• 7,280     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 90 deaths
• 36,160   Vascular disorders incl. 653 deaths

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273(CX-024414) from Moderna: 9,084 deaths and 409,189 injuriesto 04/12/2021

• 8,678     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 102 deaths
• 13,650   Cardiac disorders incl. 953 deaths
• 166        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 7 deaths
• 4,940     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 4 deaths
• 373        Endocrine disorders incl. 4 deaths
• 5,992     Eye disorders incl. 31 deaths
• 33,407   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 339 deaths
• 109,178 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 3,117 deaths
• 673        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 44 deaths
• 4,054     Immune system disorders incl. 16 deaths
• 15,636   Infections and infestations incl. 849 deaths
• 8,535     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 172 deaths
• 8,001     Investigations incl. 211 deaths
• 3,893     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 220 deaths
• 49,233   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 184 deaths
• 568        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 74 deaths
• 68,948   Nervous system disorders incl. 870 deaths
• 754        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 6 deaths
• 82           Product issues incl. 2 deaths
• 7,472     Psychiatric disorders incl. 149 deaths
• 2,398     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 174 deaths
• 8,859     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 7 deaths
• 18,183   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 975 deaths
• 21,946   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 82 deaths
• 1,872     Social circumstances incl. 39 deaths
• 1,642     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 115 deaths
• 10,056   Vascular disorders incl. 338 deaths

Total reactions for the vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca: 6,515 deaths and 1,088,775 injuries to 04/12/2021

• 13,292   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 254 deaths
• 19,523   Cardiac disorders incl. 720 deaths
• 203        Congenital familial and genetic disorders incl. 7 deaths
• 12,845   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 4 deaths
• 619        Endocrine disorders incl. 4 deaths
• 19,170   Eye disorders incl. 29 deaths
• 103,368 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 340 deaths
• 286,356 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,544 deaths
• 971        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 62 deaths
• 499       Immune system disorders incl. 30 deaths
• 33,416   Infections and infestations incl. 441 deaths
• 12,583   Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 180 deaths
• 23,958   Investigations incl. 159 deaths
• 12,472   Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 96 deaths
• 161,308 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 114 deaths
• 650        Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 25 deaths
• 223,680 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,007 deaths
• 533        Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 14 deaths
• 191        Product issues incl. 1 death
• 20,150   Psychiatric disorders incl. 60 deaths
• 4,093     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 63 deaths
• 15,594   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
• 38,722   Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 817 deaths
• 49,877   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 53 deaths
• 1,533     Social circumstances incl. 6 deaths
• 1,499     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 26 deaths
• 27,179   Vascular disorders incl. 457 deaths

Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 1,989 deaths and 105,819 injuries to 04/12/2021

• 1,029     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 41 deaths
• 1,952     Cardiac disorders incl. 169 deaths
• 36           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
• 1,080     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 2 deaths
• 72           Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
• 1,415     Eye disorders incl. 7 deaths
• 8,743     Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 80 deaths
• 27,925   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 533 deaths
• 130        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 11 deaths
• 473        Immune system disorders incl. 9 deaths
• 4,676     Infections and infestations incl. 157 deaths
• 974        Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 20 deaths
• 4,927     Investigations incl. 111 deaths
• 664        Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 50 deaths
• 15,331   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 45 deaths
• 59           Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 4 deaths
• 20,725   Nervous system disorders incl. 219 deaths
• 43           Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
• 32           Product issues
• 1,479     Psychiatric disorders incl. 17 deaths
• 443        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 26 deaths
• 2,249     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 6 deaths
• 3,799     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 259 deaths
• 3,241     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 8 deaths
• 337        Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
• 718        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 58 deaths
• 3,267     Vascular disorders incl. 151 deaths

*These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen ordered his country’s military to destroy or submit to warehouses all weapons that were produced in the US. The reason for such a harsh reaction by the Cambodian leader is because of provocative actions and further threats of sanctions from US authorities.

La Federazione Russa ha consegnato agli Stati Uniti d’America, il 15 dicembre, il progetto di un Trattato e di un Accordo per disinnescare la crescente tensione tra le due parti. I due documenti sono stati resi pubblici, il 17 dicembre, dal Ministero degli Esteri russo. La bozza di trattato prevede, all’Art. 1, che ciascuna delle due parti «non intraprenda azioni che incidono sulla sicurezza dell’altra parte» e, all’Art.2, che «si adoperi per garantire che tutte le organizzazioni internazionali e alleanze militari a cui partecipa aderiscano ai principi della Carta delle Nazioni Unite».

All’Art. 3 le due parti si impegnano a «non utilizzare i territori di altri Stati allo scopo di preparare o effettuare un attacco armato contro l’altra parte». L’Art. 4 prevede, quindi, che «gli Stati Uniti non stabiliranno basi militari nel territorio degli Stati dell’ex Urss che non sono membri della Nato», ed «eviteranno l’adesione di Stati dell’ex Urss alla Nato, impedendo una sua ulteriore espansione ad Est». Nell’Art. 5 «le parti si astengono dal dispiegare le loro forze armate e i loro armamenti, anche nell’ambito di alleanze militari, nelle aree in cui tale dispiegamento può essere percepito dall’altra parte come una minaccia alla propria sicurezza nazionale». Quindi «si astengono dal far volare bombardieri equipaggiati con armamenti nucleari o non nucleari e dallo schierare navi da guerra nelle aree, al di fuori dello spazio aereo e delle acque territoriali nazionali, da cui possano attaccare obiettivi nel territorio dell’altra parte».

All’Art. 6 le due parti si impegnano a «non usare missili terrestri a gittata intermedia o corta al di fuori dei loro territori nazionali, nonché nelle zone dei loro territori da cui tali armi possano attaccare obiettivi sul territorio dell’altra parte». L’Art.7, infine, prevede che «le due parti si asterranno dallo schierare armi nucleari al di fuori dei loro territori nazionali e riporteranno nei loro territori le armi già schierate al di fuori» e che «non addestreranno personale militare e civile di paesi non nucleari all’uso di armi nucleari, né condurranno esercitazioni che prevedano l’uso di armi nucleari».

Il progetto di Accordo stabilisce le procedure di funzionamento del Trattato, basate sull’impegno che le due parti «risolveranno tutte le controversie nelle loro relazioni con mezzi pacifici» e «utilizzeranno i meccanismi delle consultazioni e informazioni bilaterali, comprese linee telefoniche dirette per contatti di emergenza». Il Ministero degli Esteri russo comunica che la parte statunitense ha ricevuto spiegazioni dettagliate sulla logica dell’approccio russo e di sperare quindi che, nel prossimo futuro, gli Stati uniti avviino seri colloqui con la Russia su tale questione critica.

Tace per ora la parte statunitense. Si fa sentire però la Voce dell’America, megafono multimediale di Washington che parla in oltre 40 lingue a centinata di milioni di persone in tutto il mondo: dice che «molti esperti sono preoccupati per questa mossa della Russia, che vuole sfruttare il fallimento del negoziato come pretesto per invadere l’Ucraina». Tace per ora la Nato, in attesa degli ordini da Washington. Tace l’Italia che, pur non essendo destinataria diretta della proposta russa, è parte in causa: tra le armi nucleari che gli Usa schierano al di fuori del proprio territorio vi sono le bombe B-61 installate a Ghedi e Aviano, tra poco sostituite dalle più micidiali B61-12, al cui uso viene addestrato il nostro personale militare nonostante l’Italia sia ufficialmente paese non nucleare. E gli Usa si preparano a installare in Italia anche nuovi missili nucleari a gittata intermedia.

Mentre i media calano una quasi totale cappa di silenzio sulla proposta russa, i gruppi parlamentari la ignorano come se non avesse niente a che fare con l’Italia, esposta a crescenti pericoli quale base avanzata delle forze nucleari Usa contro la Russia. Trovino almeno il tempo di leggere in pochi minuti la bozza che la Russia ha consegnato agli Usa per aprire la trattativa, e abbiano il coraggio politico di esprimere pubblicamente il loro giudizio. Se è negativo, spieghino perché è in contrasto con la nostra Costituzione e la nostra sicurezza.

Manlio Dinucci

On December 15, the Russian Federation delivered to the United States of America the project of a Treaty and an Agreement to defuse the growing tension between the two parties.

The two documents were made public by the Russian Foreign Ministry on December 17.

The draft treaty foresees in Art. 1, that each of the two parties “shall not undertake actions that affect the security of the other party” and,

In Art.2, that “shall seek to ensure that all international organizations and military alliances in which it is taking part adhere to the principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations.”.

In Art. 3 the two parties commit themselves “not to use the territories of other States with a view to preparing or carrying out an armed attack against the other Party“.

Art. 4 provides then, that “the United States shall not establish military bases in the territory of the States of the former USSR that are not members of NATO”, and “shall deny accession to the Alliance to the States of the former USSR to prevent further eastward expansion of NATO“.

In Art. 5 “the parties shall refrain from deploying their armed forces and armaments, including in the framework of military alliances, in the areas where such deployment could be perceived by the other party as a threat to its national security.”

Thus “they shall refrain from flying heavy bombers equipped for nuclear or non-nuclear armaments and from deploying warships in areas, outside national airspace and territorial waters, from where they can attack targets in the territory of the other party.”

In Art. 6 “the parties shall undertake not to deploy ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles outside their national territories, as well as in the areas of their national territories, from which such weapons can attack targets in the national territory of the other Party” and that “shall not train military and civilian personnel from non-nuclear countries to use nuclear weapons, nor conduct exercises involving the use of nuclear weapons.”

In Art. 7 “the parties shall refrain from deploying nuclear weapons outside their national territories and return such weapons to their national territories”, and “shall not train military and civilian personnel from non-nuclear countries to use nuclear weapons” nor “conduct exercises involving the use of nuclear weapons.”

The draft Agreement established procedures for the Treaty operation, based on the commitment that the two parties “will resolve all disputes in their relations by peaceful means“, and “will use the mechanisms of bilateral consultations and information, including hotlines for emergency contacts.” The US party was given detailed explanations regarding the logic of the Russian approach, and  the Russian Foreign Ministry hoped that in the near future the United States will enter into serious talks with Russia on this critical issue.

The U.S. party is silent for now. However, the Voice of America, Washington’s multimedia megaphone that speaks to hundreds of millions of people around the world in more than 40 languages, is making its voice heard: it said that “many experts are concerned about the Russia’s gambit, which wants to use the failure of the negotiations as a pretext to invade Ukraine”.

NATO is silent for now, waiting for orders from Washington. Italy is silent, even though it is not the direct recipient of the Russian proposal but it is part of the cause: among the nuclear weapons that the US deployed outside its territory there are the B61 bombs [tactical nuclear weapons] installed in Ghedi and Aviano bases, soon to be replaced by the more deadly B61-12, and our military personnel is trained for their use despite Italy being officially a non-nuclear country. And the U.S. is preparing to install in Italy also new nuclear missiles with intermediate range.

While the media is maintaining an almost total silence on the Russian proposal, the Parliamentary groups are ignoring it as if it had nothing to do with Italy, the country is exposed to growing dangers as an advanced base for US nuclear forces against Russia. Make them at least find the time to read in a few minutes the draft that Russia handed over to the USA to open the negotiations, and have the political courage to publicly express their opinion. If it is negative, let them explain why it is contrary to our Constitution and our security. 

First published by il manifesto, December 21, 2021. Translated from Italian by the author.

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

The CIA and British intelligence are feeding the public through their media assets the story that Russia’s security concern is really a cloak behind which hides Moscow’s plan to create a new Russian sphere of influence over eastern Europe.

Of course, Washington has a sphere of influence over eastern Europe called NATO, but it would be the end of the world for Russia to have any influence with countries that border it.

Another part of the CIA disinformation is that the White House is willing to discuss part of the Russian security demand but not the parts the White House disagrees with. This, of course, is nonsensical as the Kremlin made it clear that its demand for a halt to NATO expansion is not divisible. Expansion stops. Period. Or there will be “dire consequences.”

Western orientated Russian intellectuals at the Russian International Affairs Council are already at work undermining the Kremlin’s position on the non-expansion of NATO. The mission of the Council is to facilitate Russia’s peaceful integration into the global community, something that can only happen on Washington’s terms.

The Council’s director, Andrei Kortunov, quickly undermined the Kremlin’s position by describing the Kremlin’s ultimatum as “a bargaining position.” Washington already doesn’t take the Kremlin seriously, and Kortunov’s idiotic statement makes it certain Washington will dismiss the ultimatum as well. Indeed, as I reported, NATO’s Stoltenberg, the White House press spokesperson, and Biden’s national security adviser have already dismissed the Kremlin’s demand.

To make certain that the Kremlin understands that its demand is rejected, General Tod Wolters wants an even more aggressive response to the Kremlin. He is calling for NATO/US troops to be deployed in Romania and Bulgaria. Called Enhanced Forward Presence it amounts to the US military occupation of Eastern Europe–the exact opposite of the response demanded by Russia.

Perhaps the Kremlin is learning, belatedly, that years of sweet-talking the West created the expectation that Russian complaints never have to be taken seriously. As I warned, the Kremlin’s behavior encouraged more provocations, which eventually would go too far and force the Kremlin to put a foot down.

With the CIA misrepresenting the Kremlin’s expression of a non-negotiable security concern as a plot to rebuild the Soviet Empire and the Russian International Affairs Council describing the Kremlin’s red line as just a bargaining position, we will see if the foot stays down or whether the Kremlin blows forever its credibility.

In the UK, after Government manipulation of hospitalisations and deaths to exclude more recent data, the truth is now emerging. In Scotland for August to November 2021 over 85% of deaths were in the vaccinated. Boosters are merely boosting COVID infections. Some 40,000 deaths have occurred in the USA, UK and EU following vaccination but Omicron is mild. The UK Government has manipulated the data to blame the unvaccinated but the vaccinated are at greatest risk.

It was clear from the first cases in South Africa and now in the UK and EU that the new Omicron variant of the coronavirus results in mild disease and very few deaths even “with COVID”. Indeed South African experts have advised stopping stop and trace and quarantining because most of the infected have no symptoms.

Considering the thousands of deaths and millions of injuries worldwide caused by the COVID vaccines there is very little difference between the decline in deaths between the least and most vaccinated countries.

LEAST VACCINATED COUNTRIES:

(Average vaccination rate 21%)

Decline of deaths from most recent peak:

Tanzania    100%

Nigeria         98%

Ethiopia       89%

Kenya          91%

Egypt           36%

S. Africa       92%

Pakistan      95%

Russia         18%

Average decline in deaths for 8 least vaccinated countries: 77%

MOST VACCINATED COUNTRIES

(Average vaccination rate 88%)

Decline of deaths from most recent peak:

UAE              90%

Cuba             98%

Chile             89%

Portugal        91%

Singapore     83%

Cambodia     94%

S. Korea       17%

Canada         98%

Average decline in deaths for 8 most vaccinated countries: 82%

If we take the 3 least vaccinated countries their decline in deaths from the recent peak averaged 95% whereas the three most vaccinated achieved 92%

With a vaccination rate 4 times the least vaccinated countries the 8 most vaccinated countries produce a mere 5% better decline in deaths from their recent peaks. A paltry return for vaccines which have caused nearly 2,000 deaths in the UK, 9,000 in the USA and 31,000 in the EU.

Even the Lancet has shown the vaccines do not work – as the third jab and talk of a fourth testify. To quote from the Lancet study:

“In the UK it was found that secondary attack rates among household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases was similar to household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (25% for vaccinated and 23% for unvaccinated)”

VACCINATED AT GREATEST RISK OF DEATH

In the UK, after Government manipulation of hospitalisations and deaths to exclude more  recent data, the truth is now emerging. In this graph from Scotland for August to November  2021 over 85% of deaths are in the vaccinated. 

An exposure of how the Government has manipulated the data to blame the unvaccinated appears here: It turns out that the source of the statement “Of the Covid patients treated in intensive care in recent months, the majority – nearly 75 per cent according to the latest data – have chosen not to be vaccinated.” was data from May to July. The data  above (from Scotland from August to November) suggests the exact opposite.

More evidence of the failure of vaccines in the face of new infections comes from the USA where one of the largest US outbreaks of the new Omicron variant to date is believed to have occurred at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, where almost all 930 cases over the past week are believed to be of the variant.

All of the confirmed Omicron cases in the Cornell University case are among people who are fully vaccinated, and some of them are in people who’ve also had the booster. 

The booster is of course more of the same in the hope that the third dose will do what the first two doses were supposed to do! And the new variant, “omicron”?

Most of the Omicron cases in the United States have been among the vaccinated, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said in an update on Friday 10/12/21. Most patients have experienced mild symptoms.

OMICRON IS WEAK

Indeed it was clear from the first cases in South Africa that the new Omicron variant of the coronavirus results in mild disease, without prominent symptoms and it:

“presents mild disease with symptoms being sore muscles and tiredness for a day or two not feeling well. So far, we have detected that those infected do not suffer loss of taste or smell. They might have a slight cough. There are no prominent symptoms. Of those infected some are currently being treated at home”

– as Angelique Coetzee, the chairwoman of the South African Medical Association described it. Indeed the case fatality rate in S Africa – deaths as a proportion of cases 10 days earlier – was at the lowest level since covid started.

In the UK a mere 12 deaths have been “with” Omicron – in other words not death “from” Omicron!

The World Health Organization’s weekly epidemiological update for Dec. 7 showed that all 212 Omicron cases documented across eighteen European Union (EU) countries were either mild or asymptomatic.

Everywhere the Omicron variant seems to be supplanting the Delta variant but with much milder symptoms so that as the South African doctor Omar Hamada said the Omicron variant of COVID-19 may provide natural immunity without inducing severe illness, as the symptoms so far resemble more of a “mild, common cold” in South Africa.

“If the infectivity is greater, but the virulence or severity is less, this may be actually something good in terms of getting people immune to it without necessarily having to depend on a vaccine that’s not incredibly effective,” said Hamada.

BOOSTERS

The boosters being touted by Governments are controversial among experts. “The boosters are a perfect way to bias our immune system so we’re LESS able to respond to this new variant,” said Dr Robert Malone the inventor of the mRNA vaccine.

“This is [like] jabbing everybody with a flu vaccine from three seasons ago and expecting it to have effects against the current [flu strains].”

A top World Health Organization (WHO) official said there was “no evidence” to suggest that the vaccine booster doses would offer “greater protection” to healthy people. Dr. Mike Ryan, the WHO’s emergency director, questioned the logic of some countries trying to produce more booster doses to vaccinate anyone aged 18 and older.

“Right now, there is no evidence that I’m aware of that would suggest that boosting the entire population is going to necessarily provide any greater protection for otherwise healthy individuals against hospitalisation and death,” Ryan said.

France has even banned the Moderna booster.

UK BOOSTERS BOOST INFECTIONS

On 1st October when the Boosters started in the UK 153,912 were vaccinated. On 18th December there were 904,598 vaccinated an increase of 487%

New Infections on 1st October were 34,752 while on 18th December there were 90,109 new infections – an increase of 159%.Since there is a delay between vaccination and infection it is probable that that percentage increase in infections will catch up with the prior increase in vaccinations. And that further increase will lead the politician to call for more vaccinations and ruinous lockdowns!! which will in turn lead to more infections and so on ad absurdum and ad infinitum.

worldindata.org compared the European countries which had given boosters with those countries that had not and found that the infections gap between them was growing – from 19% more infections for the Booster countries to 21%.

It is quite clear that (as in previous periods of vaccine increases) there has been a consequent increase in COVID infections. This is a world wide pattern since vaccination programmes started. The excuse (if there is one at all given the horrendous numbers of deaths) was that those who fell ill were not so seriously ill as those who were unvaccinated. But that too we now know (see above) is rubbish.

The terrible toll of deaths and serious injuries among nurses, doctors, airline pilots and sportsmen around the world is unprecedented for any vaccine, never mind one which has proved so useless in preventing infections, infectiousness and deaths. The next Freenations post will deal with those deadly consequences.

The Democrats have held the presidency and a majority of both houses of Congress for only eleven months, but they have already put their stamp on the transformation of the United States from top to bottom. In reaction to those cascading accusations of “domestic terrorism,” many Americans are beginning to believe that the country is literally coming apart, with little in the way of a binding national spirit or sense of purpose. And the heavy hand that is being wielded to impose a revolution in areas like education and health mandates raises concerns that much worse is to come over the next three years.

That the country is in deep trouble is a view that I have come to share and each morning has become a chore to get up out of bed and scan through the news service headlines that had accumulated since the night before. I sometimes notice that there is more space given to reviews of television shows, the doings of “celebrities,” and sporting events than to the more serious issues that confront the American people. One might suspect that most readers don’t really care about the state of the nation, but I rather think that what we are seeing is a deliberate and all-encompassing media driven propaganda campaign designed to deliver bread and circuses while also reducing the choices that people are able to make in many of the aspects of their daily lives.

Three weeks ago there was an article featured in The New York Times, which is, of course, one of the worst and most persistent of the national libtard media, which headlined “A Pollster’s Warning to Democrats: ‘We Have a Problem’: Focus groups with Virginia voters led to a bluntly worded memo on what Democrats need to do going into the midterms.” The article begins with “Brian Stryker, a Democratic pollster, didn’t work for Terry McAuliffe’s campaign in the Virginia governor’s race. But Mr. McAuliffe’s narrow defeat in a liberal-leaning state alarmed him and most every Democratic political professional.”

Stryker was subsequently commissioned to do polling and prepare a no-holds-barred memo on what went wrong. “The [poll’s] participants hailed from the suburbs of Washington and Richmond and had the same political profile: Each supported Mr. Biden in 2020, and either voted for Mr. Youngkin in November or strongly considered supporting him.” The Times article consists mostly of an interview by the newspaper on the points made in the memo.

I confess that I read the entire article, a rare achievement with the NYT, and then sat back to have a good laugh. I was, after all, an actual Virginia voter involved in the campaign to defeat McAuliffe due largely to his “anti-parent involvement in education” beliefs as well as his close ties to the Clintons. I noted immediately that the polls undertaken by Stryker were focused on the limousine liberal voters in northern Virginia and around the capital Richmond. Those are not necessarily the voters who turned Virginia blue and their ability to send their children to private schools made education less of an issue than it was for ordinary working people who had to rely on the public system. So the responses were, one might suggest, skewed.

Most Virginians I know who voted against McAuliffe did so for a whole basket of issues relating to the Democrats punishing the white working and middle classes and disadvantaging their children because of their skin color. They were also responding to surging homicides and unpunished looting, arson and rioting nationally, which has been linked to the Democrats opportunistic support of the BLM phenomenon generated behavior. People in Virginia in general no longer feel safe on the streets of their towns and even in the schools because of the Democratic Party tendency to pander to the various constituencies harboring grievances that it has embraced. Note particularly one question from the NYT journalist to Stryker and the response:

“Q: What drives this perception that Democrats are fixated on cultural issues?

A: We probably haven’t been as focused on the economy as we should be. I think some of that is voters reading us talking about things that aren’t economic issues. Part of it is just a natural reaction, too: We’re in an economy they feel is tough. It’s hard for them to think we’ve solved problems when they see so many.”

Stryker not so skillfully dodges the question because the problem is that the Democratic Party is indeed “fixated on cultural issues,” which is why they are willing to turn public education into a “feel good waste of time” that many parents loathe and the taxpayer/homeowner is required to fund. McAuliffe lost the election when he declared that parents should not interfere in the education of their children and that there are too many school teachers who are white. Nevertheless, it is odd that Stryker was seemingly unable to figure out that it was not the economy that drove voters to reject McAuliffe, that citing the economy is the equivalent of no answer at all. Just maybe he was talking to the wrong people.

One can only hope that the Democrats are heading for a fall in 2022, but the punditry that makes its living off of the mainstream media is persisting in its attacks. Another recent article is by Max Boot, a ramshackle neocon of no particular distinction who wears a funny hat to distinguish himself from the other odd-looking neocons. Characteristically Jewish and born in Russia, he has inevitably exploited the usual networking to find a home as an opinion contributor at the extreme liberal Washington Post though he sometimes pretends to be a conservative. His article is entitled “Democrats are on course to lose in 2022 and 2024. If they do, we may lose our democracy.”

Boot is concerned because opinion polls show that Joe Biden and his party are seen increasingly unfavorably while the Republicans are gaining support. He describes the GOP as “extremist and authoritarian” but to give him some credit for being more alert to real issues than Stryker he observes that the Democrats are suffering from “progressive overreach” recounting how “[He] recently visited [his] alma mater, the University of California at Berkeley, and got an earful from friends about the excesses of ‘cancel culture,’ the unwillingness of many progressives to confront crime and homelessness, and, above all, all the damage done by Zoom classes and mask requirements for young children. These are complaints from liberals in one of the most progressive cities in the United States. Democrats are living in a dreamland if they continue to dismiss such worries as phony Republican attacks. Similar concerns cost Democrats in New Jersey and Virginia — and could haunt them again next year… [Biden]needs to attack the far-left activists who want to defund the police, boycott Israel and divide Americans by race.”

But Boot still is blind to what is happening to America fueled by the party that he clearly prefers. It is the Democrats who have introduced the COVID vax mandate; who opened up the southern border to unlimited illegal immigration; who promote racial and ethnic preferences; who continue to saber rattle against Iran, Russia and China; who refuse to arrest and try the rioters, looters and arsonists in America’s cities; who seek to restrict free speech and freedom of association; who continue the persecution of journalist Julian Assange; and who are going after ordinary Americans who protest against the destruction of the schools as “domestic terrorists.” If Max Boot really wants to know who has totalitarian tendencies and is threatening democracy in the United States all he has to do is turn around and look at his Democratic Party friends. And when he figures it out, he can explain it all to Brian Stryker.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Recent research from Israel gives some impressive data.  For simplicity and a fair comparison, we look at data for 6 to 8 months after the event; in other words, the event being getting COVID infection and natural immunity or getting vaccination.

Here are the numbers in terms of confirmed infection rate per 100,000 risk days.  The reason the researchers used ‘risk days’, rather than just ‘people’, is that the composition of each group changed over time.  For example, some previously infected people chose to get vaccinated.

Here are the key data:

1. recovered from infection:  14

2. vaccinated and booster:  89

3. hybrid (natural immunity plus vaccination):  17

The point here is that the infections rate is much higher for vaccination and booster versus natural immunity from prior infection; in fact, it is more than six times greater.  And even getting vaccination when having natural immunity adds a little higher infection rate.

Only one big scientific conclusion: Vaccination increases COVID infection and natural immunity is far more protective.  You lose a little protection when you get vaccinated on top of having natural immunity, and that is not counting the many possible harmful health impacts of vaccines that can occur soon or much later than when you get the shots.

Every day all I hear about are all kinds of people, including many high level politicians like governors and senators getting COVID despite being vaccinated and also having received booster shots. Don’t reasonable, intelligent people say to themselves “than why in the hell is the government still pushing vaccines?” Now we also are hearing that omicron variant is becoming dominant. But the vaccines were not working when delta was the dominant variant. I guess the vaccines may be even more ineffective for the highly mutated omicron. Yet we still cannot get the government to sanction use of ivermectin and other treatments that a relatively few doctors are using with great success.

The real science data shows vaccines do not work and for many people they produce all kinds of bad health impacts. Who do you want to trust?

*

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

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Just like when U.S. President John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s American Government, during the 1962 Cuban Crisis, warned that Soviet missiles in Cuba would mean World War 3, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin’s Russian Government warned, on 20 December 2021, that if its adjoining nation of Ukraine becomes a NATO member (which would present the danger of U.S. missiles only a 7-minute flight-time away from Moscow), it would mean WW3.

Soviet communism is gone, the Soviet dictatorship is gone, the Soviet response to NATO, the Warsaw Pact, is gone; but America and its allies have continued the Cold War against Russia; and, now, finally (after decades of NATO expansion right up to Russia’s borders), Russia has laid down the gauntlet to them, just as America had laid down the gauntlet to the Soviet Union and its allies, in 1962, regarding Cuba.

Russia’s RT News bannered on December 20th, “Russia promises ‘military response’ to any further NATO expansion”. Of course, any “military response” would be against NATO — all of it — and probably within less than an hour, most people on both sides of that nuclear war would be either dead or doomed soon to die — and even throughout the world there would be billions of deaths.

No military conflict between Russia and America (and its ‘allies’ or vassal-nations) would be able to remain non-nuclear, because whichever side would be losing any non-nuclear war would promptly release all of its nuclear stockpile against the other, and so the nuclear exchanges would become a part of any U.S.-v.-Russia war.

The reader-comments at that news-report were informative, especially if a reader there clicks onto “Best” so as to be reading first the most “like”ed of the reader-comments (and this means that the most representative of all of the comments are being posted at the top). Here they are:

COMMENTS — “BEST” (the top-listed ones)

TheFishhv2

About time. NATO expansion must stop, because NATO’s intentions are not good. This organization has done a lot of damage in the last 25 years, and it must be reigned in.

Sun Tzu  TheFishhv2

NATO is a defense organization pal, they never attacked anyone!

1Beak1  Sun Tzu

How true as they were in Libya, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Colombia – What a wretched Liar.

LaCarreta  Sun Tzu

NATO in its 72 years of existence never defended a single member state only attacked, bombed, invaded a number of foreign nations.

On May 7, 1999, during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (Operation Allied Force), five U.S. Joint Direct Attack Munition guided bombs hit the People’s Republic of China embassy in the Belgrade district of New Belgrade, killing three Chinese journalists and outraging the Chinese public.

NWOD  Sun Tzu

LOL, NATO is an aggressive imperialist enterprise. It has NEVER acted defensively – name a time it has – and every single war, battle, sabotage, and threat it has engaged in has been aggressive, unlawful and evil.

TheCruXx  Sun Tzu

And how can you explain it to the world, that NATO was in several wars, when NO ONE ATTACKED THEM, OR ANYONE OF THEM. Kinda odd for a defense club…

LeftForward  Sun Tzu

The best defense?

Libertarian4Eva  TheFishhv2

When Russia is done with eastern Europe, think they’d mind coming to our US southern border? It’s not like it is defended at all, anyone can get through, and frankly the Russian troops would be good business for Texas. Considering our true enemy is in Washington DC, I think it would be a good breath of fresh air to have the visitors.

ELPuerco

One should keep in mind that during the 1990 negotiations between the Soviet Union and the US-led Western “bloc” over the issue of German reunification (the so-called fall of the German wall), the Western side promised that NATO would not expand itself into Eastern Europe. And yet, expand it did – and it has been expanding, and getting very close to Russia. To this day, Washington maintains a policy of “encircling” and “containing” Moscow. In fact, declassified documents that became public in 2017 show us that between 1990 and 1991, security assurances against any such NATO enlargement were given to Soviet authorities by western leaders of the highest level. This 1990 promise was broken, which makes Russia the aggrieved party – and not the other way around, as US narratives would have it. Basically, the so-called Iron Curtain fell, while its western counterpart (NATO) has grown larger and stronger – even though the Cold War supposedly ended. And that brings us to the current crisis.

*

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.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Featured image is from Donbass Insider

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102
Print Edition: $10.25 (+ shipping and handling)
PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Fool me once, shame on the trickster for resorting to trickery. Fool me twice, shame on me. When someone has earned the reputation of a trickster, one ought to be very skeptical of that trickster. Thus, to be fooled twice by the same trickster brings shame on the gullible person.

The United States has been duping the gullible among its citizenry and also gullible people in the world for quite a while. Near the end of WWII, there was the lie that the US had to drop nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to get Japan to surrender. There was the American deception surrounding the Gulf of Tonkin incident that served as a pretext to deepen American militarism in Viet Nam. There was the twisting of facts about Iraq’s possessing weapons of mass destruction that resulted in over a million Iraqis being killed, the country’s infrastructure being destroyed, and Iraq being occupied by US military to this day. The US lied to USSR/Russia about no eastward NATO expansion; the US lied about Syria using chemical weapons. Why would anyone continue to believe the word of a serial, unrepentant liar?

Nowadays, the US barks that Russia is about to invade Ukraine. Then there is the allegation that China is committing genocide against Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Considering the US involvement in the oppression and killing of Palestinians, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, and Iranians — the notion that the US would shed a tear for Muslims is sadly risible.

Scads of disinformation have been revealed about a purported genocide of Uyghurs.

With the outrageous claims against China dismissed as flimsy artifices, the US seized upon an interpersonal altercation: an alleged sexual assault of a Chinese female tennis player by a retired former high-ranking Communist Party official.

There was a deleted post on Weibo, a Chinese social media site, by the player, Peng Shuai. The post purportedly contained the allegation of sexual assault. Then she became a meme: #Where is Peng Shuai. Western media implied the Chinese state had deleted the post, scrubbed the net of references, and disappeared Peng.

I wrote an article with the commonsense title “Jumping to China-bashing Conclusions: Due process calls demands waiting for the facts.” In any justice-based system, people must not be tried in media; they must be tried in a functioning court of law by a preponderance of the evidence. That is why one must scrutinize the information and evidence before jumping to conclusions.

Yet, the WTA, a professional body overseeing professional women’s tennis, had already deemed China to be guilty by suspending its tournaments in that country.

Recently, on 19 December, Peng was approached by a reporter from the Singaporean Chinese-language newspaper Lianhe Zaobao. Peng looks genuinely surprised by the encounter, like a deer in the headlights, but knowing that she has to get this over with. (See the interview here.)

Peng emphatically states, “First, I would like to emphasize a very important point: I have never said nor written about anyone sexually assaulting me. This point must be very clearly emphasized.”

Whether a post on social media is a personal matter or not, people can debate, but Peng maintains it is. Peng also affirmed that an earlier email to the WTA denying a sexual assault was hers.

Unanswered in the interview was why the wording in the Weibo post seems to allege a sexual assault.

The WTA remains unsatisfied. It issued a statement: “We remain steadfast in our call for a full, fair and transparent investigation, without censorship, into her allegation of sexual assault, which is the issue that gave rise to our initial concern.” The tennis body headquartered in the US is, in effect, demanding that a powerful country of 1.4 billion people with a 5000-year history should submit a domestic crime allegation to its dictate. This demand presented to a country that rues its century of humiliation by outside powers will curry as much influence as an ant to a hungry aardvark.

Peng said she has no travel plans now. It seems the WTA ought to do its due diligence and visit Peng in China.

Not too quickly though, as Sinophobes in the West see a need to keep the heat turned up to try and spoil the Beijing Winter Olympics.

Talk about being a bad sport.

*

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 can be emailed at: kimohp@gmail. Twitter: @kimpetersen. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Stars and Stripes

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102
Print Edition: $10.25 (+ shipping and handling)
PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

All Global Research articles 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.

***

In mainstream culture, social and political violence by the poor depicted in cinema is generally situated in narratives that try to maintain the legitimacy of the state. Consequently it also tries to delegitimize violence that may threaten the state.  For example, the recent Mexican-French film New Order (2020) depicts the street violence and demonstrations of the poor as mindless violence, murder, and robbery, rather than as an inevitable reaction to decades of extreme poverty and oppression.

In these scenarios, the indigent, the poor, the working class, have no rational program, no ideological agenda, and no democratic future where they could be in the driving seat of economic and cultural progress. They are forever condemned to explosive, cathartic and senseless cyclical violence that is then simply stage-managed by the state through its courts, police, army and prisons. It could be argued that the main reason for these depictions of the poor is that mainstream culture is itself one of the tools used in the maintenance of that status quo.

Arracht Trailer on youtube.com:

Two recent Irish films, Arracht (‘Monster’) (2019) and Herself (2020), depict violence in very different eras. Arracht is based in Connemara in the middle of the nineteenth century, while Herself is set in a modern urban setting in Dublin. On another level, both films show how violence is allowed to be depicted in mainstream cinema.

Arracht, for example, is a well made film with much work gone into the authenticity of the depiction of the potato blight and the subsequent desperation of the local inhabitants. The narrative centres on Colmán Sharkey who lives on the Atlantic coast with his wife and young son. Colmán has taken on Patsy Kelly as a farmhand and fisherman, a dodgy character who was in the Royal Navy. The landlord has raised the rents and Colmán decides to talk to him personally, bringing Patsy with him. However,

“At the landlord’s estate, Colmán unsuccessfully tries to persuade him not to raise rents due to the famine devastating the country. Patsy wanders off where he encounters the two collection agents and the landlord’s daughter. He murders all three before being discovered by Colmán, who is shocked by what he finds and notices a frightened young girl has witnessed the scene. Patsy kills the landlord, leading to a confrontation with the Sharkey brothers in which Sean [Colmán’s brother] is fatally stabbed. Enraged, Colmán brutally beats Patsy and leaves him for dead.”

Soon these murders enter local nationalist folk culture in the form of a ballad sung by local fishermen. It is assumed that Colmán killed the landlord and he is seen as an heroic resistance fighter. However, it was shown that Colmán is not a violent person from an earlier scene when Patsy disarms an armed man sent to collect the rents, and Colmán orders Patsy to return the gun.

We know that the violence in the landlord’s house was committed by Patsy and not Colmán. In this case it is the actions of a sociopath (Patsy) which are immortalized in culture despite Colmán’s non-violent approach to resistance. There is a sleight of hand here that shows radical nationalist culture as illegitimate violence carried out by sociopaths and furthermore depicts the singers of the ballad as being ignorant of the facts of the situation, and that they are glorifying deeds that are basically portrayed as terrorism.

Given the severity of colonial oppression in Ireland in the nineteenth century, violence against the landlords or representatives of the state is unsurprising. Resistance by the peasants is delegitimized and limited to the legal and courts system, which is upholding the landlord rent increases and evictions that are exacerbating the conflict in the first place.

A similar cinematic sticking point over legitimate and illegitimate violence occurs in Neil Jordan’s film Michael Collins set during the Irish War of Independence. Jordan has the IRA explode a car bomb even though car bombs were not used until much later during the Troubles. Some critics focused in on this event as legitimating the later IRA campaign which they saw simply as modern terrorism unlike the earlier struggle for independence.

In Herself, the contemporary story of a woman (Sandra) fighting back against her violent ex-husband in the courts system, is a more positive narrative in that it shows her struggle against the structural violence of state bureaucracy. Furthermore, her tenacity in also resisting criminal violence by her ex-husband works well on both literal and symbolic levels.

While her battle against domestic violence is an uphill struggle against the prejudices of the state court system she eventually wins custody of her children. Her decision to build her own house in the back garden of the wealthy doctor she works for is an interesting twist in that her desire to be free and independent is determined by middle class power and control. However, her determination to create something for herself is significant as the learning processes involved in building a house counters modern consumerist ideology with the practical knowledge of production.

Furthermore, Sandra organizes a team to help her build the house, working for free, which harks back to an old Irish social tradition of a meitheal (where neighbours would come together to assist in the saving of crops or other tasks).

Unfortunately, the finished house is then burned down by her ex-husband in a criminal act of revenge. Yet this does not deter her (or her friends) from starting afresh. Thus the film carries a positive message that one can win out through struggle within the system, but also symbolically without the system, with the collective help of others despite enormous setbacks and challenges.

Herself Official Trailer on youtube.com

Despite the fact that the legitimacy of the state is maintained in Herself (winning custody of her children through the courts, her husband being caught and put away for years), the message of struggle, learning, and co-operation towards a common goal is quite subversive. She learns not only how to fight the system but also how to construct a new way of being within the system which has profound possibilities for the future (learning new skills, working collectively, solidarity, etc.).

A similar situation can be seen in The Wind that Shakes the Barley (2006), a film by Ken Loach set during the Irish War of Independence (1919–1921) and the Irish Civil War (1922–1923), wherein the First Dáil  sets up a parallel court system to the colonial institutions, which not only became accepted and recognized by the local people (de facto) but were eventually to become de jure with the setting up of the new Irish state.

However, whether the message is conservative (Arracht) or progressive (Herself), it is usually oblique, as overtly radical content rarely gets screened. Cinema is an extremely costly business, and screenplay and finished film decisions are made by wealthy and conservative producers. Yet, every now and then films depicting working class life and struggles are produced which are significant, for example, Salt of the Earth (1954), The Organizer (1963) (Italian), The Battle of Algiers (1966)(Italian-Algerian), Blue Collar (1978) (USA), Norma Rae (1979) (USA), Vera Drake (2004) (UK), I, Daniel Blake (2016) (UK).

All Global Research articles 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.

***

All Global Research articles 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.

***

“Worse Than the Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” by Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and Dr. Greg Nigh, is one of the most comprehensive descriptions of the many possible unintended consequences of the mRNA gene transfer technologies incorrectly referred to as “COVID vaccines”

As of December 3, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has logged 19,886 COVID jab related deaths. Pfizer — the only company that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted full licensing for an as-yet unavailable COVID shot — accounts for 13,268 of them

Calculations suggest VAERS COVID-related reports are underreported by a factor of 41. That means that in the U.S. alone, the actual death toll may be closer to 374,576. Including international deaths reported to VAERS would put the death toll at 815,326

Key side effects that are now being reported in massive numbers include miscarriages, heart attacks, myopericarditis, thrombocytopenia (low platelet count), shingles, Bell’s palsy and a variety of permanent disabilities, many of which involve neurological dysfunction

The side effects we now see being reported were entirely predictable based on the known science detailed in Seneff’s and Nigh’s paper

*

MIT scientist Stephanie Seneff’s paper,¹ “Worse Than the Disease: Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19,” published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research in collaboration with Dr. Greg Nigh, is still one of the best, most comprehensive descriptions of the many possible unintended consequences of the mRNA gene transfer technologies incorrectly referred to as “COVID vaccines.”

December 9, 2021, their paper was reprinted in the Townsend Letter, the Examiner of Alternative Medicine.² Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT who has been conducting research at MIT for over five decades, has spent a large portion of her career investigating the hazards and mechanisms of action of glyphosate.

Her attention was diverted to the science of mRNA gene transfer technologies in early 2020, when Operation Warp Speed was announced. As noted in her paper, many factors that lacked precedent, yet were being implemented at breakneck speed, included:

1. The first-ever use of PEG in an injection
2. The first-ever use of mRNA gene transfer technology against an infectious agent
3. The first-ever “vaccine” to make no clear claims about reducing infection, transmissibility or death
4. The first-ever coronavirus vaccine ever tested on humans (and previous coronavirus vaccines all failed due to antibody-dependent enhancement, a condition in which the antibodies actually facilitate infection rather than defend against it)
5. The first-ever use of genetically modified polynucleotides in the general population

An Insanely Reckless Process

In a May 2021 interview with me, Seneff said:

“To have developed this incredibly new technology so quickly, and to skip so many steps in the process of evaluating [its safety], it’s an insanely reckless thing that they’ve done. My instinct was that this is bad, and I needed to know [the truth].

So, I really dug into the research literature by the people who’ve developed these vaccines, and then more extensive research literature around those topics. And I don’t see how these vaccines can possibly be doing anything good …”

At the time, just five months into the mass inoculation campaign, Seneff suspected the COVID shots would end up killing far more people than the infection itself. Today, a full year into it, the statistics are grim beyond belief, proving her educated prediction to have been an astute one.

mRNA Jabs Are Shockingly Hazardous

As of December 3, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has logged an astounding 927,738 COVID jab related adverse events, including 19,886 deaths.³ VAERS can receive reports from vaccine manufacturers and other international sources, and if we exclude those, the death toll reported in U.S. territories exclusively stands at 9,136.⁴

Of the total death reports, Pfizer — the only company that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted full licensing for an as-yet unavailable COVID shot — accounts for the vast majority: 13,268, compared to 4,894 for Moderna, 1,651 for Janssen and 73 for an undisclosed brand.

Pfizer also accounts for the vast majority of hospitalizations post-injection, and while those over the age of 66 make up the bulk of deaths, the 25-to-50 age group accounts for most of the hospitalizations. Key side effects that are now being reported in massive numbers include:⁵

All of these consequences were predicted by Seneff and Nigh in their paper, which makes the events all the more tragic. Importantly, VAERS is notoriously underreported, so the real-world impact of these shots is far greater than what those data suggest.

Calculations⁶ performed by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, and his team of statisticians suggest VAERS COVID-related reports are underreported by a factor of 41. This is a conservative estimate, supported by calculations using a variety of sources besides VAERS itself.

That means that in the U.S. alone (using the data for U.S. territories only), the actual death toll may be closer to 374,576 (including international deaths reported to VAERS would put the death toll at 815,326), and those are deaths that occurred within days or weeks post-injection.

As Seneff and Nigh explain in their paper, there’s overwhelming reason to suspect that these gene transfer injections will have devastating impacts in the long term, resulting in excess deaths over the next decade.

What’s more, it’s clear that the death toll from the COVID-19 infection itself in the U.S. has been vastly exaggerated, as it’s based on positive PCR tests and even mere suspicion of COVID in the absence of testing. Many died from other causes and just happened to have a positive COVID test at the time of death.

Kirsch estimates the real death tally from COVID-19 to be about 50% of the reported number (which is likely conservative). This means about 380,000 Americans died from COVID-19 (rather than with COVID), whereas the COVID shots may have killed more than 374,570 in the first 11 months alone.

As predicted in the title of Seneff’s paper, it seems the cure may indeed end up being worse than the disease. This is particularly true for children and young adults, who have either died or been permanently disabled by the shots by the thousands, while having an extraordinarily low risk of dying from or being seriously harmed by the infection itself.

Seneff suspects that in the next 10 to 15 years, we’ll see a dramatic spike in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, and blood disorders such as blood clots, hemorrhaging, stroke and heart failure.

The Spike Protein Is the Most Dangerous Part of SARS-CoV-2

The reason we’re seeing all these problems from the COVID shots is because they program your cells to continuously produce SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which we now know is the most dangerous part of the virus. Many experts noted this from the start, wondering what the vaccine developers could possibly be thinking, selecting this as the antigen for their shots.

While the mRNA injections can cause harm in many different ways, one basic problem is that they can overstimulate your immune system to the point of failure. In summary, as your cells start producing the viral spike proteins, your immune cells rally to mop up the proteins and dump them into your lymphatic system. (This is why many report swollen lymph nodes under the arms.)

The antibody response is part of your humoral immunity. You also have cellular immunity, which is part of your innate immune system. Your innate immune system is very powerful. If you’re healthy, it can clear viruses without ever producing a single antibody. Antibodies are actually a second-tier effect when your innate immune system fails.

The problem is that your innate immune system will not be activated and likely will fail to protect you if you get a COVID-19 shot, because it’s bypassing all of the areas where your innate immune system would be brought to bear.

Normally you breathe the virus in and stimulate the production secretory IgA antibodies that protect your respiratory system. When you bypass that route of exposure with a jab in the arm, no secretory IgA antibodies are produced, leaving you susceptible to the infection.

As explained by Ronald Kostoff in an excellent December 8, 2021, Trial Site News article, “COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’: The Wrong Bomb Over the Wrong Target at the Wrong Time”:⁷

“An effective vaccine would focus on cellular immunity in the respiratory and intestinal tract, in which secretory IgA is produced by your lymphocytes that are located directly underneath the mucous membranes that line the respiratory and intestinal tract.

The antibodies produced by these lymphocytes are ejected through and to the surface of the linings. These antibodies are thus on site to meet air-borne viruses and they may be able to prevent viral binding and infection of the cells.

Unfortunately, the main inoculants used presently for COVID-19 focus on antibodies (IgG and circulating IgA) that occur in the bloodstream. These antibodies protect the internal organs of the body from infectious agents that try to spread via the bloodstream.”

When you are injected with the COVID jab, your body will only induce IgG and circulating IgA — not secretory IgA, and these types of antibodies do not effectively protect your mucous membranes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. So, as noted by Kostoff, the breakthrough infections we’re now seeing “confirm the fundamental design flaws” of this gene transfer technology.

“A natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 (coronavirus) will in most individuals remain localized to the respiratory tract,” Kostoff writes.⁸ “The vaccines used presently cause cells deep inside our body to express the viral spike protein, which they were never meant to do by nature.

Any cell which expresses this foreign antigen on its surface will come under attack by the immune system, which will involve both IgG antibodies and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes. This may occur in any organ, but the damage will be most severe in vital organs.

We are seeing now that the heart is affected in many young people, leading to myocarditis or even sudden cardiac arrest and death. In other words, we are dropping the wrong bomb on the wrong target at the wrong time!”

In the end, your body will essentially believe that your innate immune system has failed, which means it must bring in the backup cavalry. In essence, your body is now overreacting to something that isn’t true. You’re not actually infected with a virus and your innate immune system has not failed, but your body is forced to respond as if both are true.

Effects Likely to Persist Long Term

What’s more, the synthetic RNA in the mRNA vaccines contains a nucleotide called methyl-pseudouridine, which your body cannot break down, and the RNA is programmed to trigger maximum protein production. So, we’re looking at completely untested manipulation of RNA.

It is very important to recognize that this is a genetically engineered mRNA for the spike protein. It is not identical to the spike protein mRNA that SARS-Cov-2 produces. It’s been significantly altered to avoid being metabolized by your body.

The spike protein your body produces in response to the COVID-19 vaccine mRNA locks into your ACE2 receptor. This is because the genetically engineered new spike protein has additional prolines inserted that prevent the receptors from properly closing, which then cause you to downregulate ACE2. That’s partially how you end up with problems such as pulmonary hypertension, ventricular heart failure and stroke.^9,10

As noted in a 2020 paper,¹¹ there’s a “pivotal link” between ACE2 deficiency and SARS-CoV-2 infection. People with ACE2 deficiency tend to be more prone to severe COVID-19. The spike protein suppresses ACE2,¹² making the deficiency even worse. According to Seneff, the gene transfer injections essentially do the same thing, and we still don’t know how long the effects last.

Manufacturers initially guessed the synthetic RNA might survive in the human body for about six months. A more recent investigation found the spike protein persisted in recovered COVID patients for 15 months.¹³

This raises the suspicion that the synthetic and more persistent mRNA in the COVID shots may trigger spike protein production for at least as long, and probably longer.¹⁴ What’s more, the number of spike proteins produced by the shots is far greater than what you experience in natural infection.

As explained by Dr. Peter McCullough,¹⁵ this means that after your first shot, your body will produce spike protein for at least 15 months. But, when you get shot No. 2 a few weeks later, that shot will cause spike protein production to go on for 15 months or longer. With shot No. 3 six months after that, you produce spike protein for yet another 15 months.

With regular boosters, you may never rid your body of the spike protein. All the while, it’s wreaking havoc with your biology. McCullough likens it to “a permanent install of an inflammatory protein in the human body,” and inflammation is at the heart of most if not all chronic diseases. There’s simply no possible way for these gene transfer shots to improve public health. They’re going to decimate it.

Long-Term Neurological Damage Is To Be Expected

In her paper,¹⁶ Seneff describes several key characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that suggests it acts as a prion. This could help explain why we’re seeing so many neurological side effects from the shots. According to Seneff, the spike protein produced by the COVID shot, due to the modifications made, may actually make it more of a prion than the spike protein in the actual virus, and a more effective one.

For a detailed technical description of this you can read through Seneff’s paper, but the take-home message is that COVID-19 shots are instruction sets for your body to make a toxic protein that will eventually wind up concentrated in your spleen, from where prion-like protein instructions will be sent out, radically increasing your risk of developing neurodegenerative diseases.

Lung, Heart and Brain Diseases Are Predictable Consequences

Seneff also goes into great detail describing how the spike protein acts as a metabolic poison. While I recommend reading Seneff’s paper in its entirety, I’ve extracted some key sections below, starting with how the spike protein can trigger pathological damage leading to lung damage and heart and brain diseases:¹⁷

“The picture is now emerging that SARS-CoV-2 has serious effects on the vasculature in multiple organs, including the brain vasculature … In a series of papers, Yuichiro Suzuki in collaboration with other authors presented a strong argument that the spike protein by itself can cause a signaling response in the vasculature with potentially widespread consequences.

These authors observed that, in severe cases of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 causes significant morphological changes to the pulmonary vasculature … Furthermore, they showed that exposure of cultured human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit was sufficient to promote cell signaling without the rest of the virus components.

Follow-on papers showed that the spike protein S1 subunit suppresses ACE2, causing a condition resembling pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), a severe lung disease with very high mortality … The ‘in vivo studies’ they referred to … had shown that SARS coronavirus-induced lung injury was primarily due to inhibition of ACE2 by the SARS-CoV spike protein, causing a large increase in angiotensin-II.

Suzuki et al. (2021) went on to demonstrate experimentally that the S1 component of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, at a low concentration … activated the MEK/ERK/MAPK signaling pathway to promote cell growth. They speculated that these effects would not be restricted to the lung vasculature.

The signaling cascade triggered in the heart vasculature would cause coronary artery disease, and activation in the brain could lead to stroke. Systemic hypertension would also be predicted. They hypothesized that this ability of the spike protein to promote pulmonary arterial hypertension could predispose patients who recover from SARS-CoV-2 to later develop right ventricular heart failure.

Furthermore, they suggested that a similar effect could happen in response to the mRNA vaccines, and they warned of potential long-term consequences to both children and adults who received COVID-19 vaccines based on the spike protein.

An interesting study by Lei et. al. (2021) found that pseudovirus — spheres decorated with the SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein but lacking any viral DNA in their core — caused inflammation and damage in both the arteries and lungs of mice exposed intratracheally.

They then exposed healthy human endothelial cells to the same pseudovirus particles. Binding of these particles to endothelial ACE2 receptors led to mitochondrial damage and fragmentation in those endothelial cells, leading to the characteristic pathological changes in the associated tissue.

This study makes it clear that spike protein alone, unassociated with the rest of the viral genome, is sufficient to cause the endothelial damage associated with COVID-19. The implications for vaccines intended to cause cells to manufacture the spike protein are clear and are an obvious cause for concern.”

The COVID Shots Activate Latent Viruses

As mentioned earlier, shingles infection is turning out to be a rather common side effect of the COVID shot, and like the neurological, vascular and cardiac damage we’re seeing, activation of latent viral infections was also predicted.

One reason why latent viral infections are cropping up in response to the shots is because the shots disable your type I interferon pathway. A second reason is because your immune system is overburdened trying to deal with the inflammatory spike proteins flowing through your body. Something’s got to give, so latent viruses are allowed to break through.

That’s not the end of your potential troubles, however, as these coinfections may worsen or accelerate other conditions, such as Bell’s Palsy, myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome.

Herpes viruses, for example, have been implicated as a trigger of both AIDS¹⁸ and chronic fatigue syndrome.¹⁹ Some research suggests these diseases don’t appear until viruses from different families partner up and the type 1 interferon pathway is disabled.

With all of that in mind, it seems inevitable that, long term, the COVID mass injection campaign will result in an avalanche of a wide range of debilitating chronic illnesses.

*

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.

Notes

¹ International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 38-79

² Townsend Letter December 9, 2021

³ OpenVAERS data as of December 3, 2021

⁴ OpenVAERS data as of December 3, 2021. For US only data, flip the selection switch at top

⁵ OpenVAERS Adverse Event Reports Breakdown

⁶ SKirsch.io/vaccine-resources

^7, 8 Trial Site News December 8, 2021

⁹ European Heart Journal July 20, 2020: ehaa534

^10, 12 Circulation Research 2021; 128: 1323-1326

¹¹ European Journal of Internal Medicine June 2020; 76:14-20

¹³ bioRxiv June 25, 2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.25.449905

^14, 15 New American November 8, 2021 , video at circa 8 minutes

^16, 17 International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 402-444

¹⁸ Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 1996 37. Suppl B, 87-95

¹⁹ ImmunoHorizons April 1, 2020

Featured image is from TrialSiteNews

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Protests across the Western world exploded over the weekend with righteous indignation over vaccine passports and mandates, and the mainstream media responded with blatant, intentional silence.

In major cities across the Western world, tens of thousands, sometimes even hundreds of thousands in each city, marched against their government’s anti-freedom, anti-human agenda regarding COVID-19, mandatory vaccines, and the dehumanizing apartheid state the entire world seems hellbent on imposing.

These protests are so widespread that it would almost be easier to list the countries which didn’t have demonstrations rather than those that did.

Nonetheless, here are only a select number of cities that saw massive pro-freedom demonstrations, collectively constituting millions of freedom fighters:

• London, England saw an easy hundred thousand protesters come out in solidarity against vaccine mandates, wielding signs of non-compliance and demanding the government return their freedoms as they marched on Parliament.

NOW – #LondonProtest against Covid restrictions and vaccine mandates.pic.twitter.com/XHsPFz5T6T

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 18, 2021

How large was the London protest this week?

👇🏼pic.twitter.com/tlpCcOB06Z

— Aaron Ginn (@aginnt) December 20, 2021

• Paris, France, saw thousands gather in front of government buildings, raising their flags and a massive sign that reads “LIBERTE!”

NOW – Protest in #Paris against Covid restrictions and vaccine mandates.pic.twitter.com/fZueMNWKiw

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 18, 2021

For a 24th consecutive week, thousands take to the streets in cities across France to protest Macron’s draconian vaccine pass regime and the COVID tyranny spreading across Europe. The French have shown they can do this for years if need be. Paris today.pic.twitter.com/3QbJmq9xo4

— Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) December 18, 2021

As Michael Senger notes, this will be the 24th consecutive week of protests in France over the “draconian vaccine pass regime and the COVID tyranny spreading across Europe.”

• In Vienna, Austria, tens of thousands of freedom fighters tore down barricades and stormed the streets to protest lockdowns and vaccine-based segregation.

NOW – Protest in #Vienna against Covid restrictions and vaccine mandates.pic.twitter.com/tv0fKp85Us

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 18, 2021

• Those in Vienna were joined in protest by their brothers and sisters in Salzburg.

Thousands continue to take to the streets in cities all across Austria against compulsory vaccination, lockdown for the unvaccinated, and other aberrations of COVID tyranny. Salzburg today.pic.twitter.com/GsMWFt9hGK

— Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) December 19, 2021

• Tens of thousands, possibly even hundreds of thousands, of Germans rallied in Hamburg to protest the emerging state of totalitarianism that hasn’t existed in the country since WWII.

NOW – Many thousands still protesting in #Hamburg against Covid restrictions and vaccine mandates. pic.twitter.com/66Mh1irfGC

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 18, 2021

They marched day and night through the cold Fatherland to no avail and without recognition. The media remained silent.

NOW – Protest in #Hamburg against Covid restrictions and vaccine mandates.pic.twitter.com/5FA4k3XNi7

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) December 18, 2021

• Australians picked up the torch once again in Melbourne on December 17, filling the streets to oppose COVID prison camps and vaccine passports. Again, barely a mention by the mainstream media.

There is a protest on Lonsdale St and it’s massive and it’s against government overreach. #Springst #auspol #Melbourneprotest #Melbourne pic.twitter.com/moXCUe6wX8

— James Newburrie (@DifficultNerd) December 18, 2021

An amazing view of the anti-mandate protest in Australia this weekend. pic.twitter.com/vi8Z99VsXl

— Aaron Ginn (@aginnt) December 19, 2021

• Tens of thousands filled the streets of Madrid, Spain, on Sunday, demanding the return of their freedoms.

Thousands march in protest against vaccine passports and COVID tyranny in Madrid, Spain.pic.twitter.com/TapfPAP6Vv

— Michael P Senger (@MichaelPSenger) December 19, 2021

• They were joined by their countrymen in Barcelona.

How large was the anti-mandate protest this weekend in Barcelona? This big! pic.twitter.com/sWrnUFAs63

— Aaron Ginn (@aginnt) December 20, 2021

Click here to continue reading.

*

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

Manlio Dinucci delinea gli enormi pericoli che l’aggressività della Nato in Ucraina rischia di evocare. ”

C’è il rischio di una escalation determinata dall’arroganza di forze atlantiche che intendono spingersi fino ai confini della Russia”

Roger Wicker, membro da Comissão dos Serviços Armados do Senado dos EUA, disse, numa entrevista à Fox News (8 de Dezembro), não excluir a possibilidade de uma intervenção militar directa dos EUA contra a Rússia para “defender a Ucrânia” e, sem que o entrevistador lhe tivesse pedido, acrescentou: “Sabe que não excluímos a possibilidade de uma acção nuclear como primeira utilização”. Esta é uma mensagem transversal a Moscovo sobre a determinação dos EUA em apoiar um eventual ataque de Kiev contra os russos de Donbass. Seria certamente apresentada como uma resposta a um ataque efectuado pelos russos de Donbass. Na mente daqueles que, desde 2014, têm concretizado a estratégia de tensão contra a Rússia esta seria ainda uma jogada vencedora.

Moscovo teria duas alternativas: não intervir militarmente em defesa dos russos de Donbass, deixando-os subjugados pelo ataque ucraniano apoiado de facto pela NATO e forçados a abandonar a região e a refugiar-se na Rússia, decisão que seria traumática para Moscovo sobretudo a nível interno; ou intervir militarmente para impedir o ataque ucraniano, expondo-se à condenação internacional por agressão e invasão de um Estado soberano.

Os generais ucranianos avisaram que não seriam capazes de “repelir as tropas russas sem uma infusão maciça de ajuda militar do Ocidente”. A infusão já começou: os Estados Unidos, que já deram a Kiev uma ajuda militar de 2,5 biliões de dólares, forneceram-lhe em Novembro mais 88 toneladas de munições como parte de um “pacote” de 60 milhões de dólares, incluindo mísseis Javelin já posicionados contra os russos de Donbass. Ao mesmo tempo, os EUA enviaram para a Ucrânia mais de 150 conselheiros militares que, juntamente com os de uma dúzia de aliados da NATO, dirigem, de facto, as operações.

A situação é ainda mais explosiva porque a Ucrânia – agora parceira mas, de facto, já membro da NATO – poderia ser oficialmente admitida como o 31º membro da Aliança, com a consequência de que, de acordo com o Artigo 5º do Tratado do Atlântico Norte, os outros 30 membros da NATO teriam de intervir militarmente na frente de Donbass em apoio à Ucrânia contra a Rússia.  O Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros russo pediu à NATO que não admitisse a Ucrânia, para não aumentar ainda mais a tensão militar e política na Europa, recordando que desde o fim da Guerra Fria a Rússia recebeu repetidas garantias de que a jurisdição e as forças militares da NATO não avançariam um centímetro em direcção a Leste, mas estas promessas não foram cumpridas. O Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros russo propôs assim que a NATO abrisse negociações sobre acordos a longo prazo que impediriam uma maior expansão da NATO para Leste e a instalação de sistemas de armamento na vizinhança imediata do território russo. A proposta foi categoricamente rejeitada em 10 de Dezembro pela NATO através do Secretário Geral Stoltenberg: “A relação da NATO com a Ucrânia será decidida pelos 30 membros da Aliança e pela Ucrânia, e por mais ninguém”.

Imediatamente a seguir, ontem, 13 de Dezembro, os Ministros dos Negócios Estrangeiros do G7 (EUA, Canadá, Reino Unido, França, Alemanha, Itália, Japão) e o Alto Representante da União Europeia, reunidos em Liverpool, declararam que estavam “unidos na sua condenação do reforço militar da Rússia e da sua retórica agressiva em relação à Ucrânia” e que “a Rússia não deve ter dúvidas de que uma nova agressão militar contra a Ucrânia teria como resposta, consequências maciças e custos graves”.

Entretanto, a Finlândia, membro da União Europeia e parceira activa da NATO contra a Rússia, anunciou a compra de 64 caças F-35A da Lockheed Martin pelo preço de 8,4 biliões de euros, que, incluindo as infraestruturas, sobe para 10 biliões de euros, aos quais o governo acrescentará mais 10 biliões de euros para a sua manutenção e modernização. Os 64 aviões F-35A de ataque nuclear serão colocados na fronteira russa, apenas a 200 km de São Petersburgo e, de facto, sob comando dos Estados Unidos que, como recorda o Senador Wicker, não excluem serem os primeiros a usar armas nucleares.

Manlio Dinucci

Artigo original em italiano :

La polveriera ucraina e la miccia

(il manifesto, 14 de Dezembro de 2021)

Tradutora: Maria Luísa de Vasconcellos

Once again, NATO is on the verge of unnecessarily escalating tensions in Eastern Europe for the sole purpose of confronting Russia. According to recent statements by some of its top officers, the Western military alliance plans to deploy troops in Romania and Bulgaria as a way to strengthen the current “security scheme” for Ukraine. In practice, this type of attitude only tends to further increase polarization and discord between the states in that region, undermining any search for international peace and stability.

Incisive article. First posted on GR on May 15, 2021

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Say it’s 2014 and you’ve had this idea for a technocratic Great Reset of the world economy for some time now, but it only works if the entire planet is rocked by a pandemic. How do you go about selling your idea?

“The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future” — Klaus Schwab, WEF

If you are World Economic Forum (WEF) Founder Klaus Schwab, you attempt to sell your vision of a global Utopia via a Great Reset of the world order in three simple steps:

1. Announce your intention to revamp every aspect of society with global governance, and keep repeating that message
2. When your message isn’t getting through, simulate fake pandemic scenarios that show why the world needs a great reset
3. If the fake pandemic scenarios aren’t persuasive enough, wait a couple months for a real global crisis to occur, and repeat step one

It took Schwab and the Davos elite about six years to watch their great reset ideology grow from a tiny Swiss seed in 2014 to a European super-flower pollinating the entire globe in 2020.

The so-called “Great Reset” promises to build “a more secure, more equal, and more stable world” if everyone on the planet agrees to “act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.”

But it wouldn’t have been possible to contemplate materializing such an all-encompassing plan for a new world order without a global crisis, be it manufactured or of unfortunate happenstance, that shocked society to its core.

“In the end, the outcome was tragic: the most catastrophic pandemic in history with hundreds of millions of deaths, economic collapse and societal upheaval” — Clade X pandemic simulation (May, 2018)

So, in May, 2018, the WEF partnered with Johns Hopkins to simulate a fictitious pandemic — dubbed “Clade X” —  to see how prepared the world be if ever faced with such a crisis.

A little over a year later, the WEF once again teamed-up with Johns Hopkins, along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to stage another pandemic exercise called Event 201 in October, 2019.

Both simulations concluded that the world wasn’t prepared for a global pandemic.

And a few short months following the conclusion of Event 201, which specifically simulated a coronavirus outbreak, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared that the coronavirus had reached pandemic status on March 11, 2020.

The WEF would go on to repeat that message for years.

Moscow has outlined an eight-point draft treaty of security guarantees that would lead to lower tensions in Europe and defuse the crisis over Ukraine if the West were to adopt it. The demands include ending Ukraine’s path towards NATO membership, limiting the deployment of troops and weapons close to Russia’s borders, and a return to the pre-1997 status quo, i.e. before NATO’s eastward expansion.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Friday that although there was no deadline for beginning talks to ease tensions, Moscow wants to begin negotiations “without delays and without stalling” and stressed that “we can go any place and any time, even tomorrow.” He also emphasized that “this is not about us giving some kind of ultimatum, there is none. The thing is that the seriousness of our warning should not be underestimated.”

Effectively, he warned that ignoring Moscow’s request for discussions could lead to a “military response” similar to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.

Moscow’s call for talks comes as a Ukrainian soldier was killed on Friday during fighting with Donbass defense forces. Although Kiev is amassing forces and attaining new weapon systems like the US-made Javelin anti-missile system, the West lambasts Russia for deploying over 100,000 troops on its border to deter Ukraine from any new military adventures.

US President Joe Biden warned his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin of “sanctions like he’s never seen” before should Ukraine be attacked, an unlikely prospect since Moscow has repeatedly stressed that it has no interest in war or territorial expansion in Ukraine. Despite this guarantee though, it has not lessened the Western media campaign to demonize Russia.

The Guardian reported that the “Kremlin’s aggressive proposals are likely to be rejected in western capitals as an attempt to formalize a new Russian sphere of influence over eastern Europe.” This is extremely problematic as it claims that Moscow’s suggestion for Russia and NATO to “not consider each other adversaries” and “resolve all disputes peacefully and refrain from the use of force” is an “aggressive proposal.” 

It brings to question why the London-based newspaper finds it “aggressive” to resolve disputes peacefully?

Although the British tabloid believes that Moscow’s proposals “are likely to be rejected” by the West, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said “there’s no reason we can’t do that moving forward to reduce instability, but we’re going to do that in partnership and coordination with our European allies and partners.” 

A senior White House official told reporters on Friday that Washington disagreed with parts of Moscow’s proposal, but was willing to discuss its content. 

“We are prepared to discuss them. That said, there are some things in this document that the Russians know will be unacceptable,” the official told reporters on condition of anonymity, demonstrating that the US is willing to negotiate rather than reject everything as The Guardian appears to hope. 

Although it is unlikely that the West will stop military exercises in Poland and the Baltic states as the Kremlin hopes, demands like banning Ukraine from joining NATO and limiting the types of weapons near Russia’s borders could find success. The Kremlin likely does not expect all their demands to be met, however the proposals could force negotiations in the context of increased military tensions in eastern Ukraine. 

Russia-based experts doubted that the West would accept the proposals, with Dmitry Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, explaining that the “publication of Russian proposed agreements with US and NATO on [European security] may suggest that Moscow (rightly) considers their acceptance by the West unlikely.”

Andrei Kortunov, head of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), agreed with Trenin’s assessment and said: “This is a bargaining position — [the Kremlin] is trying to get some degree of partial acceptance. Of course, there is a real risk to making these sorts of demands, especially if the West takes a harsh position, but clearly, the Kremlin thinks that the risk is justified in the circumstances.”

Regardless of whether the Kremlin knew if their proposal would be accepted or not, at the very minimum, an opening for negotiations has been made. It is now in the West’s hands to pursue this opening from Moscow, or face a Russia that has clearly said they will use a “military response” if NATO continues to encroach on its sphere of influence and security interests in Ukraine. It is likely that Washington will explore negotiations with Moscow as it too wants to pool more resources towards opposing and challenging China in Asia-Pacific rather than Russia in Eastern Europe. 

American foreign policy, wrapped up in hubris inside American exceptionalism, is incapable of recognizing a dangerous situation. 

And a dangerous situation is what we have.

The Russian deputy foreign minister Sergey Ryabkov speaking for the Kremlin has made it clear that Russia will tolerate no further movement of NATO toward Russia’s borders.

Russia has ruled out any possibility of the former Russian provinces of Ukraine and Georgia becoming NATO members. If this red line is ignored, the consequences, Ryabkov said, “will be dire.” Russia will respond militarily, and the West, he said, will find it has undermined its own security, not Russia’s.

In other words, as the Kremlin sees it, the incorporation of Ukraine and/or Georgia into NATO is an unacceptable threat to Russian national security. Period. It is not negotiable.

In a rational world such an unequivocal statement by a preeminent military power with hypersonic nuclear missiles would be taken seriously.

But the Western World is no longer rational. It is a world drunk on arrogance. The NATO secretary replied to what is, in effect, an ultimatum from a nuclear power by rejecting out of hand that power’s security concern:

“Whether Ukraine joins NATO is up to the bloc’s member states and its leadership, and Moscow doesn’t have input into the decision.” The idiot NATO secretary went on to boast, foolishly, that NATO was so little impressed with Russian objections that NATO was “already training Ukrainian troops and consulting with them, and are conducting joint exercises and providing military supplies and technology.”

So NATO, so drunk on exaggerated American military power, spit in the Kremlin’s eye

The White House spokesperson replying for President Biden and the National Security Council said Washington “will not compromise” on NATO expansion, adding that Washington won’t accept the idea of halting NATO expansion, despite what Russia demands.

In other words–be certain to understand this and its consequences–Washington’s position is that Russia has NO legitimate national security interests except as defined by Washington.

Here we have a highly dangerous situation. One power says you are treading on me and we won’t tolerate it; the other power says you have no say in the matter.

During the 20th century Cold War we Cold Warriors heard every word, every intonation of what the Soviets said. To risk nuclear war because some fool had wax in his ears or was feeling macho that day was out of the question. In those days there were departments of Russian studies in US universities that were not dependent on funding from the military-security complex. There was public debate. There was always an independent expert, such as Stephen Cohen, to remind everyone of how the Russians saw the situation.

Today independent scholarship has disappeared. Russian studies programs in universities are Russophobic in keeping with their funding. As there are no objective scholars, there are no knowledgeable people in the US intelligence community. We can see this in the recent statement of Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan, who reports that US intelligence agencies believe that Putin is “giving serious consideration” to an invasion of Ukraine.

Washington has been saying this since 2014 when Washington overthrew the Russian friendly Ukrainian government hoping to seize in the process the Russian naval base in Crimea. It is a fixed message. There is no thought. Just repetition of propaganda. So we have a National Security Council incapable of nothing but the repetition of propagandistic slogans.

In effect Washington is already at war with Russia.

Meanwhile last Thursday evening, December 16, Washington and its neo-nazi Ukraine puppet decided to confirm Russian suspicions that Washington and Ukraine represent revanchist Nazism. Only two countries voted against the UN resolution condemning Nazism. Yes, it was the United States and Ukraine. The utter total stupidity of the US vote is extraordinary. That Washington supports Nazism is the last thing the Kremlin needed to hear.

My generation was the last generation in the West to be educated instead of indoctrinated, and even we were fed lies about World War I and World War II.

Subsequent generations are largely unaware that in German-occupied Western Ukraine large armies were organized and incorporated into the German army’s march into Russia. It was remnants of these “Banderas” (Stepan Bandera) that Washington used to overthrow the Ukrainian government and install an American puppet state on former Russian territory while the Kremlin, ignoring its backyard, was enjoying the Sochi Olympics.

The mistakes that people make have more to do with world history than any good decisions.

I am watching Washington, which I know so well from a quarter century of high level participation, make the mistake of a lifetime. The Washington regime is so full of arrogance that it is unable to comprehend that Russia has run out of patience.

The Russians see a real problem. All Washington sees is a propaganda opportunity. This is a situation that leads directly to Washington miscalculating. The miscalculation will be fatal.

Update to America’s Foreign Policy Dilemma 

In America Russophobia is running amuck.

The Propaganda Ministry repeats daily that Russia is on the verge of invading Ukraine.

The American people, long trained to regard Russia as the enemy, have heard the allegation so many times it has become a fact.

The arrogant Biden regime has rebuffed Russia’s security concern, and the Republicans are no better. Blind belligerence towards Russia is building as Republican senators add their voices to the propaganda that Putin intends to invade Ukraine and “rob the Ukrainian people of their sovereignty.”( Washington already did that when it overthrew the elected Ukrainian government in 2014 and established a puppet state in Kiev.)

The Republicans want to rush $450 million more in weapons to “the brave Ukrainian armed forces.” And for good measure, the Republicans want to have Russia designated a terrorist state.

The Ukraine crisis is in part an armaments marketing program as the Republicans backing the bill are in tight with the military/security complex. But everyone is overlooking the effect on the Kremlin whose trust in Washington has reached zero on the scale.

Perhaps in preparation for what the Kremlin sees will be a showdown over Washington’s indifference to Russia’s security concern, the Kremlin has ordered two strategic nuclear missile forces to combat duty. Additionally, Russia has closed the northern sea route and deployed radio engineering regiments and electronic domes to jam US over-the-horizon radar. If US naval provocations continue in the Black Sea, Russia might also close the Black Sea.

Meanwhile, the neo-nazi Ukrainian battalions armed by Washington are escalating the situation with the Donbass Russians.

Washington is setting itself up for an embarrassing backdown or a major confrontation for which Washington holds few cards.

See also the following articles

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/12/13/the-biden-putin-talk/ 

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/12/14/russia-speaks-can-the-dumbshits-in-washington-hear/

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/12/16/cuban-missile-crisis-redux/ 

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/12/16/washington-spits-in-the-kremlins-eye/ 

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published on November 12, 2021

Here is Pfizer’s criminal history. 

Watch the video below.

*

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

When Julius Caesar, after some hesitation, crossed the small river Rubicon in 49 B.C., he took a decisive and irreversible step against his opponents in Rome. “Thither go,” he is said to have exclaimed, “where the sign of the gods and the wrong of the enemy calls. The die is cast.” (1) “The sign of the gods” was a figure that appeared to him and crossed the river in front of him to the sound of trumpets. 

Should not those fellow citizens whose minds are free and who have cast off all timidity follow Caesar’s courageous example and cross the Rubicon together?

That is, courageously confront the enemies of humanity and stand up to them, because through long hesitation the evils grow stronger. Every further criminal attack on humanity by the diabolical “elite” must be thwarted with civil disobedience and further non-violent activities. It must not be allowed that a small insane clique of power-obsessed super-rich terrorises as well as tries to subjugate the whole of humanity and is already planning the next global economic and social crisis – while we citizens hesitate to put a stop to them once and for all.

Two examples from the invaluable fund of alternative media

In order to adequately describe the current global political situation – according to Michel Chossudovsky “the worst crisis in modern history” – and to glimpse the possible future, I draw on two recent articles from the indispensable fund of modern independent media. Both have been published on the academic website “Global Research” and provide an unvarnished insight into current world events. 

Robert Snefjella writes in the subtitle of his article of 16.12.2021 “Corona Crisis: Absurdity and Falsehood…”: 

“Never before had humanity been exposed to so intense barrage of falsehood and absurdity in the guise of truth, science, concern, and fact.” (2) 

His article provides context to the attempted human destruction project we are witnessing and adds comments on reconstruction. Few could have guessed, let alone understood, according to Snefjella, the attack on humanity that was officially launched publicly in March 2020. 

Professor Chossudovsky’s second article, dated 14 December 2021, provides a glimpse of the future and is titled:

“Towards Another Devastating Worldwide Crisis? The WEF’s ‘Cyber Attack With Covid-like Characteristics’. Paralysis of Power Supply, Communications, Transportation?” (3)

Klaus Schwab, the founder and CEO of the WEF and architect of the “Great Reset” describes the crisis scenario as follows, according to Chossudovsky:

“The frightening scenario of a comprehensive cyber attack could bring a complete halt to the power supply, transportation, hospital services, our society as a whole. The COVID-19 crisis would be seen in this respect as a small disturbance in comparison to a major cyberattack.” (emphasis added)

WEF executive director Jeremy Juergens adds:

“I believe there will be another crisis. It will be more significant. It will be faster than what we’ve seen with COVID. The impact will be greater, and as a result the economic and social implications will be even more significant.” (emphasis added) (4)

So, what are we waiting for?

Embrace the warmongers too

Crossing the Rubicon requires also keeping an eye on the geopolitical situation and stopping the criminal warmongers. This is the concern of the new “Krefeld Appeal” of 16 November 2021 “Falling into the arms of the warmongers”. It was signed by well-known personalities, received much attention worldwide and warns against a war against humanity.

The new “Krefeld Appeal” complements the Public Declaration

“We Europeans Say NO to a War Against Russia”, which was already written many years ago. Both appeals can be viewed on the homepage of the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung” (NRhZ) and can still be signed. Please, dear fellow citizens, make up your own minds (5).

If we let it happen, everyone dies alone

In the autumn of 1946, the German author Hans Fallada wrote his last novel, “Everyone Dies for Himself”. With it, he created a panorama of the lives of “normal” people in Nazi-era Berlin: after their son is killed in Hitler’s war, a Berlin couple wants to set signs of resistance. The quiet, sober couple write messages on cards and distribute them around the city. But they dared to resist the Nazis alone; therefore it was futile. 

In 1943 they were both executed. Hans Fallada learned of their fate from a Gestapo file that came into his hands through the poet Johannes R. Becher, later Minister of Culture of the German Democratic Republic (GDR). More than 60 years after Fallada’s death in 1947, his novel became an international event and, in the words of “The New York Times”, a “major literary event” (6).

In the preface to his book, Hans Fallada addresses a few words to the reader:

“Some readers will find that there is quite a lot of torture and death in this book. The author takes the liberty of pointing out that this book deals almost exclusively with people who fought against the Hitler regime, with them and their persecutors. In these circles, quite a lot died in the years 1940 to 1942 and before and after. About a good third of this book is set in prisons and asylums, and dying was very much afoot in them as well. It also often didn’t please the author to paint such a bleak picture, but more brightness would have meant lying.” (7)

What distinguishes the noble from the common?

I leave the serious final word to Hermann H. Mitterer, an officer of the Austrian Armed Forces and former colleague. He too, in the preface of his 2019 book “Population Exchange in Europe. How the Global Elite Use Mass Migration to Replace the Native Population”, to his readers, saying:

“It is not wealth, not social position, not academic education that distinguishes the noble from the common. It is the ability to recognise the importance of supra-temporal values and the will to give personal sacrifice and, if necessary, one’s own life for their preservation.” (8)

Notes

(1) https://www.wortbedeutung.info/den_Rubikon_überschreiten/

(2) https://www.globalresearch.ca/genocide-gaslight-predatory-finance-ultimate-atrocity/5764125

(3) https://www.globalresearch.ca/towards-another-devastating-worldwide-crisis-the-wefs-cyber-attack-with-covid-like-characteristics-paralysis-of-the-power-supply-communications-transportation/5764374

(4) op. cit.

(5) http://www.nrhz.de

(6) Fallada, Hans (2011,9). Every man for himself dies. Berlin. Book cover

(7) op. cit., p. 5.

(8) Mitterer, Hermann H. (2009). Population Exchange in Europe. How a global elite uses mass migration to replace the native population. Rottenburg, p. 4

Dr Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a retired rector, educationalist and graduate psychologist.

American multinational aircraft manufacturer and government contractor Boeing has issued a statement declaring that it will not enforce Joe Biden’s controversial and divisive COVID-19 vaccine mandate after a series of federal rulings have dealt the White House devastating losses.

In a statement first obtained by Seattle-based KIRO, Boeing announced their intention to suspend the mandate.

“We continue to encourage our employees to get vaccinated and get a booster shot if they have not done so,” a Boeing spokesperson said.

The Danes are now publishing extremely detailed daily data about Covid cases and hospitalizations – not just about Omicron, but all Covid variants.

And, in news that will surprise precisely no one who has been alive the last two years, they paint a picture entirely different than what the media claims.

Omicron – which continues to appear significantly less dangerous though more transmissible than earlier variants of Covid – has been used as a cover for vaccine failure.

Most new Covid cases in Denmark occur in people who are vaccinated or boosted – and that is true for both Omicron and earlier variants. More than 76 percent of non-Omicron Covid infections in Denmark are in vaccinated people, along with about 90 percent of Omicron infections.

Further, only 25 of the 561 people currently hospitalized in Denmark for Covid have the Omicron variant. The Danes do not provide an exact number for patients in intensive care with Omicron, saying only that it is fewer than five.

Perhaps the most stunning fact about Omicron and Denmark is that its rise actually parallels a marked slowdown in the growth of Danish hospitalizations and intensive care patients. Those rose roughly fivefold between mid-October and late November, as the Danes left the happy vaccine valley. Since then they have barely budged, rising about 20 percent.

Danish Covid hospitalizations over the last three months: note that the rise predates Omicron.

 

The Danish data also show that people with Omicron are both less likely to be hospitalized than those with other variants and released from the hospital much more quickly – in line with what South African health authorities have reported.

On Friday, for example, the Danes reported that the total number of hospital patients with Omicron since the epidemic began reached 77, up by 20 patients from Thursday.

But the number of Omicron patients currently hospitalized rose only by eight between Thursday and Friday, from 17 to 25. Thus 12 out of the 17 Omicron patients on Thursday appear to have been released overnight.

Compared to Monday’s report, the trend is even more clear. The number of Omicron cases has roughly tripled, but the number of people hospitalized has barely budged, from 14 to 25.

SOURCE: https://www.ssi.dk/-/media/cdn/files/covid19/omikron/statusrapport/rapport-omikronvarianten-17122021-ep96.pdf?la=da

https://www.ssi.dk/-/media/cdn/files/covid19/omikron/statusrapport/rapport-omikronvarianten-16122021-fk3t.pdf?la=da

About the only reason for concern in any of the Danish data is that Omicron still appears to be preferentially infecting younger people – though not people under 15, who are more likely to be unvaccinated.

Overall, though, the figures out of Denmark largely back those from South Africa – and make clear that the reason that Europe has seen a massive rise in cases and hospitalizations this fall has nothing to do with Omicron and everything to do with vaccine failure.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials skipped the start of oral arguments Tuesday as a federal district court weighed whether the agency can take 75 years to fully release documents on Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID vaccine, according to a lawyer representing plaintiffs who sued the FDA for the documents.

A U.S. Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA told the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas the agency will produce more than 329,000 related documents as fast as it can, while safeguarding personally identifiable information and Pfizer trade secrets.

Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT), the group behind the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and subsequent lawsuit, is seeking safety and effectiveness data, adverse reaction reports and a list of active and inactive vaccine ingredients.

PHMPT is a group of more than 30 scientists, medical professionals, international public health professionals and journalists. The group’s lawsuit argues the FDA is overestimating the time needed and understaffing the job.

“Assuming a low average of 50 pages per hour per person, even to review the hundreds of thousands of pages the FDA estimates, the agency would need just 19 reviewers to work full-time for 12 weeks to review and produce these documents — which is a tiny fraction of its approximately 18,000 employees,” said PHMPT in a legal brief filed Monday.

The day before oral arguments, the FDA released 14 document files, the largest file including 2,030 pages. PHMPT posted an updated list which shows documents released since Nov. 17.

FOIA does not mandate any particular processing schedule, only that the agency process requests “as soon as practicable,” the FDA said in a legal brief filed Monday.

“The bottom-line issue still remains what processing schedule is ‘practicable’ for the agency,” the FDA said.

At the agency’s proposed rate of 500 documents per month, the last documents would be released in 2096.

A quote from Business Intelligence Associates, an e-discovery company, estimated 400,000 pages could be produced within six to eight weeks at a cost of $132,000, according to PHMPT.

PHMPT wants the FDA documents released within 108 days. That’s the same amount of time the FDA spent reviewing the responsive documents for “the far more intricate task” of licensing Pfizer’s vaccine, the group said in its lawsuit.

Attorney Aaron Siri, who represents PHMPT, said:

“Americans must routinely produce documents, pay fines, and otherwise expend resources to comply with the law. Courts don’t inquire as to the ability or financial resources to comply with the law — they must comply.

“In fact, it would be laughable if a billionaire defendant came before a court and claimed poverty to escape making a document production, but that is the FDA’s position.”

The FDA budget for fiscal year 2019 was $6.1 billion.

In the FDA’s 64-page briefing, the agency argued it needed the full 75 years to redact and release the documents out of “fairness” to other FOIA requesters.

PHMPT defined fairness differently in its responding brief:

“Fairness would be giving millions of Americans who are mandated to receive this liability-free vaccine today assurance regarding the FDA’s review by allowing independent scientists access to the same data the FDA reviewed, without making them wait decades.

“Fairness would be allowing Americans injured by the vaccine today, who cannot sue Pfizer or anyone else for the harm, hope that independent scientists with access to that data can more readily develop treatments for their ailments.

“Fairness would be our federal health authorities allocating more than one person spending a few hours each month to review Pfizer’s documents for public disclosure after having given Pfizer over $17 billion of taxpayer money to develop and market the product.

“That would be fair to the American people.”

Siri noted that no decision has been made by the court and that a transcript of this week’s hearing should be released soon.

U.S. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) earlier this month introduced a bill that would force the FDA to release them in 100 days.

What is unfolding is a digital police State. See report below

***

Swedish Epicenter, a specialist in subdermal microchips, has demonstrated an implant capable of storing information about a person’s Covid passport. This is reported by APnews.

The company says the implanted chip will be able to read any device that uses the Near Field Communication (NFC) protocol.

“Implants are a very versatile technology that can be used for a variety of purposes, and now it is very helpful to have your Covid passport at your fingertips. If your phone runs out of battery, the Covid passport will always be available,” company representative Hannes Sjoblad.

According to the researcher of digital cultures Moa Petersen, at the moment in Sweden, about 6 000 people have already implanted a chip in their hand, but this does not mean that they all loaded their Covid passports there. The chips can store not only certificates, but also office documents, bus passes or gym membership.

 In the crudest, most political judgement in memory, two High Court judges in London have ordered the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States, where a trial in a kangaroo court awaits him, followed by a life lost in a barbaric prison system.


“Let us look at ourselves, if we have the courage, to see what is happening to us” – Jean-Paul Sartre

Sartre’s words should echo in all our minds following the grotesque decision of Britain’s High Court to extradite Julian Assange to the United States where he faces “a living death”. This is his punishment for the crime of authentic, accurate, courageous, vital journalism.

Miscarriage of justice is an inadequate term in these circumstances. It took the bewigged courtiers of Britain’s ancien regime just nine minutes last Friday to uphold an American appeal against a District Court judge’s acceptance in January of a cataract of evidence that hell on earth awaited Assange across the Atlantic: a hell in which, it was expertly predicted, he would find a way to take his own life.

Volumes of witness by people of distinction, who examined and studied Julian and diagnosed his autism and his Asperger’s Syndrome and revealed that he had already come within an ace of killing himself at Belmarsh prison, Britain’s very own hell, were ignored.

The recent confession of a crucial FBI informant and prosecution stooge, a fraudster and serial liar, that he had fabricated his evidence against Julian was ignored. The revelation that the Spanish-run security firm at the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where Julian had been granted political refuge, was a CIA front that spied on Julian’s lawyers and doctors and confidants (myself included) – that, too. was ignored.

The recent journalistic disclosure, repeated graphically by defence counsel before the High Court in October, that the CIA had planned to murder Julian in London – even that was ignored.

Each of these “matters”, as lawyers like to say, was enough on its own for a judge upholding the law to throw out the disgraceful case mounted against Assange by a corrupt US Department of Justice and their hired guns in Britain. Julian’s state of mind, bellowed James Lewis, QC, America’s attack dog at the Old Bailey last year, was no more than “malingering” – an archaic Victorian term used to deny the very existence of mental illness.

To Lewis, almost every defence witness, including those who described from the depth of their experience and knowledge, the barbaric American prison system, was to be interrupted, abused, discredited. Sitting behind him, passing him notes, was his American conductor: young, short-haired, clearly an Ivy League man on the rise.

In their nine minutes of dismissal of the fate of journalist Assange, two of the most senior judges in Britain, including the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Burnett (a lifelong buddy of Sir Alan Duncan, Boris Johnson’s former foreign minister who arranged the brutal police kidnapping of Assange from the Ecuadorean embassy) referred to not one of a litany of truths aired at previous hearings in the Old Bailey and the District Court – truths that had struggled to be heard in the lower court presided over by a weirdly hostile judge, Vanessa Baraitser. One episode of her insulting behaviour towards a clearly stricken Assange, struggling through a fog of prison-dispensed medication to remember his name, is unforgettable.

What was truly shocking last Friday was that the High Court  judges – Lord Burnett and Lord Justice Timothy Holyrode, who read out their words – showed no hesitation in sending Julian to his death, living or otherwise. They offered no mitigation, no suggestion that they had agonised over legalities or even basic morality.

Their ruling in favour, if not on behalf of the United States, is based squarely on transparently fraudulent “assurances” scrabbled together by the Biden administration when it looked in January as if justice might prevail.

These “assurances” are that once in American custody, Assange will not be subject to the Orwellian SAMS – Special Administrative Measures – which would make him an un-person; that he will not be imprisoned at ADX Florence, a prison in Colorado long condemned by jurists and human rights groups as illegal: “a pit of punishment and disappearance”; that he can be transferred to an Australian prison to finish his sentence there.

The absurdity of this lies in what the judges omitted to say. In offering its “assurances”, the US reserves the right not to guarantee any pledge made in court should Assange do something that displeases his jailers. In other words, as Amnesty has pointed out, it reserves the right to break any promise, or all of them.

There are abundant examples of the US doing just that. As investigative journalist Richard Medhurst revealed last month, David Mendoza Herrarte was extradited from Spain to the US on the “promise” that he would serve his sentence in Spain. The Spanish courts regarded this as a binding condition.

“Classified documents reveal the diplomatic assurances given by the US Embassy in Madrid and how the US violated the conditions of the extradition “, wrote Medhurst, “Mendoza spent six years in the US trying to return to Spain. Court documents show the United States denied his transfer application multiple times.”

The High Court judges – who were aware of the Mendoza case and of Washington’s habitual duplicity – describe the “assurances” as a “solemn undertaking offered by one government to another”. This article would stretch into infinity if I listed the times the rapacious United States has broken “solemn undertakings” to governments, such as treaties that are summarily torn up and civil wars that are fuelled. It is the way Washington has ruled the world, and before it Britain: the way of imperial power, as history teaches us.

It is this institutional lying and duplicity that Julian Assange brought into the open and in so doing performed perhaps the greatest public service of any journalist in modern times.

Julian himself has been a prisoner of lying governments for more than a decade now. During these long years, I have sat in many courts as the United States has sought to manipulate the law to silence him and WikiLeaks. The obsession to “get him” has been unrelenting.

This reached a bizarre moment when, in the tiny Ecuadorean embassy, he and I were forced to flatten ourselves against a wall, each with a notepad in which we conversed, taking care to shield what we had written to each other from the ubiquitous spy cameras – installed, as we now know, by a proxy of the CIA, the world’s most enduring criminal organisation.

This brings me to the quotation at the top of this article: “Let us look at ourselves, if we have the courage, to see what is happening.”

Jean-Paul Sartre wrote this in his preface to Franz Fannon’s The Wretched of the Earth, the classic study of how colonised and seduced and coerced and, yes, craven peoples do the bidding of the powerful.

Who among us is prepared to stand up rather than remain mere bystanders to an epic travesty such as the judicial kidnapping of Julian Assange? What is at stake is both a courageous man’s life and, if we remain silent, the conquest of our intellects and sense of right and wrong: indeed our very humanity.

(Julian’s fiancée, Stella Moris, has revealed that Julian suffered a stroke on 27 October, the opening day of a previous High Court hearing).

The New York Times (NYT) has revealed that a top secret US cell known as Talon Anvil sidestepped safeguards and repeatedly ordered airstrikes that killed an untold number of civilians in Syria under the guise of targeting ISIS fighters.

According to the report published on 12 December, the shadowy group operated from anonymous rooms “cluttered with flat screens” in three shifts around the clock between 2014 and 2019.

Among US officials, Talon Anvil was known to disregard safeguard procedures to function at the “speed of war,” and obscured a countless number of civilian deaths including farmers trying to harvest, children in the street, families fleeing fighting, and villagers taking shelter in buildings.

The NYT report also claims that Talon Anvil played an “outsize role” in the dropping of over 100,000 bombs in the war-torn country.

“They were ruthlessly efficient and good at their jobs … but they also made a lot of bad strikes,” a former Air Force intelligence officer who worked on hundreds of classified Talon Anvil missions told the NYT.

Among the many bombing campaigns that Talon Anvil was responsible for is the 2019 airstrike in the eastern Syrian governorate of Dayr al-Zawr which killed over 60 civilians, including dozens of women and children. This particular attack has been described as being “part of a pattern of reckless strikes that started years earlier.”

US Air Force officials who spoke with the NYT on condition of anonymity said that over the years they notified their commanding officers several times about Talon Anvil’s disregard for civilian lives. However, the military leaders seemed reluctant to scrutinize the strike cell as it was “driving the offensive” on the battlefield.

According to Larry Lewis, a former Pentagon and State Department adviser, every year that Talon Anvil operated in Syria the civilian casualty rate increased significantly.

Lewis also claims that US military commanders “enabled the tactics by failing to emphasize the importance of reducing civilian casualties.” He singles out General Stephen J. Townsend, who commanded US troops in Syria in 2016 and 2017, as being “dismissive of widespread reports from news media and human rights organizations describing the mounting toll.”

Talon Anvil’s operations were highly classified and the strike cell as a whole never existed in an official manner. It was run by a classified Special Operations unit called Task Force 9, whose other tasks included training allied Syrian and Kurdish armed groups.

The strike cell reportedly worked out of “bland office spaces” both in Iraq and Syria and were in control of a “fleet of Predator and Reaper drones that bristled with precision Hellfire missiles and laser-guided bombs.”

They carried out most of their operations based on tips from allied forces, secret electronic intercepts, drone cameras, and other information to find enemy targets.

A former member of Talon Anvil told the NYT that the strike cell often decided that something was an enemy target with scant supporting evidence. But as suspicion mounted over their tactics, Talon Anvil began to classify nearly all of its attacks as defensive – even when targets were 100 miles away from the front lines.

“It’s more expedient to resort to self-defense,” said Lewis. “It’s easier to get approved.”

The drone operators were also known to turn away the drone cameras away from targets before launching bombs or missiles to avoid accountability.

The operators also pressured analysts, who watched drone footage after strikes had taken place, to report that they had seen weapons or other evidence that would justify a strike hit. If they refused, the cell would simply ask for another analyst.

To the majority of politically correct conformists of Western Europe, North America and beyond, Jesus Christ is a dangerous subverter of the status quo. This, in spite of the fact that they claim to be adherents of the values he proclaimed.

The message put across by the most followed figurehead of the Christian faith, juxtaposed into this moment of time, is far too radical for any western government to go anywhere near. Yet these same governments – or at least the majority of their members – will proclaim their belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ. 

This goes to the very heart of the definition of ‘hypocrisy’.

To proclaim unity over division, love over hate, freedom of the individual over authoritarian control, justice over injustice and self enlightenment over top down dogma – the central message of Jesus’s teachings – is currently to be labelled ‘not normal’. 

 To all those who prefer to do what they are told – to be ‘not normal’ means ‘not one of us’ – even if this means supporting a modern day policy of segregation, suppression and slandering of those guilty of of not conforming to ‘the rules of the game’.

Some 2,000 years ago it appears that the same conditions prevailed. To go against them was ‘a criminal offence’. An offence against the diktats of the Holy Roman Empire, and the punishment was to be ostracised, imprisoned or put to death.

The non conformist of the politically correct status quo today is faced by precisely the same techniques of oppression, with only the death sentence being largely outlawed. Which does not mean that those considered the greatest threat to the state won’t ‘loose their lives’ via some covert secretive way or other.

Jesus stood fully against fascism, many facets of which were at large amongst the corrupt officials of the Roman Empire. He also exposed the fake officialdom and materialistic ambitions of the clerks, stewards and ‘money hoarders’ who dominated the great cities of that era.

Has anything changed?

To stand-up against the top-down politically repressive cabal today is to be vilified as ‘a terrorist’ or ‘a mental case’ – and singled-out for special surveillance and monitoring.

To speak the truth and to speak-out against the lies perpetuated in the parliaments of the western world, is to be instantly framed as a ‘conspiracy theorist’, of which Jesus was perhaps the original role model.

Yet the very people who stand-up on their moral soap-boxes to proclaim the good Christian values they profess to follow – and demand from others – are the very ones to condemn the ‘conspiracy theorist’ for daring to carry forward the wisdom of the teachings of he who the fake moralists also proclaim as their traditional value model.

It is well known that passages of The New Testament, in the course of many translations and editorial abridgements, have been expurgated and watered down so as to sterilise the more radical teachings of Jesus Christ. This is paralleled today by the leading voices of the resistance to a totalitarian take-over being blocked from having a public voice by the mainstream media and by social media sites owned by corporate clones and deep state financiers.

The truth, it seems, has always been dangerous.

This planet has been in the hands of the oppressors of truth for well over 2,000 years. Their ambitions have grown steadily greater throughout the passage of time. Now they want to claim not only ‘full spectrum dominance’ over every aspect of the daily life of the planet, but to take control of the human soul itself. To digitalise and genetically engineer the very molecules, cells and genes of the human species to fit their cold anti-life vision.

To breed-out the God instinct that leads humanity in the direction of justice, love, wisdom, truth – and oneness with the Supreme Creator.

The great scamdemic being manifested today by the perpetrators of the demonic anti life/pro death control obsessed cabal, is built upon the underlying use of fear to keep people in a permanent state of imbalance, anxiety and stress. A state which makes control mechanisms very easy to put in place.

Yet a significant proportion of those who are complicit in aiding the cabal to do their hatchet job call themselves Christians, which means followers of the teachings of Jesus.

This Christmas, let’s encourage those we personally know; those in our families and social milieux and those in positions of power in society, to join in meditating on what values we are committed to uphold in the great battle for the future direction of the planet. 

Peace, love, wisdom and truth; or division, hate, foolhardiness and lies? The great teachings of spiritual masters – or the power pursuits of aspiring fascists?

Let’s not be kind to hypocrites, even if we find ourselves to be one of them. The future of the soul of man is at stake.

Be bold, brave and bright this Christmas – or don’t celebrate it at all. Don’t be just another hypocrite.

Seasons greetings.

Julian Rose is an early pioneer of UK organic farming, writer, international activist, entrepreneur and holistic teacher. He is co-founder of HARE The Hardwick Alliance for Real Ecology see https://hardwickalliance.org/ Julian’s acclaimed book ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind – Why Humanity Must Come Through’ is particularly recommended reading for this time: see www.julianrose.info 

All Global Research articles 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.

***

It’s the 13th December 2021.

In my video dated 11th December I detailed some of the health problems which face the gullible folk who have succumbed to the lies and misinformation shared so widely and enthusiastically by governments, the medical establishment and the mainstream media.

In that video, entitled ‘Here’s why most of the jabbed will die early’ I mentioned my fear that the jabbed might suffer brain damage as a result of the covid-19 jab.

Click here to watch the video.

That fear was real, as I will show in this video.

It has been established that there is much that no one yet knows about the covid-19 jabs and the eagerness of the Medicines and healthcare products regulatory agency in the UK to licence a product about which information appeared to be lacking has never been adequately explained. We do know however that, as I was the first to reveal, the MHRA received a huge sum of money from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – which has financial links with jab producers such as Pfizer.

As far as the effect on the brain is concerned the big question is, can the lipid nanoparticles carry the mRNA jab across the blood brain barrier?

The blood brain barrier is a semi permeable barrier of cells which prevent some substances in the blood from crossing into the protective fluid around the central nervous system.

It is vital to know if this happens because if it does then all bets are off as to what might happen to the brain.

And after all, liquid nanoparticles are already used to deliver other drugs across the blood brain barrier.

If the LNPs carry the mRNA jab into the brain then the neurons, the brain cells, might be marked as foreign by the body’s immune system. And as more booster jabs are given the problem will get worse.

The worry is that brain cells might be targeted and killed by cytotoxic T cells.

It has now been established that mRNA has been found in all human tissues except the kidney. It has been found in heart, lung, liver, testicles – and brain. A Japanese study, for example, showed that the vaccine does end up in the brain.

Also worrying is the fact that researchers have called for studies to investigate any relationship between jabs and acute CNS demyelination.

How much damage will this do?

How long will it take before brain damage can be identified?

I don’t have the foggiest idea.

And nor does anyone else.

In a normal experiment with a new drug, doctors would be looking and checking all the possible problems before releasing the drug for widespread use.

But the covid-19 jabs are being rolled out to billions without any one having the faintest idea what will happen.

If you have been jabbed, the first certainty seems to be that the mRNA vaccine will enter your brain.

The second certainty is that the more covid jabs you have, the more dangerous this will be.

How many of your brain cells will die is something only time will tell. And children, of course, will be more vulnerable because they are more vulnerable anyway and because they are likely to live longer.

Some experts, advisors and regulators will tell you that the risks are small. But how can they know that? And what is small? They told us that the blood clotting problems were small.

In my view, having one of these jabs is the equivalent of taking a huge dose of LSD and waiting to see what happens. And hoping that you’re not going to end up like Peter Green for example.

And, remember, the covid-19 jabs don’t stop you getting covid-19 and they don’t stop you passing it on. According to the NHS’s own guidelines in the UK you can still get or spread covid-19 even if you have had three jabs.

The choice about whether or not to be jabbed should be yours.

But governments want to make these jabs compulsory.

You can find links to more information on my websites www.vernoncoleman.com and www.vernoncoleman.org

If this jab were being given for a lethal disease with a 50% mortality rate then the risks might be worth taking. It’s not and they’re not.

Thank you for watching an old man in a chair. And thanks to Brand New Tube and to Muhammad Butt. Please subscribe to my channel on Brand New Tube and spread my videos about on other platforms such as Rumble, Brighteon, Odysee and Bitchute. My thanks to everyone who does this. Put this video on Twitter and Facebook too. If you get your wrist slapped regard it as a war injury. Please do translations too. All the papers and so on that I refer to can easily be found on the internet. If I give you all the links I’ll never do anything else. We do put up transcripts of the videos on both websites and when possible we add important links.

For the record, this channel has not been monetised – none of my videos ever has been. There are no ads, no sponsors and no requests for funds on videos or websites.

Don’t forget to watch my friend Dr Colin Barron’s amazing videos which are always fantastic and often incredibly funny. And visit his website www.colinbarron.co.uk.

Read www.theLightpaper.co.uk for all the news considered too truthful to print by the mainstream media. An amazing 200,000 copies are distributed. That’s a bigger circulation than The Guardian. Make sure you get hold of a copy of `We are the 99%’ recorded by Darren and the Daz Band which is the anthem for the Resistance Movement. It’s vital it’s the Christmas Number One. There is a link to it on both my websites. And visit and astandinthepark.org which will give advice on how and where to stand in a park.

Please visit my own websites www.vernoncoleman.org and www.vernoncoleman.com. www.vernoncoleman.com is more old fashioned but contains hundreds of articles on animal issues, politics and much else in addition to health. You can find free books on both sites and brand new stuff is added every weekday. There are hundreds of original articles to read and, of course, the feature detailing vaccine damage is updated every week. New articles are added most days.

Vernon Coleman’s Wednesday Review will, God willing, appear here every Wednesday at 7pm. If it doesn’t then either something has happened to me or the video has been suppressed as has so much of my work these days.

We all need to pray for the truth to be shared by the many, not just the few. Whatever your religion you need to pray because the people running this fraud respect only lies but, in the way that vampires fear sunlight, they fear the truth – it is your government’s greatest enemy and our only weapon. Finally, although it may feel like it at times, please remember that you are not alone. More and more people are waking up and once they are awake they don’t go back to sleep. – which means our numbers are growing daily.

If we are going to win this war then we have to fight hard and with determination and passion and the truth. Remember, this is primarily a propaganda and media war.

Distrust the government, avoid mass media and fight the lies.

Thank you for watching an old man in a chair.

*

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.

Vernon Coleman’s no 1 bestselling book Endgame explains the awful truth behind the covid fraud and the global warming fraud – and explains where we are heading. Endgame is available from Amazon as a paperback and an eBook.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This article was originally published in February 2021.

As I reported on my website back in March, on March 19th, the public health bodies in the UK and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens decided that the new disease should no longer be classified as a ‘high consequence infectious disease’ (click on the link below to see the proof). The coronavirus was downgraded to flu level.

Here is the statement

As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK. There are many diseases which can cause serious illness which are not classified as HCIDs.

Source (Public Health England)

A couple of days after this decision, the UK Government introduced lockdowns and introduced the most oppressive Bill in British Parliamentary history.

The Emergency Bill, which was 358 pages long, turned Britain into a totalitarian state and gave the Government and the police unprecedented powers. Public meetings and elections were banned and there were new powers relating to ‘restrictions on use and disclosure of information’.

There are still people who do not know that the coronavirus was downgraded to `flu’ threat back in March. Please send the link to MPs and newspapers. It proves that everything that has happened since March has been a lie.

*

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 Zero Hedge

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published by Global Research on October 22, 2021

***

The price of energy from all sources conventional is exploding globally. Far from accidental, it is a well-orchestrated plan to collapse the industrial world economy that has already been weakened dramatically by almost two years of ridiculous covid quarantine and related measures.

What we are seeing is a price explosion in key oil, coal and now especially, natural gas energy. What makes this different from the energy shocks of the 1970s is that this time, it is developing as the corporate investment world, using the fraudulent ESG green investment model, is dis-investing in future oil, gas and coal while OECD governments embrace horrendously inefficient, unreliable solar and wind that will insure the collapse of industrial society perhaps as early as the next months. Barring a dramatic rethinking, the EU and other industrial economies are willfully committing economic suicide.

What only a few years ago was accepted as obvious was that ensuring an abundant, reliable, efficient and affordable energy defines the economy. Without efficient energy we cannot make steel, concrete, mine raw materials or any of the things that support our modern economies. In the past months the world price of coal for power generation has doubled. The price of natural gas has risen by almost 500%. Oil is headed to $90 a barrel, highest in seven years. This is a planned consequence of what is sometimes called the Davos Great Reset or the Green Agenda zero carbon madness.

Some two decades ago Europe began a major shift to mis-named renewables or Green Energy, mainly solar and wind. Germany, the heart of EU industry, led the transformation with former chancellor Merkel’s ill-conceived Energiewende, where Germany’s last nuclear power plants will close in 2022 and coal plants are rapidly being phased out. This all has now collided with the reality that Green Energy is not at all able to deal with major supply shortages. The crisis was entirely predictable.

Green Chickens Come Home to Roost

With the widespread covid lockdowns of industry and travel in 2020 EU natural gas consumption fell dramatically. The largest EU gas supplier, Gazprom of Russia, in interest of an orderly long-term market, duly reduced its deliveries to the EU market even at a loss. An unusually mild 2019-2020 winter allowed EU gas storage to reach maximum. A long, severe winter all but erased that in 2021.

Contrary to EU politicians’ claims, Gazprom has not played politics with the EU to force approval of its new NordStream 2 gas pipeline to Germany. As EU demand resumed in the first six months of 2021, Gazprom rushed to meet it and even exceed record 2019 levels, and even at the expense of replenishing Russian gas storage for the coming winter.

With the EU now firmly committed to a Green Energy agenda, Fit for 55, and explicitly rejecting natural gas as a long-term option, while at the same time killing coal and nuclear, the incompetence of the think-tank climate models that justified a 100% CO2-free, electric society by 2050 has come home to roost.

Because financial investors on Wall Street and London saw the benefit of huge profits from the Green energy agenda, working with the Davos World Economic Forum to promote the laughable ESG investing model, conventional oil, gas and coal companies are not investing profits in expanded production. In 2020 worldwide spending on oil, gas, coal dropped by an estimated $1 trillion. That is not coming back.

With BlackRock and other investors all but boycotting ExxonMobil and other energy companies in favor of “sustainable” energy, the prospects of one exceptionally cold and long winter in Europe and a record lack of wind in northern Germany, triggered a panic buying of gas on world LNG Markets in early September.

The problem was the restocking was too late, as most available LNG from the USA, Qatar and other sources that normally would be available had already been sold to China where an equally confused energy policy, including a political ban on Australian coal, has led to plant closings and a recent government order to secure gas and coal “at any cost.” Qatar, US LNG exporters and others have flocked to Asia leaving the EU in the cold, literally.

Deregulation of Energy

What few understand is how today’s Green energy markets are rigged to benefit speculators like hedge funds or investors like BlackRock or Deutsche Bank and penalize energy consumers. The headline prices for natural gas traded in Europe, the Dutch TTF futures contract, is sold by the London-based ICE Exchange. It speculates on what future wholesale natural gas prices in the EU will be in one, two or three months hence. The ICE is backed by Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank and Société Générale among others. The market is in what are called gas futures contracts or derivatives.

Banks or others can speculate for pennies on the dollar, and when news broke on how low EU gas storage for the coming winter were, financial sharks went on a feeding frenzy. By early October futures prices for Dutch TTF gas had exploded by an unprecedented 300% in only days. Since February it is far worse, as a standard LNG cargo of 3.4 trillion BTU (British Thermal Units) now costs $100-120 million, while at the end of February its cost was less than $20 million. That’s a 500-600% rise in seven months.

The underlying problem is that, unlike the case for most of the postwar period, since the political promotion of unreliable and high-cost solar and wind “renewables” in the EU and elsewhere (e.g. Texas, February 2021) electric utility markets and their prices have been deliberately deregulated to promote Green alternatives and force out gas and coal on the dubious argument that their CO2 emissions endanger the future of humankind if not reduced to zero by 2050.

The prices borne by the end consumer are set by the energy suppliers who integrate the different costs under competitive conditions. The diabolical way EU electricity costs are computed, allegedly to encourage inefficient solar and wind and discourage conventional sources, is that, as French energy analyst Antonio Haya put it, “the most expensive plant of those needed to cover demand (marginal plant) sets the price for each hour of production for all the production matched in the auction.” So today’s natural gas price sets the price for essentially zero cost hydro-electric electricity. Given the soaring price for natural gas, that is defining EU electricity costs. It’s a diabolical pricing architecture that benefits speculators and destroys consumers, including households and industry.

A fundamental aggravating cause for the recent shortages of abundant coal, gas and oil is the decision by BlackRock and other global money trusts to force investment away from oil, gas or coal—all perfectly safe and necessary energy sources—to buildup of grossly inefficient and unreliable solar or wind. They call it ESG investing. It is the latest rage on Wall Street and other world financial markets ever since BlackRock CEO Larry Fink joined the Board of the Klaus Schwab World Economic Forum in 2019. They set up front ESG certifying companies that award ESG “politically correct” ratings on stock companies, and punishing those who do not comply. The rush into ESG investing has made billions for Wall Street and friends. It has also put the brakes on future development of oil, coal or natural gas for most of the world.

The ‘German Disease’

Now after 20 years of foolish investment into solar and wind, Germany, the once-flagship of EU industry, is a victim of what we can call the German Disease. Like the economic Dutch Disease, the forced investment into Green Energy has resulted in the lack of reliable affordable energy. All for an unproven 1.5C claim of IPCC that is supposed to end our civilization by 2050 if we fail to reach Zero Carbon.

To advance that EU Green Energy agenda, country after country with a few exceptions have begun dismantling oil, gas and coal and even nuclear. Germany’s last remaining nuclear plants will permanently close next year. New coal plants, with latest state-of-art scrubbers, are being scrapped even before being started.

The German case gets even more absurd.

In 2011 the Merkel government took an energy model developed by Martin Faulstich and the state Advisory Council on the Environment (SRU) which claimed that Germany could attain 100% renewable electricity generation by 2050. They argued that using nuclear longer would not be necessary, nor the construction of coal-fired plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS). With that, Merkel’s catastrophic Energiewende was born. The study argued, it would work because Germany could contract to buy surplus, CO2-free, hydro-electric power from Norway and Sweden.

Now with extreme drought and a hot summer, the hydropower reserves of Sweden and Norway are dangerously low coming into winter, only 52% of capacity. That means the electric power cables to Denmark, Germany and now UK are in danger. And to make it worse, Sweden is split on shutting its own nuclear plants which give it 40% of electricity. And France is debating cutting as much as one-third of its clear nuclear plants meaning that source for Germany will also not be sure.

Already on January 1, 2021 because of a German government mandated coal phase-out, 11 coal-fired power plants with a total capacity of 4.7 GW were shut down. It lasted only 8 days when several of the coal plants had to be reconnected to the grid due to a prolonged low-wind period. In 2022 the last German nuclear plant will shut and more coal plants will permanently close, all for the green nirvana. In 2002 German nuclear power was source for 31% of power, carbon-free electric power.

As for wind power making up the deficit in Germany, in 2022 some 6000 wind turbines with an installed capacity of 16 GW will be dismantled due to the expiration of feed-in subsidies for older turbines. The rate of new wind farm approvals is being blocked by growing citizen rebellion and legal challenges to the noise pollution and other factors. An avoidable catastrophe is in the making.

The response from the EU Commission in Brussels, rather than admit the glaring flaws in their Green Energy agenda, has been to double down on it as if the problem were natural gas and coal. EU Climate Czar Frans Timmermans absurdly declared, “Had we had the green deal five years earlier, we would not be in this position because then we would have less dependency on fossil fuels and natural gas.”

If the EU continues with that suicidal agenda, it will find itself in a deindustrialized wasteland in a few short years. The problem is not gas, coal or nuclear. It is the inefficient Green Energy from solar and wind that will never be able to offer stable, reliable power.

The Green Energy Agenda of the EU, US and other governments along with the Davos-promoted ESG investing will only guarantee that as we go forward there will be even less gas or coal or nuclear to fall back on when the wind stops, there is a drought in hydroelectric dams or lack of sunshine.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize this is a road to economic destruction. But that’s in fact the goal of the UN 2030 “sustainable” energy or the Davos Great Reset: population reduction on a massive scale. We humans are the frogs being slowly boiled. And now the Powers That Be are really turning the heat up.

*

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, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. 

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

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

List Price: $25.95

Special Price: $18.00

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.

On November 7, Nicaragua held elections in which current president Daniel Ortega received 75% support and, as a result, begins a new term of office in January. Not surprisingly, the US government described the election as a “sham.” Of more concern is that many on the left seem to agree. William Robinson’s NACLA article, Nicaragua: Chronicle of an Election Foretold, is a scathing critique, repeated in an interview with The Real News. 

In this article, we will show that Robinson’s claims are based on falsehoods and elite bias. He appears to be out of touch with the reality faced by most Nicaraguans. 

Robinson says Ortega’s election was foretold because “Seven presidential candidates are imprisoned [and]… opposition figures [are] detained without trial”

Prior to the elections, several people were accused of treason because of involvement in US attempts to overthrow Nicaragua’s elected government. They allegedly violated new laws controlling the use of foreign money for “political purposes” as well as older ones which penalize seeking foreign intervention in Nicaraguan affairs. Some of the detainees aspired to the presidency, but none were credible contenders. Here are the seven “presidential candidates”:

Robinson says, “The repression particularly decimated the left-leaning opposition party Democratic Renovation Union (UNAMOS), formerly called the Sandinista Renovation Movement (MRS).”

Robinson calls the MRS/UNAMOS “left-leaning”, completely ignoring its rightward shift in the last two decades. 

One leading member, the former Sandinista Dora María Téllez, supported right-wing candidates in recent elections; she praised the 2019 coup in Bolivia and actively collaborated with US plans to end Sandinista (FSLN) rule. Both she and Ana Margarita Vigil, who also has a lengthy history of collaboration with the US, are charged with inciting foreign interference in the elections. Tellez was one of the main organizers of the violent roadblocks in 2018, seen distributing money, drugs and food to the thugs running them. 

The author Sergio Ramirez is a former Sandinista, Nicaragua’s Vice-President from 1985 until 1990, who founded the MRS in 1995 in opposition to Daniel Ortega. When he competed for the presidency in 1996, he received a derisory 7,665 votes nationwide.  Clearly, he is more popular among elites abroad than in his homeland. Since opposing the FSLN, Ramirez’s non-profit organization, Fundación Luisa Mercado has received US money via the Chamorro Foundation. He must have forgotten that in 1988 he said it was a “crime” to receive US government funds, “because they are part of a campaign against Nicaraguan sovereignty and integrity.”

Robinson appears to blame the opposition’s rightward shift on “repression” but does not explain why, when its supposedly radical young leaders came to the US, they were celebrated by the far right in Washington – Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio and Rep Ileana Ros-Lehtinen – and looked to Trump for help. 

Robinson says, “There is little evidence to corroborate the claim that the 2018 mass uprising was instigated by Washington … or that the United States has since carried out a destabilization campaign aimed at overthrowing the regime.”

Ever since the FSLN regained power in 2007, the US has been funding anti-government media and “civil society” groups. At the influential Council on Foreign Relations, Elliott Abrams spoke out aggressively beginning in 2015. Kenneth Wollack, now chairman of the state-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED), bragged to the US Congress on June 14, 2018 that they had trained 8,000 young Nicaraguans to take part in the uprising. Yorlis Luna has described in detail the indoctrination process. An article for Global Americans, which Robinson has disparaged elsewhere, gave some details of the NED “laying the groundwork for insurrection.” 

When the uprising and coup attempt failed, the US increased its open opposition to the Nicaraguan government with the Nica Act. Washington imposed sanctions on Nicaraguan government officials and opposed international loans to Nicaragua in bodies like the World Bank, which halted its funding for three years as a result. Rather than stepping back, Washington escalated its interference. In 2020, it was revealed that Washington was planning for “government transition” in Nicaragua. A major contract called Responsive Assistance in Nicaragua (RAIN) outlined different transition scenarios.

It is reasonable to assume that non-public agencies such as the CIA were also active. 

Robinson suggests the US government was actually helping the FSLN government and says, “USAID also granted several hundred million dollars directly to the Ortega government from 2007 until 2018.” 

Robinson’s assertion is untrue. The vast majority of USAID funds went to non-governmental organizations and other “partner organizations.” The USAID Nicaragua website shows they provided $115 million from 2014 to 2018 with the majority to “support Nicaraguans in their efforts to restore democratic norms and practices.” To give just one example, over 2,000 Nicaraguans received so-called “political party training.”

It is understandable that any country might object to this and see it as interference in its domestic affairs. What is not understandable is how Robinson got this basic information so wrong. 

Robinson says, “The independent organization Urnas Abiertas reported an abstention rate of approximately 80 percent after the opposition called for an election boycott.”

The organization Urnas Abiertas claims that only 830,000 voted, not the 2,921,430 votes officially recorded, implying that some two million were falsified. The near impossibility of two million votes being faked has already been explained. Urnas Abiertas provides no evidence of how it was done, nor have they quoted any of the thousands of poll watchers from opposition parties who would have seen it happening. While Robinson calls Urnas Abiertas “independent,” Ben Norton has shown that it is heavily dominated by opposition figures. 

Official results show 66% of registered voters took part, which was far from unexpected given that 2.8 million voters had earlier checked their entries on the electoral register. 

Robinson says, “CID-Gallup…found that 76 percent of the country’s electorate believed the country was moving in the wrong direction. The poll reported that 19 percent of the electorate planned to vote for Ortega, 65 percent stated they would favor an opposition candidate….”

Out of an electorate of almost 4.5 million, 2,759,743 cast a valid vote (62%) and of these 2,093,834 (75%) voted for the Ortega-Murillo ticket. Opinion polls by M&R had shown Ortega’s support at 70%. 

Methodologically, the M&R polls are strong, using face-to-face interviews of over 4,200 potential voters. However, Robinson chooses to focus on results from CID-Gallup (not part of the international Gallup group) which found that only 19% would vote for Ortega. While Robinson says M&R polls are “contracted by the FSLN” he offers no proof, and fails to say that at least some of the CID-Gallup polls are paid for by the opposition, and in this case rely on just 1,200 cell phone interviews. In the past, he has pointed out that CID-Gallup was employed in US government propaganda campaigns in Nicaragua. 

Robinson says, “The vote was carried out in a climate of fear and intimidation, with a total absence of safeguards against fraud”

Some 160 international witnesses, covering all regions of the country, reported enthusiastic participation in the elections by Nicaraguans young and old. Families frequently came together on foot or on motorcycles, some on crutches or in wheelchairs. Eyewitness reports are here, here, here, and here. A 4-minute video captures images from the day. 

Safeguards against fraud included having opposition “poll watchers” in the 13,459 voting stations from start to finish. Votes are counted at each voting station with all parties ratifying the results, which are then posted outside for the public to see. Detailed results can be checked at the CSE website.

Robinson says, “As part of the crackdown the government also banned 24 civic organizations and professional associations…” “…a spate of laws… allows authorities to criminalize anyone who speaks out against the government.”

One element of the information war against Nicaragua is to spread false claims. This included a tsunami of social media posts fomenting violence in 2018, much of it produced by troll farms. More recently, 24 NGOs were closed which include 15 medical bodies which broadcast false information about Nicaragua’s response to Covid-19, undermining the government’s efforts (see below) and making people hesitant to go to public hospitals. A new law specifically penalizes the publishing of false information “likely to spread anxiety, anguish or fear.”

Nicaraguans are free to speak out against the government and they do so without fear. Here is an article which documents interviews with various Nicaraguans, both favorable and opposed to the FSLN. 

Robinson says, “the economy began to tank in 2015.”

This is untrue. From 2009 to 2017, World Bank figures show that economic growth never fell below 4.4%. It only did so in 2018-20, when the coup attempt was quickly followed by the pandemic. 

The FSLN government’s achievements over 14 years are remarkable. In a letter to a cynic, Becca Mohally Renk, points out that they include: infant mortality reduced by 61% since 2007, the percentage of people with a university degree rising from 9% to 19%, electricity coverage growing from 54% to 99%, the lowest homicide rates in the region, and many more. Far from “suppressing” students, workers, feminists, and environmentalists as Robinson claims, the government ensures free university provision, promotes trade union rights, has an unparalleled record on gender equality and recently became the first Latin American state to grant territorial rights to all its indigenous communities.

Robinson says, “Nicaragua… has the lowest rate of vaccination in Latin America, with only 4.9 percent of the population inoculated as of October.”

While it’s true that vaccination against Covid-19 proceeded slowly at first because of limited supplies, by December over 70% of the population aged 2 and above had received at least one dose, and many older people had received booster doses. UNICEF and the World Health Organization congratulated Nicaragua on its vaccination campaign.

Nowhere are the Nicaraguan government’s advances more obvious than in healthcare. With 21 new public hospitals built since 2007, and thousands more trained health workers, Nicaragua was much better prepared for Covid-19 than neighboring countries. With community healthcare, door-to-door education and contract tracing, Nicaragua has kept Covid deaths to levels which are 55% of the average for Latin American countries, according to the respected Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. 

Robinson says, “The worldwide Left similarly demanded sanctions against apartheid South Africa, sought to block U.S. and international financing for the Pinochet dictatorship, and currently calls for ‘boycott, divestment, and sanctions’ against Israel.”

The comparison of Sandinista Nicaragua to apartheid South Africa, Pinochet’s Chile and apartheid Israel is an indication of how wrong Robinson is on this topic. Nicaragua has endured over 100 years of US sponsored attacks, invasions, occupations, and dictatorships. They have a huge need and legitimate right to defend their sovereignty. It is disgraceful that some former progressives are supporting Washington’s escalating attacks and sanctions on Nicaragua.

Robinson says, “Ortega will now start his fourth consecutive term in office… in the midst of economic and political crisis. With its legitimacy shattered in the aftermath of the 2018 mass uprising and its violent repression, the regime has to rely more on direct coercion to maintain control.”

Robinson talks about “the government’s repression of the popular uprising” in 2018. He appears to acknowledge that support for the uprising faded almost as quickly as it began, but he completely misreads the reasons, which were that people realized they had been misled about state violence by the fake news spread on social media. Then they experienced the opposition’s house burning, looting, destruction of public buildings, kidnappings and murder. They saw that Sandinista sympathizers were targeted and that the police, confined to their stations by the government as a step towards a negotiated peace, were directly attacked and 22 police officers killed. 

It is not surprising that Nicaraguans rejected the opposition’s call to abstain from the elections, opting instead for the peace and stability offered by continuing Sandinista government. That is what more than two million Nicaraguans voted for on November 7, and the international left, including William Robinson, should now accept this result.

Rick Sterling is a journalist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. He can be contacted at [email protected]. John Perry lives and works in Masaya, Nicaragua and can be contacted at [email protected]. 

All Global Research articles 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.

***

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

First published on October 12, 2021

***

Imagine humanity would one day – very soon – decide to stop wearing masks. In unison. Not in the streets, not in restaurants, not in shops, not in sports events – simply nowhere. Against all orders of a good portion of the 193 UN member governments, or at least the western governments. And, indeed, against the entire UN system – against the orders of Mr. Antonio Guterres, himself. Yes, indeed. Many of the UN agencies, not all yet, have started mandating vaxxing for their staff… or else.

How come, it hasn’t occurred to everyone yet, that there is something wrong? Badly wrong. Can it be that it is simply cognitive dissonance? You know that there is something horribly wrong, but your comfort zone doesn’t allow you to admit it? That was the case in the Third Reich – that brought forward Hitler’s tyranny. The rest is history.

The alternative to imagine would be that all those who have decided not to get vaxxed – stick to it and make it public. They defy the totally illegal and unconstitutional orders of the government, the UN system which gets their marching orders from the dark invisible cult, that threatens with death, those who don’t comply.

But just imagine, nobody would listen to these absurd and anti-constitutional orders, not even the police, nor the military – both law enforcement bodies would side with the people – with the very people, whose rights they have sworn to defend.

Actually, the latter has happened more than once already around the globe, where police brutality used to be particularly strong, suddenly a group of front-line police have taken off their helmets and marched with the people – in France, Germany, Austria, Italy, Switzerland and elsewhere. Lately, a similar trend may be crystallizing, in Australia’s State of Victoria, where people of Melbourne have been in a lockdown literally for months.

A police lady quit and came to the fore giving interviews and divulging that the majority of her colleagues think alike, but they are afraid of losing their jobs and / or being punished by Victoria’s tyrannical governor. This is a good start. See this.

It has to happen in unison. In solidarity. In most European countries you are not allowed to go to restaurants or any public event unless you can show the vaxx-certificate – an infamous QR-code on your cell phone, that would be read by another cell phone, programmed to read your QR-code.

You have no idea what is or what will eventually be put on this QR-code. The goal is all your personal information, from your complete health record to your criminal record, your bank accounts – just everything. But you wouldn’t know. You cannot read what is on the QR-code. “They” can, since it is programmed that way.

The objective is to have in essence this QR-code implanted in your body. That’s pretty much what Klaus Schwab proudly said in his brief (about 2 min video below ) interview with the French Swiss TV in 2016. He frames it something like this: Humans will become “transhumans”.

Video: Towards Digital Tyranny with Peter Koenig

Click here to link to bitchute version

The video has since been “fact-checked” out of the internet. Mr. Microsoft, Bill Gates, actually spoke of an implanted Operating System in the human body. So, we, humans, need to have a body that can respond to electromagnetic waves, in other words our bodies have to be transformed to electromagnetic fields (EMF). That’s being done, by the mRNA- “vaxx” that is injected into our tissues.

Have you noticed, Pfizer and Moderna, the frontrunners of mRNA – which are absolutely not vaccines, you better believe it – are the only ones that are allowed in the West? Now they have added AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson — they are only different in as much as their “killing” mechanism is different.

They also produce blood clots and spike proteins. The former may lead to respiratory blockages all the way to embolisms of the lung or brain, or even heart. The spike protein spreads to all your cells. They eventually attack your immune defense system making you much more vulnerable to any kind of disease, especially cancers. Why are they not allowing the Russian Sputnik V or any one of the Chinese vaccines, both of which are based on traditional vaccination methods?

The Russian and Chinese ones do not work for the population reduction agenda.

See this, well-researched horror story / video by Dr. Madej: Dr. Carrie Madej: First U.S. Lab Examines “Vaccine” Vials, Horrific Findings Revealed. No, this is not to scare anyone. This is to bring reality into your comfort zone and hopefully throw you out of comfort into a world that you and everybody must help resisting.

Do you know that the mRNA vaxxes inject you with graphene, a highly poisonous fluid, that creates of your entire body an electromagnetic field (EMF), receptive to 5G and soon 6G ultra-short shortwaves that eventually will be able to manipulate your brain and all your info, now gradually being stored on your personalized QR-code, transforming you, human, into – in Klaus Schwab’s words, a “transhuman” – no longer in possession of your own will or your bank account?

Your money, by the way, if you haven’t noticed already, will soon no longer be physical money that you can touch and hand over to a cashier or a provider, but it’s going to be all electronic, digital money, over which you still may have control, because “they” let you. But once they decide that you must give up control, it will be gone.

Have you noticed at what speed ATM machines are disappearing? How cashiers in banks disappear? They will soon no longer be necessary, because you don’t control cash anymore. There are entire countries in northern Europe which are almost there: Full digitization. In some countries, among them Sweden, some people have already voluntarily let a nano-chip be implanted under the skin of their wrist. The chip works like a built-in bank account. Young people love it. It’s so cool. You swipe your hand, not even a card anymore – and the payment is made. Except, these people have no idea, how this will be played out in the future.

Mind you, this only applies to the people who survive the false vaccination – or rather inoculation campaign. Because, do you know, that considerably more people have died and are dying from receiving the poisonous mRNA-jab, than from covid itself? – No, of course not. Government and the paid mainstream media won’t tell you about it. The MSM gets billions from governments for lying to you.

So, all the above only applies to those people, who survive the inoculations in the long run. Because chances are you may not survive. From the false vaccine, not from covid. See this: Video: A Final Warning to Humanity from Former Pfizer Chief Scientist Michael Yeadon.

Let’s go back to mask wearing. This was the first step – in the Lockstep Phase – remember the 2010 Rockefeller Report – where the authors describe the “Lockstep Phase”, as meaning that all 193 UN member countries do the same at the same time – in “lockstep”? – Well, we are already beyond this phase now.

This Lockstep phase has every government in the world order their people to wear masks, everywhere. Unbought science has long proven that mask wearing does not prevent covid nor any viral disease, but causes tremendous damage, as it reduces oxygen intake by 20 to 50 percent, depending on the type of mask. Instead, you are breathing your own CO2.

But that’s not all, the psychological damage done by forced mask wearing is tremendous. It’s sheer humiliation; it’s depressive. You talk to people, but you cannot recognize them in many cases, the voices are muffled, often difficult to understand – and the facial expression that says so much in a conversation is gone. Depressions have skyrocketed, and so have suicides. But the governments and the well-paid mainstream media, as well as the bought science, do not report about these disastrous effects.

About the “bought science”: Many people can simply not imagine the corrupt world we have become in the span of, say, two decades.

Let’s put the beginning of the countdown at 9/11.

That’s when the Big official lies started, and the coercion of the truth tellers took hold. Most scientists, police or other first-hand witnesses have families, they have a career, they have a steady income. They do not want “trouble”. And trouble can go from harassment, to job loss to death. This is no joke. That’s how the “system” works today. You are either in the Matrix and live a life of a certain comfort, or you take the Red Pill – and you are on your own.

Lately it has gone a step further – to the internet, “the goldmine” of all information, is being severely censored.

All inconvenient information is either completely deleted or is being “fact-checked’ away. If you check who is behind the fact-checkers, something most people don’t do, you see that they are big interest groups, in the case of covid, mostly pharmaceuticals, helped by Bill Gates et al. It is therefore ever more difficult to find referenced information.

Youtube just declared that any information, no matter how scientifically proven it is, that goes against the classical “climate change narrative” will be deleted. So simple. We are dominated, no – more than we – the TRUTH – is being dominated and manipulated by private interests.

Yes, the world needs a Great Reset, but no à la Klaus Schwab, not according to the WEF, but according to a design growing out of the people. That’s why solidarity and not submission is so important. – When do we wake up to this simple matter?

There are nevertheless some excellent exceptions. In the US at least Texas and Florida and others, mostly Republican States, do not follow the mask-wearing mandate, nor all the consequential narrative that goes with it, like testing. People are free to wear or not to wear. Most don’t wear. And the covid-incidence is actually also less than in other States, say California, where this absurd rule is strictly enforced. Maybe this “lesser covid incidence”, like in Texas, goes hand-in-hand, with the number of people who do not opt getting the jab and also, State Government reporting is more honest than in vaxx-mask-imposing states.

Something to think about.

To increase the cadence of fear – Bill Gates declared already in 2018 that there may be a much deadlier disease than covid waiting for humanity, a Marburg-R epidemic. See this.

It is a hemorrhagic fever which was first described in 1967, with a brief outbreak that killed 376 people. It’s described as being about as deadly as Ebola. In the video below is a message from Kieran Morrisey – University Hospital Manager, Dublin. See also this.

Real or false? It doesn’t matter. It’s first designed to instill fear, and fear, we now know, lowers our defense system and makes us vulnerable to obey orders – just what we as humanity should stop doing and becoming ourselves again: Sovereign human beings.

The next step is full digitization. Make-believe vaccination which are coerced by any means by the Biden Administration, which is a prime example for many European countries, and the QR-code are progressing fast, without the people not even noticing.

Don’t forget Agenda ID2020 – also a Bill Gates invention – is in full Swing. See this and this.

It’s now being tested in West Africa, where people have “volunteered” to partake in an exercise where they have access to their money only through a body-implanted “bank account”. This account can and is being monitored from outside. It’s part of what is awaiting us in the west as the great reset takes hold. See also this (last third of same video as above) Dr. Carrie Madej: First U.S. Lab Examines “Vaccine” Vials, Horrific Findings Revealed.

To some extent it’s also being tested by some people in Sweden who have voluntarily implanted a chip under their skin that caried the details of their bank account. Maybe more and they don’t know it?

This is the future QR-codification of the world.

Therefore, be aware of what QR-codes are really destined for, what they can and will do in the future, if we do not stop them. It’s time and again the same question. We have to be aware – and we have to become free of fear, we have to become disobedient and instead becoming ourselves again. We have to return to what we were born to be, sovereign human beings.

And – we have no time to lose. We must act fast.

*

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.

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

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

Featured image: Public domain image from Wiki’s COVID-Protest page.

All Global Research articles 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.

***

“That’s the one precept every religion has in common. The Golden Rule…None of us practice it. And if we did, a miracle would happen. Joy and justice would be inter-twined in our journeys! And the world we create because we’re writing our own history.

“Then, and then only, will there be light at the end of the tunnel!”

– Paul Hellyer (From his last presentation to Winnipeg. Oct 20, 2016) [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Warm. Friendly. Courageous as hell. Gentle as a warm summer breeze.

Those are the thoughts I have of Paul Hellyer from his last visit to Winnipeg now more than five years ago. He left me and a crowd of well over a hundred people engaged in spite of not having particularly dynamic oratorical skills. Such were the power of the man, his ideas and the urgency with which he learned and taught his ideas to major cities all across the country.

Hellyer was a high profile federal cabinet minister in the 60s. He ran for the leadership of both the Liberal and the Progressive Conservative parties. In the late 90s he founded and led the Canadian Action Party. [2]

Mr. Hellyer was a Canadian nationalist and a political campaigner. He was notable essentially for his critiques of the Free Trade Agreements, beginning with the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement in the 1980s. But he was also a fervent believer in the Bank of Canada remaining a public bank, and remaining the prime lender at low or no rates of interest for major government projects as it was before that focus was removed by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in 1974. [3]

In spite of all his accomplishments, and him also being the longest serving member of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada, this author can personally attest to the complete lack of interest of a local visit by this man now past his 93rd birthday.[4]

Paul Hellyer has authored fifteen separate books including Agenda, a Plan for Action (1971), Funny Money: A common sense alternative to mainline economics (1994), One Big Party: To Keep Canada Independent (2003), The Money Mafia: A World in Crisis (2014), and Liberation! The Economics of Hope (2020)

And now, sadly, as Christmas approaches, Paul Hellyer will not be joining Winnipeggers, or anyone, to greet the holiday season. His long and exciting life came to a close on August 8 of this year.

To mark the passage of a dear member of the Canadian community, and a good friend, we present this tribute in audio made up of the voices of a number of individuals who knew his record and met him. We also include a brief message of his own from an except of our last full interview with him in 2016.

As a bonus, we include on this page a copy of his talk in Winnipeg.

Ronald Stagg is a Professor of History at Ryerson University. He has taught there over three decades. His research interests include Canadian social history and Canadian-American relations, and his teaching interests are in social protest and in the relationship between film and history.

Howard Bertram was a member of the Canadian Action Party, founded and led by Paul Hellyer.

Barrie Zwicker has been a journalist for a time spanning 7 decades. He is also a media critic and a documentary producer. He met Paul Hellyer in person during 9/11 visibility conference in 2004.

Rocco Galati has been a constitutional lawyer for 32 years. He is the Executive Director of the Constitutional Rights Centre Inc. In the past he won multiple suits against the government. Galati was named twice by Canadian Lawyers’ Magazine as one of Canada’s top 25 lawyers.

Grant Cameron is a UFOlogist. His  interests have turned to the involvement and actions of the President of the United States in the UFO problem. He has made over 20 trips to the National Archives and most of the various Presidential archives looking for presidential UFO material. HE recently wrote the book, THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT UFO STORY: The Wilbert Smith Files.

Victor Viggiani is the News Director of Zland Communications an international news service, and a close friend to Paul Hellyer.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 337)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

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

Other stations airing the show:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MndOxRLBg0&t=109s
2. Taylor C. Noakes (Aug 13, 2021), ‘Former federal defence minister Paul Hellyer dies at 98’, The Canadian Press; https://www.thestar.com/politics/2021/08/13/former-federal-defence-minister-paul-hellyer-dies-at-98.html?rf
3. https://www.globalresearch.ca/canadian-sovereignty-the-free-trade-agreements-and-the-money-mafia-a-conversation-with-paul-hellyer/5532851
4. “Current Chronological List of Members of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada”. Privy Council Office. Archived from the original on February 15, 2016. Retrieved June 17, 2013.

Sixty years ago in the late fall and early winter, a seventeen-year-old blue-eyed Bronx boy went by himself to see an afternoon showing of West Side Story on Fordham Road in the north Bronx. 

.

West Side Story (1961)

Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin spent an hour and 14 minutes in a video conversation on Wednesday. Geopolitically, paving the way for 2022, this is the one that really matters – much more than Putin-Biden a week ago.

Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov, who generally carefully measures his words, had previously hinted that this exchange would be “extremely important.”

It was obvious the two leaders would not only exchange information about the natural gas pipeline Power of Siberia 2. But Peskov was referring to prime time geopolitics: how Russia-China would be coordinating their countercoups against the hybrid war/Cold War 2.0 combo deployed by the US and its allies.

While no substantial leaks were expected from the 37th meeting between Xi and Putin since 2013 (they will meet again in person in February 2022, at the start of the Beijing Winter Olympics), Assistant to the President for Foreign Policy Yuri Ushakov did manage to succinctly deliver at least two serious bits of information.

These are the highlights of the call:

Moscow will inform Beijing about the progress, or lack thereof, in negotiations with the US/NATO on security guarantees for Russia. Beijing supports Moscow’s demands on US/NATO for these Putin and Xi agreed to create an “independent financial structure for trade operations that could not be influenced by other countries.” Diplomatic sources, off the record, say the structure may be announced by a joint summit in late 2022.

They discussed the Biden-hosted “Summit for Democracy,” concluding it was counterproductive and imposed new dividing lines.

Of all of the above, the third point is the real game-changer – already in the works for a few years now, and gaining definitive momentum after Washington hawks of the Victoria “F**k the EU” Nuland kind recently floated the idea of expelling Russia from SWIFT – the vast messaging network used by banks and other financial institutions to make money transfer instructions – as the ultimate sanctions package for the non-invasion of Ukraine.

Putin and Xi once again discussed one of their key themes in bilaterals and BRICS meetings: the need to keep increasing the share of the yuan and ruble in mutual settlements – bypassing the US dollar – and opening new stock market avenues for Russian and Chinese investors.

Bypassing a SWIFT mechanism “influenced by third counties” then becomes a must. Ushakov diplomatically put it as “the need to intensify efforts to form an independent financial infrastructure to service trade operations between Russia and China.”

Russian energy businesses, from Gazprom to Rosneft, know all there is to know not only about US threats but also about the negative effects of the tsunami of US dollars flooding the global economy via the Fed’s quantitative easing.

This Russia-China drive is yet another dimension of geoeconomic, geostrategic and demographic power rapidly shifting towards Eurasia and possibly foreshadowing the advent of a new world system related to other matters Putin-Xi certainly discussed: the interconnection of Belt and Road with the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), the expanded reach of the  Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the coming Chinese presidency of BRICS in 2022.

The US – with US$30 trillion in debt, 236% of its militarized GDP – is virtually bankrupt. Russia-China have already experimented with their alternative payment systems, which will inevitably integrate.

The most important banks in both countries will adopt the system – as well as banks across Eurasia doing business with them, and then vast swaths of the Global South. SWIFT, in the long run, will be used only in exceptional cases if China and Russia have their way.

Maidan redux

Now to the heart of the geopolitical puzzle.

Ushakov confirmed that the Russian Federation has submitted proposals on security guarantees to the US. As Putin himself had confirmed even before talking to Xi, it’s all about “indivisible security”: a mechanism that has been enshrined all across the territory of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe since a 1975 summit in Helsinki.

Predictably, under orders of the powers that be, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg already rejected it.

Both Xi and Putin clearly identify how Team Biden is deploying a strategic polarization gambit under good old divide-and-rule. The wishful thinking at play is to build a pro-American bloc – with participants ranging from the UK and Australia to Israel and Saudi Arabia – to “isolate” Russia-China.

That’s what’s behind the narrative thunderously splashed non-stop all across the West – to which Biden’s Summit for Democracy was also tied. Taiwan is being manipulated against Beijing while Ukraine is being literally weaponized against Russia. “China aggression” meets “Russian aggression.”

Beijing has not fallen into the trap but has asserted at different levels that Taiwan will eventually be integrated into the mainland motherland, without any ludicrous “invasion.” And the wishful thinking that massive American pressure will lead to cracks inside the Chinese Communist Party is also likely generating zero traction.

Ukraine is a much more volatile proposition: a dysfunctional nightmare of systemic instability, widespread corruption, shady oligarchic entanglements and poverty.

Washington still follows the Zbigniew Brzezinski-concocted Maidan plan laid out for cookie distributor Nuland in 2014. Yet seven years later, no American “strategist” managed to understand why Russia would fail to invade Ukraine, which has been part of Russia for centuries.

For these “strategists”, it’s imperative that Russia faces a second Vietnam, after Afghanistan in the 1980s. Well, it’s not going to happen because Moscow has no interest whatsoever in “invading” Ukraine.

It does get more complicated. The ultimate fear dictating all US foreign policy since the early 20^th century is the possibility of Germany clinching a new version of Bismarck’s 1887 Reinsurance Treaty with Russia.

Add China to the combination and these three actors are able to control just about the entire Eurasian landmass. Updating Mackinder, the US would then be turned into a geopolitically irrelevant island.

Putin-Xi may have examined not only how the imperial hybrid war tactics against them are floundering against them, as well as how the tactics are dragging Europe further into the abyss of irrelevance.

For the EU, as former British diplomat Alastair Crooke points out, the strategic balanceis a disaster:

“The EU has virtually ruptured its relations with both Russia and China – at the same time. Washington’s hawks wanted it. A ‘European Brzezinski’ certainly would have advised the EU differently: never lose both in tandem – you are never that powerful.”

No wonder the leadership in Moscow-Beijing can’t take anyone in Brussels seriously – be it assorted NATO chihuahuas or the spectacularly incompetent Ursula von der Leyen at the European Commission.

A faint ray of light is that Paris and Berlin, unlike the Russophobic Poland and the Baltic fringe, at least prefer having some sort of negotiation with Moscow over Ukraine as opposed to slapping on extra sanctions.

Now imagine Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov explaining the ABCs of foreign policy to a clueless Annalena “Grune” Baerbock, now posing as German foreign minister while displaying a fresh mix of incompetence and aggressiveness. She actually placed the phone call.

Lavrov had to meticulously explain the consequences of NATO expansion; the Minsk agreement; and how Berlin should exercise its right to pressure Kiev to respect Minsk.

No leaks about it should be expected from Ushakov. But it’s fair to imagine that with “partners” like the US, NATO and the EU, Xi and Putin should conclude that China and Russia don’t even need enemies.

Follow Pepe Escobar on Twitter: @RealPepeEscobar

Pepe Escobar is a frequent contributor to Global Research

“Raymond Kurzweil is described in Wikipedia as “an American inventor and futurist. He is involved in fields such as optical character recognition, text-to-speech synthesis, speech recognition technology, and electronic keyboard instruments” 

***

Ray Kurzweil doesn’t have a God to honour. He has a machine, and he wants us all to shift to this digital version of the divine. He wants us to become super-computers in all but name. He calls it ‘the singularity’, a name with a quasi-religious ring to it. The singularity stands for ‘the fusion of the real with the synthetic’. 

Kurzweil sees this as a supreme act that will end the need for human evolution by transferring the meaning and purpose of life into a ‘real-time’ electro-digital encyclopedia composed of trillions of soulless electrical circuits that ape what we call ‘knowledge’.

He’s not alone in this way of thinking, there’s Zuckerberg, Schwab, Musk and who knows who else.  And then there’s a whole trail of followers stretching out behind, all travelling the same way. Tens of millions, if not billions of them. They don’t describe themselves as believers in ‘the singularity’, they simply worship the same digital totem and allow it to gradually take-over their lives – megabyte by megabyte, gigabyte by gigabyte – until they can no longer be described as human. 

When you see people constantly looking downwards, you realise that they are metamorphosing into something less than human. Aspiration – the desire to grow, learn and be more than one is – is an upward moving action. The impulse of aspiration to a state of higher consciousness, is an upwardly rising movement. As a tree or flower reaches for the light, so do we humans.

But those seduced by their cell phones, I pods, tabs et al. always look down. Down into a place where the only light is the LED powered glow on the face of their appliance.

Slowly but surely humans are being transformed into that which they are addicted to. They are losing their ability to see and respond to the actual Light, their guiding angel and innate link with universal cosmic consciousness. They are loosing their humanity. Their soul is being overridden, short-circuited, deleted.

Whenever one sits in front of a glowing screen one is the subject of hypnosis. One is subconsciously becoming reliant upon that which is the gateway technology into another world of being and perceiving: ‘a virtual world’.

Kurzweil and those billions who adopt his fascination with a virtual existence, are placing a great burden on the rest of life. They are dead weight imposed upon living matter. They are the receivers and transmitters of distorted energy fields – and these fields pollute the natural vibratory fields responsible for the health and well being of all living matter.

People who only look down ‘shed’ their negative vibrations on others in their vicinity. This is a vibratory reality. And when coupled with the actual EMF radiation emanating from that to which they are addicted, the circadian rhythms of the biosphere are drowned-out by a pervasive electro smog.

The Schumann Resonance (7.86 Hertz) which maintains balance of the natural environment, including humans, wildlife and plant life, is pushed into the background, while the synthetic radiation frequencies beamed out from 3,4,5G towers and transmitters, become the predominant energy field. 

A voltage field that is dispersed and accentuated by the little pocket time bombs that some 95% of those living and working in Western societies cannot bear to part company with. 

But when your best friend is a machine you easily fall victim to its powers.

Man’s love-affair with technology has intensified with each passing decade. There has always been a fascination with that which appears to make daily life more navigable and more ‘convenient’. 

But the price to be paid for the ever more high-tech and ‘unrepairable’ digitalised props of the modern age, is far too high. They cannot simply be dismissed as something ‘one can’t do without’. 

Food, water, clothes, shelter and medicine belong in that category, but not convenience technologies that kill.

We humans are not machines. We have sensitive physical bodies, astoundingly brilliant brains and exquisite powers of perception and spirituality. The role of the machine is to support this condition, not to override it. To accentuate a creative ‘human scale’ sense of proportion and responsiveness in daily life.

Today’s multifarious tech toys have been weaponised. They were born out of military research and development. They were conceived and designed as intentional weapons and surveillance tools, combined into one.

They come with no health warning, aside from some precautionary small print, less obvious than that associated with plastic toys. Children are urged to enter into long-term relationships with these toxic electro magnetic play things, and with the virtual worlds they draw their owners into – like moths to the flame. They are military accessories, sweetened and domesticated into tools of ‘friendly’ torture. Silent weapons seductively distorting the divine human condition.

Now we begin to see the dire results of having adopted such a blind degree of faith in the fake one-eyed god called ‘progress’, with its Faustian promise of taking us ever closer to the promised land of technological perfection. The transmutation of warm, spontaneous, creative human beings into sterile, soulless cyborgs. 

That is the Kurzweil, Zuckerberg, Gates and Schwab agenda for the future of humanity; “genocide of the human soul”.

So guard your precious, responsive souls with your very life. Never let them be technologically enslaved. Give them the true breathing space they need to make themselves known to you. 

For your soul alone knows the true direction to the Promised Land.

Julian Rose is an early pioneer of UK organic farming, writer, international activist, entrepreneur and holistic teacher. He is co-founder of HARE The Hardwick Alliance for Real Ecology see https://hardwickalliance.org/ Julian’s acclaimed book ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind – Why Humanity Must Come Through’ is particularly recommended reading for this time: see www.julianrose.info 

U.S. military members involved in a lawsuit challenging the military’s COVID vaccine mandate on Dec. 10 filed an amended complaint seeking a new injunction.

The move came after a judge last month rejected the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DOD) assertion the Pfizer-BioNTech and Comirnaty COVID vaccines are “interchangeable, but before the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Marines began discharging unvaccinated service members.

In an interview with The Defender, attorney Travis Miller, who represents the 18 plaintiffs in Doe et al v. Austin, told The Defender:

“Our clients face comparable challenges. As our amended complaint alleges, the [U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s] ‘approval’ of the Comirnaty vaccine excluded testing on large segments of the American population, including those with previous COVID-19 infections (an alleged 3% of trial participants), pregnant women, and individuals with serious pre-existing conditions.

“The clinical trials were inappropriately truncated, with trial participants being observed for an average of four months, instead of the FDA’s recommended period of one to two years.”

On Nov. 12, U.S. Federal District Judge Allen Winsor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida denied plaintiffs’ original request for a preliminary injunction against the military’s vaccine mandate.

However, in his order denying the injunction, Judge Winsor acknowledged that under the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) statute, “recipients of EUA drugs must be ‘informed’ … of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.”

Judge Winsor also pointed out that DOD’s guidance documents explicitly state only FDA-licensed COVID vaccines are mandated.

While this would be applicable to the Comirnaty vaccine, the judge noted:

“The plaintiffs have shown that the DOD is requiring injections from vials not labeled ‘Comirnaty.’ Indeed, defense counsel could not even say whether vaccines labeled ‘Comirnaty’ exist at all.”

Miller said the FDA’s “wrongful conclusion” that two distinct vaccines can be ‘interchangeable’” is one of the claims in the amended complaint.

Miller told The Defender:

“Τhe FDA incorrectly determined that the EUA Pfizer vaccine can be used interchangeably with the licensed Comirnaty vaccine. Whether the FDA can make that determination is currently being litigated. And this FDA determination presents a significant problem for military service members. With the Comirnaty vaccine being unavailable, those in the military are improperly being forced to take an EUA vaccine.”

DOD violated own vaccine mandate guidance, plaintiffs allege

The plaintiffs’ amended complaint cites five primary causes of action, including two new causes related to the FDA’s “wrongful conclusion that two distinct vaccines can be ‘interchangeable.’”

Miller said black letter law states products issued under a EUA are rescinded once a fully licensed alternative becomes available.

On this basis, the plaintiffs filed a claim of action in relation to the armed services’ violation of the DOD’s own vaccine mandate, wherein service members are being mandated to receive the vaccines administered under a EUA instead of the Comirnaty vaccine, which the military claims is “unavailable.”

As part of their amended complaint, the plaintiffs are now once again requesting injunctive relief from the court, including declaratory judgment from the “unlawful” mandate, which they argue is in violation of AR 40-562, DOD procedural requirements, the APA, and federal informed consent laws.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs are requesting a declaratory judgment on the basis that federal law only permits fully licensed vaccines to be mandated for members of the armed service, and to that end, “implementation of the mandate are [sic] unlawful to the extent that they permit or require an EUA product to be administered pursuant to the mandate.”

The plaintiffs additionally request that any implementation of the DOD vaccine mandate be enjoined, that plaintiffs “with natural immunity due to previous infection are entitled to a medical exemption from COVID-19 vaccination under AR 40-562,” and that the DOD and the armed services be enjoined from treating the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine “as if” it were the licensed Comirnaty vaccine, and that this practice be declared unlawful.

The FDA is also the target of the plaintiffs’ claims for relief, as they are requesting that the FDA’s approval of the Comirnaty vaccine be declared unlawful, and that this decision be vacated and remanded, “for reconsideration consistent with [applicable] laws and regulations.”

Accordingly, the plaintiffs further request that a declaratory judgment be issued against the FDA presenting it from simultaneously treating “the same product as an EUA product and licensed product for the same indication and use” or using the BioNTech and Comirnaty vaccines “interchangeably” or in a way where they can be “substituted” for each other.

As The Defender reported, even though the Comirnaty vaccine was fully licensed by the FDA, an EUA for the very same vaccine was also issued, shielding it from liability laws applicable only to licensed products.

Trial is scheduled for Sept. 14, 2022.

At stake for plaintiffs: health, livelihoods and careers

The amended complaint introduced each of the individual service members and their unique circumstances, ranging from the non-availability of the licensed Comirnaty vaccine, to rejection of medical and religious exemptions and other pre-existing health risks.

Miller said for the plaintiffs, there is more at stake than the refusal to take a vaccine for any reason, or the willingness of some to only receive a licensed vaccine.

“What’s at stake for refusing this vaccine? Everything. Their careers, their livelihoods, everything they’ve sacrificed and worked for,” Miller said.

The plaintiffs, and their reasons for refusal, are summarized below:

• Army Major and board-certified family physician Dr. Samuel Sigoloff, who was stationed in Arizona as the medical director for Fort Huachuca, was relieved and suspended from treating patients, due to his granting medical exemptions from the DOD mandate to several of his patients, and for prescribing alternative treatments, including Ivermectin. He subsequently received a negative counseling statement and is the subject of a pending investigation due to his refusal, based on applicable legal and ethical principles, to provide the names of his patients that were granted medical exemptions.
• Air Force Master Sergeant Nickolas Kupper, stationed at Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, had previously applied for, and been granted, exemptions from other required vaccines. He has also recovered from a previous COVID infection. His requests for medical and religious exemptions are pending. He confirmed, both from his base immunologist and from a Pfizer representative, that the Comirnaty vaccine is unavailable. He has submitted a complaint to the DOD inspector general regarding the validity of the order to take an unlicensed EUA vaccine.
• Air Force Captain Taylor Roberts, stationed in New Mexico, requested a medical exemption based on a genetic predisposition to increased likelihood of adverse requests from vaccination. While this exemption was temporarily granted, it was subsequently revoked. He has also challenged the lawfulness of the vaccination order on the basis of being asked to take the EUA Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine instead of the Comirnaty vaccine. This complaint was, however, dismissed.
• Air Force Captain Jordan Karr is stationed at Hurlburt Field, Fla. She is a woman of childbearing potential (WOCBP) and would likely be injured by the vaccine due to a medical disorder. She has been told that the Comirnaty vaccine is unavailable and that she would be required to take an EUA-labeled vaccine.
• Air Force Master Sergeant Joseph Connell, stationed in Hurlburt Field, Fla., had his medical exemption request, submitted in relation to his prior history with cancer, denied.
• Air Force Captain Sean Cothran, stationed at Hurlburt Field, Fla., was refused a medical exemption on the basis of prior infection and natural immunity. He did not receive a response from his base’s immunology department regarding the availability of the licensed Comirnaty vaccine.
• Air Force Captain Blake Morgan, stationed at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., also submitted a request for an exemption based on prior exemption, via a positive serology test. This request was denied, and he has been required to cancel mission-critical travel as a result.
• Similarly, Marine Corps Major Eric Kaltrider, stationed at Camp Lejeune, NC, was denied a medical exemption based on previous infection. As a result, he has been withdrawn from assignment.
• Non-commissioned Air Force officer David Lund, stationed at Fort Walton Beach, Fla., was also told that the licensed Comirnaty vaccine was not available. His objection, based on a previous COVID-19 infection, was rejected, and he was obliged to receive the EUA Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) vaccine.
• Air Force Staff Sergeant Samuel Craymer, stationed at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, inquired about the availability of the Comirnaty vaccine after receiving his vaccination orders in September. He was told that it was unavailable and that he was required to take an EUA vaccine, and was shown several vials of the vaccine being administered, which was the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine. Upon challenging the lawfulness of the order to take the EUA vaccine via a complaint filed with the DOD Inspector General, he received an Article 15 violation for “failing to follow a lawful order.” A religious accommodation request remains pending.
• Similarly, Air Force Major Kacy Dixon, in response to the vaccination order she received, inquired about the availability of the licensed Comirnaty vaccine from pharmacies and other healthcare providers. Upon being told it was unavailable, she sought clarification as to whether she was being obliged to take an unlicensed vaccine, and was informed that she must take the “interchangeable” Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Her subsequent request for a medical waiver on the basis of “lack of [licensed] vaccine supply” was denied, as was her appeal. Moreover, her request for a medical exemption, filed because she is breastfeeding, was also denied.
• Brain Stermer, Sergeant First Class in the Army Reserve stationed at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, also was previously infected with COVID-19. He has also challenged the legality of the vaccination orders obliging him to receive an EUA vaccine due to the unavailability of the Comirnaty product. He has been threatened with administrative action and separation from the Army if he does not comply.
• Marine Corps Major Nicholas Harwood, stationed at Camp Pendleton, California, also was informed that the Comirnaty vaccine was unavailable. In response to his refusal of the EUA vaccine, he has faced “adverse employment and disciplinary action,” including removal from his position, severe duty restrictions, and a withholding of his promotion to Lieutenant Colonel, while continued refusal to receive the vaccine will result in a “refusal of a lawful order” counseling statement, which will launch the process for his administrative separation or dismissal from the Marine Corps. Such a process has already been completed for 11 Marines in his unit and is in progress for an additional 11 Marines.
• Marine Corps Master Sergeant Michael Thompson, stationed at MCAS Cherry Point, North Carolina, also inquired about the availability of the licensed Comirnaty vaccine and was told that it was not available. He nevertheless observed that medical records for at least one other service member who was given an EUA vaccine indicated that Comirnaty had been administered. He is currently under a non-deployable status and has received a “Page 11 counseling statement” which will form the basis for his administrative separation. According to him, other Marines at MCAS Cherry Point have been processed for administrative separation due to their refusal to receive EUA vaccines.
• Andrew Snow, a Major in the Air Force Reserve stationed in Delaware, was denied a religious exemption. His appeal remains pending. He has confirmed that the Comirnaty vaccine is not available at his base. He currently faces severe duty and flight restrictions, and will be placed under “no point, no pay” status if his appeal is denied. After two months, he will then be dismissed for cause.
• Navy Chief Benjamin Coker, stationed in Washington, D.C., and Kalem Cossette, a Chief Warrant Officer-3 in the Marine Corps who is stationed in Twentynine Palms, California, had their religious accommodation requests denied.
• Similarly, Navy Commander James Furman, who had been stationed in Arlington, Virginia, had his request for a religious exemption denied. He opted to retire and end his 22-year military career.

Congress weighing bill that would prohibit military members from being discharged for noncompliance with mandates

The issue of service members facing dishonorable discharge simply due to not receiving the COVID vaccine, has reached Congress.

The Senate on Wednesday passed a draft of the new National Defense Authorization Act that includes a rider forbidding the DOD from dishonorably discharging servicemembers for not getting the vaccine.

The rider was included in the larger bill by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), a vocal opponent of President Biden’s vaccine mandates, to “prevent Joe Biden from dishonorably discharging servicemembers for choosing to not get the COVID vaccine.”

The bill now is headed to Biden’s desk for his signature. However, Biden may choose to veto this bill and demand changes to it before signing it.

According to Miller though, “the proposed legislation does not go far enough to protect the rights of military service members.”