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 by  Global Research on november 19, 2021

***

“The silence of so many Cardinals and Bishops, along with the inconceivable promotion of the vaccination campaign by the Holy See, represents a form of unprecedented complicity that cannot continue any longer. It is necessary to denounce this scandal, this crime against humanity, this satanic action against God.

With every passing day, thousands of people are dying or are being affected in their health by the illusion that the so-called vaccines guarantee a solution to the pandemic emergency.

The Catholic Church has the duty before God and all of humanity to denounce this tremendous and horrible crime with the utmost firmness, giving clear directions and taking a stand against those who, in the name of a pseudo-science subservient to the interests of the pharmaceutical companies and the globalist elite, have only intentions of death.

His Excellency Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano

***

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Video: The “Vaccine” and “The Great Reset”: Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano Points to Crimes against Humanity

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.

***

A video has surfaced from what appears to be January 2021 of World Bank President David Malpass explaining that Pfizer is “hesitant” to distribute its vaccine in countries which refuse to grant legal indemnity from liability for adverse events. He says:

The immediate problem is indemnification. Pfizer has been hesitant to go into some of the countries because of the liability problems, they don’t have a liability shield. So we work with the countries to try to do that. But I think also some of the other vaccine manufacturers may be able to go into countries because they’re operating through subsidiaries. This is all something that we’re exploring, and our goal, my goal, is to have vaccines available throughout the developing world based on what their countries decide. We’ve got financing available but the countries need to choose systems and then begin buying or receiving the vaccines.

If Pfizer is so confident that its vaccine has been proven safe in rigorous trials, why is it unwilling to take responsibility for any problems?

And if it is unwilling to take the risk with its own product, how is that going to persuade the vaccine-hesitant to take the risk themselves?

The Pfizer vaccine has been linked with 388,618 adverse events in the UK to date, including 628 deaths.

Taiwan has halted its use in teenagers due to concerns about the risk of myocarditis.

Yet a cloak of secrecy has been thrown over the approvals process and the company has come under fire for “war profiteering” by making huge profits during the pandemic.

Pharmaceutical companies are profit-driven entities and rules on transparency and liability exist to keep them honest and ensure only safe, effective drugs are provided to the public. It may turn out to be a big mistake to have allowed them to avoid this scrutiny and accountability just because many were desperate for a medical way out of the pandemic.

*

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 Before It’s News

Special Report: Two Ivermectin Success Stories

December 12th, 2021 by Joel S. Hirschhorn

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.

***

Ivermectin has been attacked by pro-vaccine interests despite it being a cheap, safe and proven medicine for COVID treatment and prevention.  Despite a mountain of clinical and test evidence showing that it really works, Big Media, Big Pharma and Big Government have stubbornly fought its use.  Its use in a number of countries, notably India, has proven its effectiveness against COVID.  Here are recent stories of its successful use worthy of serious attention.

Story 1. Hospitalized Patients

Most work on IVM has been on its early use when a person first gets COVID, because of its positive impact on the initial virus replication stage of the infection.  If you get stricken with COVID and are seriously ill your doctor and hospital will not provide ivermectin.  But several cases have shown that courts can force hospitals to allow IVM use.

As the following examples show it has been found life-saving for critically ill, hospitalized patients with little chance of survival when government approved protocols are used.  Yet hospitals have stubbornly refused to use IVM even when patients or family members have strongly requested its use as patients face probable death.  In response to this awful situation, some gutsy people have used the judicial system to get hospitals to do what is justified by medical science, save lives by using IVM.

In Illinois it took a court to force a hospital to capitulate to family demands to give a very sick elderly patient IVM.  The hospital used the approved ways to treat the patient without success.  These included the proven unsafe and very expensive drug remdesivir, intubation and ventilator use for a month in the ICU.  None of it worked and the patient was given only a 10 to 15% percent chance of surviving.

Sun Ng, 71, who was visiting the United States from Hong Kong to celebrate his granddaughter’s first birthday.  He became ill with COVID-19 and within days was close to death.  He was hospitalized on Oct. 14 at Edward Hospital, in Naperville, Illinois.

Recognizing that her father was facing death, Ng’s only child, Man Kwan Ng, with a doctoral degree in mechanical engineering, did her own research and decided that her father should take IVM.  But the hospital refused to administer IVM and denied access to a physician the family located who was willing to administer it.  This is typical of virtually all US hospitals.

Frustrated and seeing her father near death, the daughter went to court on her father’s behalf and on Nov. 1 Judge Paul M. Fullerton of the Circuit Court of DuPage County granted a temporary restraining order requiring the hospital to allow IVM be given to the patient.  And just like many other cases in the country, this hospital refused to comply with the court order.  But the daughter and her attorney refused to give up.  At a subsequent court hearing on Nov. 5, Fullerton said one physician who testified described Sun Ng as “basically on his death bed.”  The judge was informed IVM can have minor side effects such as dizziness, itchy skin, and diarrhea at the dosage suggested for Ng.  And the judge said that the “risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold.”

The judge issued a preliminary injunction that day directing the hospital to “immediately allow … temporary emergency privileges” to Ng’s physician, Dr. Alan Bain, “solely to administer Ivermectin to this patient.”  As of several months ago, Dr. Bain had treated over 40 patients with IVM.  But the hospital resisted the order on Nov. 6 and 7, denying Bain access to his patient.  But the fight continued.

An emergency report was filed with the court on Nov. 8 and Fullerton heard from both sides. The judge admonished the hospital and restated that it must allow Bain inside over a period of 15 days to do his job.  Then the hospital filed a motion to stay the order but judge Fullerton denied it, again directing the hospital to comply.

The hospital finally gave in.  Ng showed signs of improvement almost immediately.  He passed a breathing test that he hadn’t been able to pass in the prior three weeks, looked more alert and aware.  The first dose of IVM showed immediate results and he got it from Nov. 8 through Nov. 12.  He recovered from COVID-19 and was discharged by the hospital on Nov. 27, some six weeks after admission.

The drug “most definitely” saved the elderly patient’s life “because his condition changed right immediately after he took ivermectin,” said the attorney.  Also recommended was that family members “find ivermectin themselves” and have it on hand “and use it when someone starts to develop symptoms.”  Great advice.

The attorney in this case was Kirstin M. Erickson of Chicago-based Mauck and Baker.

Ivermectin was also at the center of three successful court cases in three upstate counties of New York involving hospitalized COVID patients – 65, 80 and 81 years old.  All were given the drug under court order and recovered and were discharged.  They were against hospitals in Buffalo, Rochester, and Batavia, N.Y.  As in the Illinois case, the three patients were in ICUs and on ventilators when given IVM and had little chance of living.

The attorney for these cases was Ralph Lorigo.  Not surprisingly, as he has helped many families, with about 40 similar cases nationwide, he was the subject of an article titled “Ralph Lorigo has built a potentially lucrative brand as the go-to guy for desperate people willing to buck science in the pandemic’s fourth wave.  Now doctors are speaking out.”  As he has succeeded in getting courts to overcome hospital stubbornness, some physicians have spoken out against him.  A law website said this: “Hospitals reeling from surging Covid-19 cases are facing a new pandemic battle: lawsuits from guardians of patients on ventilators demanding treatment with ivermectin.”

Lorigo has become a much in-demand attorney for people across the country desperate to force hospitals and doctors to give dying loved ones IVM to do what the approved protocols have failed to do, namely save the lives of extremely ill COVID patients.  In courts he has had to combat the mistaken beliefs of doctors and hospitals that IVM is not effective against COVID.  The situation is stacked against lawyers but sometimes courts have gone against the medical establishment.

Lorigo said his cases were the result of “legitimate disputes” between hospitals, doctors and families, and called hospitals “arrogant” in the matter. “They only stick to their protocols,” he said. “It’s like they think they’re gods. They wear white coats, but they’re not God.”  Absolutely correct.

The attorney has not always succeeded in saving lives with IVM.  A Texas case sadly had a 74-year-old man die amid his family’s push for the hospital to give him IVM.  Pete Lopez’s family said he was previously prescribed IVM at a VA hospital, but was admitted before he was able to take it.  The family sought a court order against Memorial Hermann in Sugar Land, Texas.  Lopez had battled his COVID infection for almost a month and was put on a ventilator.  His family won a court order for the hospital to treat him with IVM but the hospital refused to administer the drug.  And so, Lopez died.  In this pandemic, hospitals to a large extent are killing machines.

Lorigo and other attorneys have to fight the notion that IVM is “unproven.”  But medical science is on their side.  There really is a mountain of medical evidence that lawyers can use in courts.  One important example is a published medical 2021 study of patients hospitalized with confirmed severe acute COVID respiratory syndrome at a four-hospital consortium in South Florida.  There were 280 patients with 173 treated with ivermectin and 107 in the usual care group.  Analysis showed statistically significant lower mortality rates in the group treated with IVM as compared with the group treated with usual care: 15.0% vs 25.2%, respectively.  That is a big reduction in deaths.  The article noted: “Interpretation: Ivermectin was associated with lower mortality during treatment of COVID-19 patients, especially in patients who required higher inspired oxygen or ventilatory support.”  Mortality was even lower for a subgroup of patients with severe pulmonary involvement (what most court cases are): 38.8% vs. 80.7% for IVM and usual care, respectively, a very significant result.  The study emphasized: “We showed that ivermectin administration was associated significantly with lower mortality among patients with COVID-19, particularly in patients with more severe pulmonary involvement.”

All this explains why good judges have made the correct decision to give dying COVID patients a chance of surviving by letting them get IVM.  Perhaps judges are paying attention to the huge number of COVID deaths of Americans, now approaching 800,000.  Sounds like the medical establishment is not doing all that good.

Story 2. Early treatment with IVM

Here is what radio host and author Wayne Allyn Root said very recently: “Yes, it’s true. I beat COVID-19 in 48 hours with ivermectin.”  He had a big wedding where he said: “Here’s the best story yet.  I was healthy and strong at my wedding because of ivermectin.  I caught COVID-19 for the first time a few weeks ago.  I beat COVID-19 in 48 hours with ivermectin and massive doses of vitamins, including intravenous vitamin C.  Ivermectin is truly a miracle drug.  I had had COVID-19 for a day when I decided to take it.  The virus was gone in 24 hours.  Yes, ivermectin and vitamins turned the deadly, run-for-your-life, lock-down-the-economy, mask-up-for-life, vaccinate-or-die COVID-19 into a minor common cold.  And then it was gone in a day.  Ivermectin made my bout of COVID-19 so mild, I never missed a day of work.”

“And lest you think I got a mild case, on the first day I had a fever, chills, a bad cough, mucus filling my lungs, awful pain in every muscle of my body, terrible exhaustion, and I lost my sense of taste.  Sound familiar?  It’s every symptom of COVID-19.  I took two tests just to be certain.  I tested positive twice.  One day of ivermectin and it was gone. No one ever knew.  Until now.”

He also noted: “My treatment was pretty much exactly the same as that used by Joe Rogan and NFL quarterback Aaron Rodgers.  Ivermectin plus mega doses of vitamins.  The outcomes were the same, too.  Ivermectin works like magic.  It’s inexpensive.  I never experienced any side effects.  I thank God for ivermectin and mega doses of vitamin C, D3, zinc, quercetin, selenium, lysine, melatonin, garlic, liquid silver and probiotics.”

He added this: “No one has to fear COVID-19.  No one has to be forced to take an experimental vaccine.  No one ever has to choose between the vaccine and his job ever again.  We have a miracle drug and a wonderful vitamin regimen that works fantastically.  I’m exhibit A.  Hey, liberals, are you listening?  Have your heads exploded yet?  Ivermectin works.  It’s cheap, it’s effective and it has no side effects.  India used it to make the worst COVID-19 outbreak in the world disappear almost overnight.”

On the political side he asked the reasonable question: “So why are President Joe Biden, the Democratic Party, Anthony Fauci and the CDC trying to hide the truth?  Ivermectin can save millions of Americans from both COVID-19 and the risks of the COVID-19 vaccine.  Ivermectin can save our economy.  Ivermectin can save millions of jobs. Ivermectin can save trillions of dollars in costs from missed work, vaccines, hospitalizations and deaths.  I’m playing the role of Paul Revere. ‘The ivermectin is coming, the ivermectin is coming.’ I want the whole world to know.”

IVM is not just coming; it is here and some great front-line doctors are using it successfully, including successful protocols of Dr. George Fareed and Dr. Brian Tyson.  But most of the medical and public health establishment refuses to follow medical science and keeps letting hundreds of thousands of Americans die from COVID unnecessarily.  Their government approved protocols and mindless advocacy for vaccines, that clearly have not worked well enough, spell death for very ill COVID patients.  And it keeps many people from using IVM as an early treatment and preventive medicine.

*

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

This article was originally published on Pandemic Blunder Newsletter.

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles, podcasts and radio shows on the pandemic, worked on health issues for decades. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine.  As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers.  He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years.  He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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.

***

The Cold War was the greatest ideological propaganda campaign in modern world history. In that propaganda battle of more than 40 years, human rights and democracy were the two main battlefields. With the Summit for Democracy, President Biden reverts to Cold War rhetoric. Whoever had thought that world peace would be better served with Biden than with Trump might be disappointed.

On 9 and 10 December, Joe Biden organized a virtual summit for democracy. Representatives of 110 countries were invited to this summit. Among them were many Western heads of government.

The purpose is, so to speak, promoting “democracy” and “universal human rights” around the world. But if you zoom in on some of the invited countries, you will quickly see that a completely different agenda is at stake here. Some examples.

Strange democracies

Colombia is the second most dangerous country in the world for defenders of human rights or the environment. In 2020, more than 250 indigenous leaders, rights activists, environmentalists or former Farc fighters[i] were assassinated. In the first half of this year, that number already exceeded 350. In street protests that began in April 2021, at least 44 people have been killed and another 500 ‘disappeared’.

Another invited country is India, the so-called ‘largest democracy’ in the world. Some 29 percent of parliamentarians have been indicted for crimes or offences serious enough to merit five years in prison. Camps have been built in the north of the country to intern two million illegal immigrants. By the way, you may have to wonder why you haven’t heard about that yet. The contrast with the coverage of the Uyghurs in China is quite striking.

Human rights organizations are tackled more and more in India. That is why Amnesty International left the country last year.

And what about Brazil? Jair Bolsonaro, the country’s president, is a fan of Chilean dictator Pinochet, who “did what had to be done”. It does not bother Bolsonaro that some 3,000 political opponents were killed and tens of thousands were tortured. His government includes more than 100 active or retired military personnel, including several ministers and a vice president. When his position was threatened in 2020, Bolsonaro raised the prospect of military intervention.

His culture minister had to resign because he had quoted Goebbels.[ii] More than 60,000 Brazilians are killed by firearms every year. “A cop who doesn’t kill is not a cop,” the president said.

No authority 

We could also refer to the Philippines, Israel, Poland, Georgia, etc. Or to the US itself. Almost a year ago a mob stormed parliament there. There is a substantial chance that the instigator of this failed raid will be president again within three years.

The US is the largest arms supplier to a whole series of brutal dictatorships. In Guantánamo, it has kept a concentration camp open for nearly twenty years, where 780 people have been detained and tortured without trial so far.

US attempts to install democracy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria or Libya have turned into humanitarian catastrophes. In any case, Washington has no authority to give lessons on democracy or human rights.

New Cold War?

This summit is clearly not about democracy. It is about power and about bloc formation. After the Second World War, the US strived for absolute dominance. “Preponderant power must be the objective of US policy”, it said in 1952. This has been the official doctrine ever since.

For the US, the issue is not whether the country or world peace is under threat, it is about being able to impose its will on others. Due to China’s rapid economic and technological development, the US is now in danger of losing its supremacy. Biden wants to avoid that at all costs.

To continue to impose this unipolar world led by the US, the White House needs more and more support from other countries. That is why it is trying to form a bloc. The countries invited to the summit are not chosen because of their democratic credentials but because of their obedience to the US.

Bloc formation was characteristic of the Cold War, as was the rhetoric of ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’. Precisely at a time when the world needs unity and a joint approach to the climate or to combat a pandemic, Biden is pushing for bloc formation.

Instead of uniting the world, he is pushing for division, for a new Cold War. It is up to us to unmask this and not to allow ourselves and our countries to be dragged into it.

*

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

Marc Vandepitte is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes

[i] Farc means Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia–Ejército del Pueblo, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. This guerrilla movement has been active from the 1960s. In 2016, a peace agreement was reached with the government. The rebels surrendered their weapons and transformed their army into a political party.

[ii] Joseph Goebbels was propaganda minister of Hitler.

Featured image is from Trending Politics

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.

***

 

British justice is advertised by its proponents as upright, historically different to the savages upon which it sought to civilise, and apparently fair.  Such outrages as the unjust convictions of the Guilford Four and Maguire Seven, both having served time in prison for terrorist offences they did not commit, are treated as blemishes.

In recent memory, fewer blemishes can be more profound and disturbing to a legal system than the treatment of Australian citizen and WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange The British legal system has been so conspicuously outsourced to the wishes of the US Department of Justice and the military-industrial complex Assange did so much to expose.  The decision of the UK High Court, handed down on December 10, will go down in the annals of law as a particularly disgraceful instance of this.

From the outset, extradition proceedings utilising a First World War US statute – the Espionage Act of 1917 – should have sent legal eagles in the UK swooping with alarm.  17 of the 18 charges Assange is accused of have been drawn from it.  It criminalises the receipt, dissemination and publication of national security information.  It attacks the very foundations of the Fourth Estate’s pursuit of accountability and subverts the protections of the First Amendment in the US constitution.  It invalidates motive and purpose.  And, were this to be successful – and here, the British justices seem willing to ensure that it is – the United States will be able to globally target any publisher of its dirty trove of classified material using an archaic, barbaric law.

It should also have occurred to the good members of the English legal profession that these lamentable proceedings have always been political.  Extraditions are generally not awarded on such grounds.  But this entire affair reeks of it.  The US security establishment wants their man, desperately.   With the coming to power of President Donald Trump, one counterintelligence officer, reflecting on Assange’s plight, made the pertinent observation that, “Nobody in that crew was going to be too broken up about the First Amendment issues.”

The original decision by District Court Judge Vanessa Baraitser was hardly grand.  It was chastising and vicious to journalism, cruel to those revealing information that might expose state abuses and an offense to the sensibility of democratic minded persons.  The point was made that security and intelligence experts, however morally inclined or principled, were best suited to assessing the merits of releasing classified information.  Journalists should never be involved in publishing such material.  Besides, thought the Judge, Assange was not a true journalist.  Such people did not purposely go out to disclose the identities of informants or propagandise their cause.

The only thing going for that otherwise woeful judgment was its acceptance that Assange would well perish in the US legal system.  Noting such cases as Laurie Love, Baraitser accepted that the prosecution had failed to show that Assange would not be placed in a position where he could be prevented from taking his own life.  Should he be sent across the Atlantic, he would face Special Administrative Measures and conclude his life in the wretched cul-de-sac of the ADX Florence supermax.  Any extradition to such conditions of sheer baroque cruelty would be “oppressive” given “his mental condition”.

The prosecution had no qualms trying to appeal and broaden the arguments, citing several propositions.  Contemptibly, these focused on Assange the pretender (suicidal autistics cannot give conference plenaries or host television programs), expert witnesses as deceivers (neuropsychiatrist Michael Kopelman, for initially “concealing” evidence from the court of Assange’s relationship with Stella Moris and their children), and the merits of the US prison system: matronly, saintly, and filled with soft beds and tender shrinks.  Why, scolded the prosecutor James Lewis QC in October, had the good judge not asked the US Department of Justice for reassurances?  Assange would not face the brutal end of special administrative measures.  He would not be sent to decline and moulder in ADX Florence.  He could also serve his sentence in Australia, provided, of course, the Department of Justice approved.

In reversing the decision to discharge Assange, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales Ian Burnett, and Lord Justice Timothy Holroyde were persuaded by two of the five grounds submitted by the prosecutors.  Sounding astonishingly naïve (or possibly disingenuous) at points, the justices accepted the prosecution’s argument that undertakings or assurances could be made at a later stage, even during an appeal.  Delays by a requesting state to make such assurances might be tactical and stem from bad faith, but not entertaining such assurances, even if made later, might also result in “a windfall to an alleged or convicted criminal, which would defeat the public interest in extradition.”

Judge Baraitser should have also been mindful of seeking the assurances in the first place, given how vital the issue of Assange’s suicide risk and future treatment in US prisons was in making her decision against extradition.

It followed that the justices did “not accept that the USA refrained for tactical reasons from offering assurances at an earlier stage, or acted in bad faith in choosing only to offer them at the appeal stage.”  Diplomatic Note no. 74 contained “solemn undertakings, offered by one government to another, which will bind all officials and prosecutors who will deal with the relevant aspects of Mr Assange’s case now and in the future.”

This meant that Assange would not be subjected to SAMs, or sent to ADX Florence, and that he would receive appropriate medical treatment to mitigate the risk of suicide.  (The justices erred in not understanding that the assurance to not detain Assange ADX “pre-trial” was irrelevant as ADX is a post-conviction establishment.)  He could also serve his post-trial and post-appeal sentence in Australia, though that would be at the mercy of DOJ approval.  All undertakings were naturally provisional on the conduct of the accused.

As the original judgement was premised upon Assange being subjected to the “harshest SAMs regime”, and given the significance of the evidence submitted by Kopelman and Dr Quinton Deeley on Assange’s suicide risk in “being held under such harsh conditions of isolation”, the justices were “unable to accept the submission that the judge’s conclusion would have been the same if she had not found a real risk of detention in those conditions.”

Such narrow reasoning served to ignore the ample evidence that such diplomatic assurances are unreliable, mutable and without legal standing.  In terms of solitary confinement, the US legal system is filled with euphemistic designations that all amount to aspects of the same thing.  If it is not SAMs, it is certainly something amounting to it, such as Administrative Segregation.

Previous diplomatic assurances given by US authorities have also been found wanting.  The fate of Spanish drug trafficker David Mendoza Herrarte stands out.  In that case, a Spanish court was given an assurance that Mendoza, if extradited to the US to face trial, could serve any subsequent prison sentence in Spain.  When the application to the US Department of Justice was made to make good that undertaking, the transfer application was refused.  The pledge only applied, it was claimed, to allow Mendoza to apply for a transfer; it never meant that the DOJ had to agree to it.  A diplomatic wrangle between Madrid and Washington ensued for six years before the decision was altered.

And just to make such undertakings all the more implausible, the “solemn assurances” were coming from, as Craig Murray pointedly remarked, “a state whose war crimes and murder of civilians were exposed by Julian Assange.”

The justices also failed to consider the murderous elephant in the room, one that had been submitted by the defence at both the extradition hearing and the appeal: that US government officials had contemplated abducting and assassinating the very individual whose extradition they were seeking.  This was a view that held sway with former US Secretary of State and CIA chief Mike Pompeo.

In the United States, talking heads expressed their satisfaction about the glories of the US justice and prison system.  Former Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill told MSNBC that, “This was really a guy who just violated the law”.  Concerns by Assange’s defence team that his “safety in [US] prison” would be compromised showed that “they really don’t have perspective on this”.

It is fittingly monstrous that this decision should be handed down the same day the Nobel Peace Prize was being awarded to two journalists, Maria Ressa and Dmitry Muratov.  Or that it should happen on Human Rights Day, which saw US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s boast that “we will continue to promote accountability for human rights violators.”  Except one’s own.

Inevitably, these cruel, gradually lethal proceedings move to the next stage: an appeal to the Supreme Court.  As the paperwork is gathered, Assange will muse, grimly, that the entire period of his discharge never saw him leave Belmarsh Prison.

*

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 is from Another Day in the Empire

The Omicron Variant: Deliberately Raising the Global State of Panic

December 12th, 2021 by Paul Anthony Taylor

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The latest statistics from South Africa reveal that intensive care admissions for the Omicron Covid variant are running at just a third of what they were at the same point in the country’s Delta wave. The figures come following the chair of the South African Medical Association (SAMA) reporting that Omicron’s symptoms are mostly “very, very mild” and could be treated at home. With even US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci now admitting the new variant is “almost certainly” not more severe than Delta, the question that urgently needs to be asked is a very simple one: why is global tension being raised to a state of panic?

Reports from South Africa’s Gauteng province, the center of the Omicron outbreak, suggest that around two weeks after the new variant’s detection there were a total of 139 patients being cared for in hospital ICUs. By comparison, two weeks into the province’s Delta wave there were already 393 patients in its ICUs. While the Omicron variant is suspected to be more transmissible than Delta, Gauteng hospitals have confirmed that the symptoms displayed by patients are “far milder” than those seen during the first three waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Most patients are said to not require oxygen or ICU treatment.

But as promising as these signs are, Western political leaders and their allies appear not to have noticed. Instead, they are ramping up what can only be described as a global state of panic. In a policy seen by some as having colonial undertones, their first move was to implement blanket travel bans to southern African countries. With this effectively resulting in the international isolation of this already economically challenged region, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa echoed the thoughts of many when he complained that his country was being punished for having discovered the new variant.

Threatening mandatory vaccinations

Brussels EU Commission head Ursula von der Leyen responded to the discovery of the variant by saying it was time to consider making vaccination against COVID-19 mandatory in Europe. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson later made a similar statement, saying there would be a “national conversation” in his country on the way forward. With Europe being home to 8 of the top 10 pharmaceutical exporting countries, both leaders will no doubt be greedily eyeing the skyrocketing shareholder profits that could result if mandatory vaccination was enforced worldwide.

US President Joe Biden used the emergence of Omicron as an excuse to push for 100 million Americans to submit to so-called ‘booster shots’ as soon as possible. In words that will be interpreted by many as a veiled threat, he also stated that “this pandemic will not end until we have global vaccinations.” Along with Europe, the US is one of the top pharmaceutical exporting countries. Between them, the American pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and Moderna are already expected to rake in more than $93 billion in COVID-19 vaccine sales next year. Revealingly, therefore, and as we shall examine next, the profits bonanza presented by the pandemic coincidently arrived at the precise moment when the pharma industry was facing terminal decline.

Why the pharma industry needed COVID-19

Written in November 2017 and May 2018, blog posts by Dr. Kelvin Stott, Director of Portfolio Management at the Novartis drug company in Basel, Switzerland, caused widespread alarm among pharma investors. Asserting that the entire pharmaceutical industry was “on the brink of terminal decline,” Stott described how research and development (R&D) returns in drug development had fallen to just 3.2 percent and could potentially reach zero by the year 2020. To put it simply, this meant that each dollar spent on R&D by drug companies would merely result in an income of a dollar. In other words, the pharma industry would no longer be a profitable concern. According to business website Forbes, Stott’s data correlated “with the observation of virtually every serious researcher who has looked at the industry.” As I wrote at the time, the implication of this was that the beginning of the end for the pharmaceutical investment business may soon have been within sight.

Acknowledging the failings of the pharma business model, Stott explained how it depends on a positive return on investment. This confirmed what Dr. Rath and our Foundation have been saying for years now, namely that the pharma industry isn’t a health industry, it’s an investment industry driven by the profits of its shareholders. Describing how the return on investment in pharma R&D was rapidly declining, Stott stated that the reasons for this included decreasing success rates in new drug development, rising clinical trial costs, a tougher regulatory environment, and increasing competition from generic manufacturers who disruptively make cheaper copies of existing drugs after the original patents have expired.

Putting all this together, Stott predicted that falls in the average return on investment would result in the entire pharma industry beginning to contract within the following two to three years. By the year 2040 the annual value of the industry’s total global sales may have fallen back to what it was in 1990. This would represent a catastrophic reduction in revenue of around 90 percent. Tellingly, therefore, Stott described the pharma business model as “broken,” adding that it was “entering a vicious cycle of negative growth and terminal decline as its fundamental business model has run out of steam.” He concluded that the industry would “not be around forever” and that it must “adapt or die.”

In his most revealing statement of all, emphasizing the desperate nature of the situation that drug companies had found themselves in, Stott wrote that the pharma industry needed “a major breakthrough right now, in 2018.” Even then, however, he said it would still face “a period of significant contraction before any recovery,” and that “anything less [than an immediate breakthrough] would be too little, too late to save the industry from terminal decline.”

In what can only therefore be described as an incredible stroke of good fortune for pharmaceutical investors, a mere 18 months after Stott wrote these words, the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China, provided the answer to the drug industry’s prayers. As a result, the worldwide mandatory use of experimental vaccines is being positioned as the ‘major breakthrough’ to rescue the industry’s business model.

Pharma in a desperate battle for survival

Only time will tell where all this leads, and whether there may be even more to the lab-leak theory than is currently suspected. But whatever happens next, one thing is already certain: the pharmaceutical investment business is engaged in a desperate battle for its survival.

By targeting the micronutrient deficiencies that Dr. Rath’s scientific discoveries have proven are the primary cause of diseases, nutrition and Cellular Medicine therapies offer the tantalizing opportunity to effectively, safely, and affordably save millions of lives from cardiovascular disease, cancer, pandemics, and other diseases alike. This, more than anything else, is what will ultimately ensure the final demise of the drug industry.

Viewed in this light, it can be seen that forcing the entire world to submit to experimental pharmaceutical vaccines is a last desperate throw of the dice by the drug industry’s key political stakeholders. It is in all of our interests to ensure that they don’t succeed.

*

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

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

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings.

Prior to joining the Foundation, Paul’s background was in the music industry, where he worked as a keyboard player and programmer with artists including Paul McCartney, Bryan Ferry, Bill Withers, the Verve, Texas, and Primal Scream.

He first became interested in natural health after falling ill with a chronic fatigue syndrome-related disorder in 1991 and subsequently making a full recovery through the use of natural health therapies. After meeting Dr. Rath and Dr. Niedzwiecki at an anti-Codex rally in Berlin in 2002, Paul was inspired to make a life-changing decision to leave the music industry to work for the Foundation and help defend the right of patients worldwide to have free access to natural health approaches.

You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

Featured image is from Alt-Market.us

Introduction to “The Real Anthony Fauci”: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

December 11th, 2021 by Robert F. Kennedy Jr

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.

***

 

Below is the Introductory Chapter of  “The Real Anthony Fauci by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

***

 

I wrote this book to help Americans—and citizens across the globe—understand the historical underpinnings of the bewildering cataclysm that began in 2020. In that single annus horribilis, liberal democracy effectively collapsed worldwide. The very governmental health regulators, social media eminences, and media companies that idealistic populations relied upon as champions of freedom, health, democracy, civil rights, and evidence-based public policy seemed to collectively pivot in a lockstep assault against free speech and personal freedoms.

Suddenly, those trusted institutions seemed to be acting in concert to generate fear, promote obedience, discourage critical thinking, and herd seven billion people to march to a single tune, culminating in mass public health experiments with a novel, shoddily tested and improperly licensed technology so risky that manufacturers refused to produce it unless every government on Earth shielded them from liability.

Across Western nations, shell-shocked citizens experienced all the well-worn tactics of rising totalitarianism—mass propaganda and censorship, the orchestrated promotion of terror, the manipulation of science, the suppression of debate, the vilification of dissent, and use of force to prevent protest. Conscientious objectors who resisted these unwanted, experimental, zero-liability medical interventions faced orchestrated gaslighting, marginalization, and scapegoating.

American lives and livelihoods were shattered by a bewildering array of draconian diktats imposed without legislative approval or judicial review, risk assessment, or scientific citation. So-called Emergency Orders closed our businesses, schools and churches, made unprecedented intrusions into privacy, and disrupted our most treasured social and family relationships. Citizens the world over were ordered to stay in their homes.

Standing in the center of all the mayhem, with his confident hand on the helm, was one dominating figure. As the trusted public face of the United States government response to COVID, Dr. Anthony Fauci set this perilous course and sold the American public on a new destination for our democracy.

This book is a product of my own struggle to understand how the idealistic institutions our country built to safeguard both public health and democracy suddenly turned against our citizens and our values with such violence. I am a lifelong Democrat, whose family has had eighty years of deep engagement with America’s public health bureaucracy and long friendships with key federal regulators, including Anthony Fauci, Francis Collins, and Robert Gallo.

Members of my family wrote many of the statutes under which these men govern, nurtured the growth of equitable and effective public health policies, and defended that regulatory bulwark against ferocious attacks funded by industry—and often executed by Republican-controlled congressional committees intent on defunding and defanging these agencies to make them more “industry friendly.” I built alliances with these individuals and their agencies during my years of environmental and public health advocacy. I watched them, often with admiration. But I also watched how the industry, supposedly being regulated, used its indentured servants on Capitol Hill to systematically hollow out those agencies beginning in 1980, disabling their regulatory functions and transforming them, finally, into sock-puppets for the very industry Congress charged them with regulating.

My 40-year career as an environmental and public health advocate gave me a unique understanding of the corrupting mechanisms of “regulatory capture,” the process by which the regulator becomes beholden to the industry it’s meant to regulate. I spent four decades suing the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and other environmental agencies to expose and remedy the corrupt sweetheart relationship that so often put regulators in bed with the polluting industries they regulated. Among the hundreds of lawsuits I filed, perhaps a quarter were against regulatory officials making illegal concessions to Big Oil, King Coal, and the chemical and agricultural polluters that had captured their loyalties. I thought I knew everything about regulatory capture and that I had armored myself with an appropriate shield of cynicism.

But I was wrong about that. From the moment of my reluctant entrance into the vaccine debate in 2005, I was astonished to realize that the pervasive web of deep financial entanglements between Pharma and the government health agencies had put regulatory capture on steroids. The CDC, for example, owns 57 vaccine patents[1] and spends $4.9 of its $12.0 billion-dollar annual budget (as of 2019) buying and distributing vaccines.[2][3] NIH owns hundreds of vaccine patents and often profits from the sale of products it supposedly regulates. High level officials, including Dr. Fauci, receive yearly emoluments of up to $150,000 in royalty payments on products that they help develop and then usher through the approval process.[4] The FDA receives 45 percent of its budget from the pharmaceutical industry, through what are euphemistically called “user fees.”[5] When I learned that extraordinary fact, the disastrous health of the American people was no longer a mystery; I wondered what the environment would look like if the EPA received 45 percent of its budget from the coal industry!

Today many of my liberal chums are still crouched in a knee jerk posture defending “our” agencies against Republican slanders and budget cuts, never quite realizing how thoroughly the decades of attacks succeeded in transforming those agencies into subsidiaries of Big Pharma.

In this book, I track the rise of Anthony Fauci from his start as a young public health researcher and physician through his metamorphosis into the powerful technocrat who helped orchestrate and execute 2020’s historic coup d’état against Western democracy.

I explore the carefully planned militarization and monetization of medicine that has left American health ailing and its democracy shattered. I chronicle the troubling role of the dangerous concentrated mainstream media, Big Tech robber barons, the military and intelligence communities and their deep historical alliances with Big Pharma and public health agencies. The disturbing story that unfolds here has never been told, and many in power have worked hard to prevent the public from learning it. The main character is Anthony Fauci.

During the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Fauci, who turned 80 that year, occupied center stage in a global drama unprecedented in human history. At the contagion’s beginnings, the US still enjoyed its reputation as the universal standard-bearer in public health. As the world’s faith in American leadership dwindled during the Trump era, the singular US institutions that were seemingly immune from international disillusionment were our public health regulators; HHS—and its subsidiary agencies CDC, FDA, and NIH—persisted as role models for global health policies and gold standard scientific research. Other nations looked to Dr. Fauci, America’s most powerful and enduring public health bureaucrat, to competently direct US health policies, and rapidly develop countermeasures that would serve as state-of-the-art templates for the rest of the world.

Dr. Anthony Fauci spent half a century as America’s reigning health commissar, ever preparing for his final role as Commander of history’s biggest war against a global pandemic. Beginning in 1968, he occupied various posts at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), serving as that agency’s Director since November 1984.[6] His $417,608 annual salary makes him the highest paid of all four million federal employees, including the President.[7] His experiences surviving 50 years as the panjandrum of a key federal bureaucracy, having advised six Presidents, the Pentagon, intelligence agencies, foreign governments, and the WHO, seasoned him exquisitely for a crisis that would allow him to wield power enjoyed by few rulers and no doctor in history.

During the epidemic’s early months, Dr. Fauci’s calm, authoritative, and avuncular manner was Prozac for Americans besieged by two existential crises: the Trump Presidency, and COVID-19. Democrats and idealistic liberals around the globe, traumatized by President Trump’s chaotic governing style, took heart from Dr. Fauci’s serene, solid presence on the White House stage. He seemed to offer a rational, straight-talking, science-based counterweight to President Trump’s desultory, narcissistic bombast. Navigating the hazardous waters between an erratic President and a deadly contagion, Dr. Fauci initially cut a heroic figure, like Homer’s Ulysses steering his ship between Scylla and Charybdis. Turning their backs to the foreboding horizon, trusting Americans manned the oars and blindly obeyed his commands—little realizing they were propelling our country toward the desolate destination where democracy goes to die.

Throughout the first year of the crisis, Dr. Fauci’s personal charisma and authoritative voice inspired confidence in his prescriptions and won him substantial—though not universal—affection. Many Americans, dutifully locked in their homes in compliance with Dr. Fauci’s quarantine, took consolation in their capacity to join a Tony Fauci fan club, chillax on an “I heart Fauci” throw pillow, sip from an “In Fauci We Trust” coffee mug, warm cold feet in Fauci socks and booties, gorge on Fauci donuts, post a “Honk for Dr. Fauci” yard sign, or genuflect before a Dr. Fauci prayer candle. Fauci aficionados could choose from a variety of Fauci browser games and a squadron of Fauci action figures and bobbleheads, and could read his hagiography to their offspring from a worshipful children’s book. At the height of the lockdown, Brad Pitt performed a reverential homage to Dr. Fauci on Saturday Night Live,[8] and Barbara Streisand surprised him with a recorded message during a live Zoom birthday party in his honor.[9] The New Yorker dubbed him “America’s Doctor.”[10]

Dr. Fauci encouraged his own canonization and the disturbing inquisition against his blasphemous critics. In a June 9, 2021 je suis l’état interview, he pronounced that Americans who questioned his statements were, per se, anti-science. “Attacks on me,” he explained, “quite frankly, are attacks on science.”[11]

The sentiment he expressed reminds us that blind faith in authority is a function of religion, not science. Science, like democracy, flourishes on skepticism toward official orthodoxies. Dr. Fauci’s schoolboy scorn for citation and his acknowledgement to the New York Times that he had twice lied to Americans to promote his agendas—on masks and herd immunity—raised the prospect that some of his other “scientific” assertions were, likewise, noble lies to a credulous public he believes is unworthy of self-determination.[12][13]

In August 2021, Dr. Fauci’s acolyte—CNN’s television doctor, Peter Hotez—published an article in a scientific journal calling for legislation to “expand federal hate crime protections” to make criticism of Dr. Fauci a felony.[14] In declaring that he had no conflicts, Dr. Hotez, who says that vaccine skeptics should be snuffed out,[15] evidently forgot the millions of dollars in grants he has taken from Dr. Fauci’s NIAID since 1993,[16] and more than $15 million from Dr. Fauci’s partner, Bill Gates, for his Baylor University Tropical Medicine Institute.[17][18]

As we shall see, Dr. Fauci’s direct and indirect control—through NIH, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Wellcome Trust of some 57 percent of global biomedical research funding[19]—guarantees him this sort of obsequious homage from leading medical researchers, allows him to craft and perpetuate the reigning global medical narratives, and can fortify the canon that he, himself, is science incarnate.

High-visibility henchmen like Hotez—and Pharma’s financial control over the media through advertising dollars—have made Dr. Fauci’s pronouncements impervious to debate and endowed the NIAID Director with personal virtues and medical gravitas supported by neither science nor his public health record. By the latter metric, his 50-year regime has been calamitous for public health and for democracy. His administration of the COVID pandemic was, likewise, a disaster.

As the world watched, Tony Fauci dictated a series of policies that resulted in by far the most deaths, and one of the highest percentage COVID-19 body counts of any nation on the planet. Only relentless propaganda and wall-to-wall censorship could conceal his disastrous mismanagement during COVID-19’s first year. The US, with 4 percent of the world’s population, suffered 14.5 percent of total COVID deaths. By September 30, 2021, mortality rates in the US had climbed to 2,107/1,000,000, compared to 139/1,000,000 in Japan.

Anthony Fauci’s Report Card

After achieving these cataclysmicly awful results, “Teflon Tony’s” media savvy and his skills for deft maneuvering beguiled incoming President Joe Biden into appointing him as the new administration’s COVID Response Director.

Blinded by generously stoked fear of deadly disease against which Dr. Fauci seemed the only reliable bulwark, Americans failed to see the mounting evidence that Dr. Fauci’s strategies were consistently failing to achieve promised results, as he doggedly elevated Pharma profits and bureaucratic powers over waning public health.

As we shall see from this 50-year saga, Dr. Fauci’s remedies are often more lethal than the diseases they pretend to treat. His COVID prescriptions were no exception. With his narrow focus on the solution of mass vaccination, Dr. Fauci never mentioned any of the many other costs associated with his policy directives.

Anthony Fauci seems to have not considered that his unprecedented quarantine of the healthy would kill far more people than COVID, obliterate the global economy, plunge millions into poverty and bankruptcy, and grievously wound constitutional democracy globally. We have no way of knowing how many people died from isolation, unemployment, deferred medical care, depression, mental illness, obesity, stress, overdoses, suicide, addiction, alcoholism, and the accidents that so often accompany despair. We cannot dismiss the accusations that his lockdowns proved more deadly than the contagion. A June 24, 2021 BMJ study[22] showed that US life expectancy decreased by 1.9 years during the quarantine. Since COVID mortalities were mainly among the elderly, and the average age of death from COVID in the UK was 82.4, which was above the average lifespan,[23] the virus could not by itself cause the astonishing decline. As we shall see, Hispanic and Black Americans often shoulder the heaviest burden of Dr. Fauci’s public health adventures. In this respect, his COVID-19 countermeasures proved no exception. Between 2018 and 2020, the average Hispanic American lost around 3.9 years in longevity, while the average lifespan of a Black American dropped by 3.25 years.[24]

This dramatic culling was unique to America. Between 2018 and 2020, the 1.9 year decrease in average life expectancy at birth in the US was roughly 8.5 times the average decrease in 16 comparable countries, all of which were measured in months, not years.[25]

“I naïvely thought the pandemic would not make a big difference in the gap because my thinking was that it’s a global pandemic, so every country is going to take a hit,” said Steven Woolf, Director Emeritus of the Center on Society and Health at Virginia Commonwealth University. “What I didn’t anticipate was how badly the US would handle the pandemic. These are numbers we aren’t at all used to seeing in this research; 0.1 years is something that normally gets attention in the field, so 3.9 years and 3.25 years and even 1.4 years is just horrible,” Woolf continued. “We haven’t had a decrease of that magnitude since World War II.”[26]

Cost of Quarantines—Deaths

As Dr. Fauci’s policies took hold globally, 300 million humans fell into dire poverty, food insecurity, and starvation. “Globally, the impact of lockdowns on health programs, food production, and supply chains plunged millions of people into severe hunger and malnutrition,” said Alex Gutentag in Tablet Magazine.[27] According to the Associated Press (AP), during 2020, 10,000 children died each month due to virus-linked hunger from global lockdowns. In addition, 500,000 children per month experienced wasting and stunting from malnutrition—up 6.7 million from last year’s total of 47 million—which can “permanently damage children physically and mentally, transforming individual tragedies into a generational catastrophe.”[28]

In 2020, disruptions to health and nutrition services killed 228,000 children in South Asia.[29] Deferred medical treatments for cancers, kidney failure, and diabetes killed hundreds of thousands of people and created epidemics of cardiovascular disease and undiagnosed cancer. Unemployment shock is expected to cause 890,000 additional deaths over the next 15 years.[30][31]

The lockdown disintegrated vital food chains, dramatically increased rates of child abuse, suicide, addiction, alcoholism, obesity, mental illness, as well as debilitating developmental delays, isolation, depression, and severe educational deficits in young children. One-third of teens and young adults reported worsening mental health during the pandemic. According to an Ohio State University study,[32] suicide rates among children rose 50 percent.[33] An August 11, 2021 study by Brown University found that infants born during the quarantine were short, on average, 22 IQ points as measured by Baylor scale tests.[34] Some 93,000 Americans died of overdoses in 2020—a 30 percent rise over 2019.[35]

“Overdoses from synthetic opioids increased by 38.4 percent,[36] and 11 percent of US adults considered suicide in June 2020.[37] Three million children disappeared from public school systems, and ERs saw a 31 percent increase in adolescent mental health visits,”[38][39] according to Gutentag. Record numbers of young children failed to reach crucial developmental milestones.[40][41] Millions of hospital and nursing home patients died alone without comfort or a final goodbye from their families. Dr. Fauci admitted that he never assessed the costs of desolation, poverty, unhealthy isolation, and depression fostered by his countermeasures. “I don’t give advice about economic things,”[42] Dr. Fauci explained. “I don’t give advice about anything other than public health,” he continued, even though he was so clearly among those responsible for the economic and social costs.

Economic Destruction and Shifting Wealth Upward

During the COVID pandemic, Dr. Fauci served as ringmaster in the engineered demolition of America’s economy. His lockdown predictably shattered the nation’s once-booming economic engine, putting 58 million Americans out of work,[43] and permanently bankrupting small businesses, including 41 percent of Black-owned businesses, some of which took generations of investment to build.[44] The business closures contributed to a run-up in the national deficit—the interest payments alone will cost almost $1 trillion annually.[45] That ruinous debt will likely permanently bankrupt the New Deal programs—the social safety net that, since 1945, fortified, nurtured, and sustained America’s envied middle-class. Government officials have already begun liquidating the almost 100-year legacies of the New Deal, New Frontier, the Great Society, and Obamacare to pay the accumulated lockdown debts. Will we find ourselves saying goodbye to school lunches, healthcare, WIC, Medicaid, Medicare, university scholarships, and other long standing assistance programs?

Enriching the Wealthy

Dr. Fauci’s business closures pulverized America’s middle class and engineered the largest upward transfer of wealth in human history. In 2020, workers lost $3.7 trillion while billionaires gained $3.9 trillion.[46] Some 493 individuals became new billionaires,[47] and an additional 8 million Americans dropped below the poverty line.[48]

The biggest winners were the robber barons—the very companies that were cheerleading Dr. Fauci’s lockdown and censoring his critics: Big Technology, Big Data, Big Telecom, Big Finance, Big Media behemoths (Michael Bloomberg, Rupert Murdoch, Viacom, and Disney), and Silicon Valley Internet titans like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Eric Schmidt, Sergey Brin, Larry Page, Larry Ellison, and Jack Dorsey.

The very Internet companies that snookered us all with the promise of democratizing communications made it impermissible for Americans to criticize their government or question the safety of pharmaceutical products; these companies propped up all official pronouncements while scrubbing all dissent. The same Tech/Data and Telecom robber barons, gorging themselves on the corpses of our obliterated middle class, rapidly transformed America’s once-proud democracy into a censorship and surveillance police state from which they profit at every turn.

CEO Satya Nadella boasted that Microsoft, by working with the CDC and the Gates-funded Johns Hopkins Center for Biosecurity, had used the COVID pandemic to achieve “two years of digital transformation in two months.”[49]

Microsoft Teams users ballooned to 200 million meeting participants in a single day, averaged more than 75 million active users, compared to 20 million users in November 2019,[50] and the company’s stock value skyrocketed. Larry Ellison’s company, Oracle, which partnered with the CIA to build new cloud services, won the contract to process all CDC vaccination data.[51]
Ellison’s wealth increased by $34 billion in 2020; Mark Zuckerberg’s wealth grew by $35 billion; Google’s Sergey Brin by $41 billion; Jeff Bezos by $86 billion; Bill Gates by $22 billion[52] and Michael Bloomberg by nearly $7 billion.[53]

Ellison, Gates, and the other members of this government/industry collaboration used the lockdown to accelerate construction of their 5G network[54] of satellites, antennae, biometric facial recognition, and “track and trace” infrastructure that they, and their government and intelligence agency partners, can use to mine and monetize our data, further suppress dissent, to compel obedience to arbitrary dictates, and to manage the rage that comes as Americans finally wake up to the fact that this outlaw gang has stolen our democracy, our civil rights, our country, and our way of life—while we huddled in orchestrated fear from a flu-like virus.

With fears of COVID generously stoked, the dramatic and steady erosion of constitutional rights and fomenting of a global coup d’état against democracy, the demolition of our economy, the obliteration of a million small businesses, the collapsing of the middle class, the evisceration of our Bill of Rights, the tidal wave of surveillance capitalism and the rising bio-security state, and the stunning shifts in wealth and power going to a burgeoning oligarchy of high-tech Silicon Valley robber barons seemed, to a dazed and uncritical America, like it might be a reasonable price to pay for safety. And anyway, we were told, it’s just for 15 days, or maybe 15 months, or however long it takes for Dr. Fauci to “follow the data” to his answer.

Failing Upward

Dr. Fauci’s catastrophic failure to achieve beneficial health outcomes during the COVID-19 crisis is consistent with the disastrous declines in public health during his half-century running NIAID. For anyone who might have assumed that federal and public health bureaucrats survive and flourish by achieving improvements in public health, Dr. Fauci’s durability at NIAID is a disheartening wake-up call. By any measure, he has consistently failed upward.

The “J. Edgar Hoover of public health” has presided over cataclysmic declines in public health, including an exploding chronic disease epidemic that has made the “Fauci generation”—children born after his elevation to NIAID kingpin in 1984— the sickest generation in American history, and has made Americans among the least healthy citizens on the planet. His obsequious subservience to the Big Ag, Big Food, and pharmaceutical companies has left our children drowning in a toxic soup of pesticide residues, corn syrup, and processed foods, while also serving as pincushions for 69 mandated vaccine doses by age 18—none of them properly safety tested.[55]

When Dr. Fauci took office, America was still ranked among the world’s healthiest populations. An August 2021 study by the Commonwealth Fund ranked America’s health care system dead last among industrialized nations, with the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy. “If health care were an Olympic sport, the US might not qualify in a competition with other high-income nations,”[56] laments the study’s lead author, Eric Schneider, who serves as Senior Vice President for Policy and Research at the Commonwealth Fund.

Following WWII, life expectancy in the US climbed for five decades, making Americans among the longest-lived people in the developed world. IQ also grew steadily by three points each decade since 1900. But as Tony Fauci spent the 1990s expanding the pharmaceutical and chemical paradigm—instead of public health— the pace of both longevity and intelligence slowed. The life expectancy decrease widened the gap between the US and its peers to nearly five years,[57] and American children have lost seven IQ points since 2000.[58]

Under Dr. Fauci’s leadership, the allergic, autoimmune, and chronic illnesses which Congress specifically charged NIAID to investigate and prevent, have mushroomed to afflict 54 percent of children, up from 12.8 percent when he took over NIAID in 1984.[59]

Dr. Fauci has offered no explanation as to why allergic diseases like asthma, eczema, food allergies, allergic rhinitis, and anaphylaxis suddenly exploded beginning in 1989, five years after he came to power. On its website, NIAID boasts that autoimmune disease is one of the agency’s top priorities. Some 80 autoimmune diseases, including juvenile diabetes and rheumatoid arthritis, Graves’ disease, and Crohn’s disease, which were practically unknown prior to 1984, suddenly became epidemic under his watch.[60][61][62] Autism, which many scientists now consider an autoimmune disease,[63][64] [65] exploded from between 2/10,000 and 4/10,000 Americans[66] when Tony Fauci joined NIAID, to one in thirty-four today. Neurological diseases like ADD/ADHD, speech and sleep disorders, narcolepsy, facial tics, and Tourette’s syndrome have become commonplace in American children.[67]

The human, health, and economic costs of chronic disease dwarf the costs of all infectious diseases in the United States. By this decade’s end, obesity, diabetes, and pre-diabetes are on track to debilitate 85 percent of America’s citizens.[68] America is among the ten most overweight countries on Earth. The health impacts of these epidemics—which fall mainly on the young—eclipse even the most exaggerated health impacts of COVID-19.

What is causing this cataclysm? Since genes don’t cause epidemics, it must be environmental toxins. Many of these illnesses became epidemic in the late 1980s, after vaccine manufacturers were granted government protection from liability, and consequently accelerated their introduction of new vaccines.[69]

The manufacturer’s inserts of the 69 vaccine doses list each of the now-common illnesses—some 170 in total—as vaccine side effects.[70] So vaccines are a potential culprit, but not the only one. Other possible perpetrators—or accomplices—that fit the applicable criterion—a sudden epidemic across all demographics beginning in 1989—are corn syrup, PFOA flame retardants, processed foods, cell phones and EMF radiation, chlorpyrifos, ultrasound, and neonicotinoid pesticides.

The list is finite, and it would be a simple thing to design studies that give us these answers. Tracing the etiology of these diseases through epidemiological research, observational and bench studies, and animal research is exactly what Congress charged Dr. Fauci to perform. But Tony Fauci controls the public health bankbook and has shown little interest in funding basic science to answer those questions.

Is this because any serious investigation into the sources of the chronic disease epidemic would certainly implicate the powerful pharmaceutical companies and the chemical, agricultural, and processed food multinationals that Dr. Fauci and his twenty-year business partner, Bill Gates, have devoted their careers to promoting? As we shall see, his capacity to curry favor with these merchants of pills, powders, potions, poisons, pesticides, pollutants, and pricks has been the key to Dr. Fauci’s longevity at HHS.

Is it fair to blame Dr. Fauci for a crisis that, of course, has many authors? Due to his vast budgetary discretion, his unique political access, his power over HHS and its various agencies, his moral authority, his moral flexibility, and his bully pulpit, Tony Fauci has more power than any other individual to direct public energies toward solutions. He has done the opposite. Instead of striving to identify the etiologies of the chronic disease pandemic, we shall see that Dr. Fauci has deliberately and systematically used his staggering power over Federal scientific research, medical schools, medical journals, and the careers of individual scientists, to derail inquiry and obstruct research that might provide the answers.

Dr. Phauci’s Pharmanation

While some Republicans bridled warily at Dr. Fauci’s accumulating power and seemingly arbitrary pronouncements, the alchemies of political tribalism and the relentlessly stoked terror of COVID-19 persuaded spellbound Democrats to close their eyes to the damning evidence that his COVID-19 policies were a catastrophic and dangerous failure.

As an advocate for public health, robust science, and independent regulatory agencies—free from corruption and financial entanglements with Pharma—I have battled Dr. Fauci for many years. I know him personally, and my impression of him is very different from my fellow Democrats, who first encountered him as the polished, humble, earnest, endearing, and long-suffering star of the televised White House COVID press conferences. Dr. Fauci played a historic role as the leading architect of “agency capture”—the corporate seizure of America’s public health agencies by the pharmaceutical industry.

Lamentably, Dr. Fauci’s failure to achieve public health goals during the COVID pandemic are not anomalous errors, but consistent with a recurrent pattern of sacrificing public health and safety on the altar of pharmaceutical profits and self-interest. He consistently priortized pharmaceutical industry profits over public health. Readers of these pages will learn how in exalting patented medicine Dr. Fauci has, throughout his long career, routinely falsified science, deceived the public and physicians, and lied about safety and efficacy. Dr. Fauci’s malefactions detailed in this volume include his crimes against the hundreds of Black and Hispanic orphan and foster children whom he subjected to cruel and deadly medical experiments and his role, with Bill Gates, in transforming hundreds of thousands of Africans into lab rats for low-cost clinical trials of dangerous experimental drugs that, once approved, remain financially out of reach for most Africans. You will learn how Dr. Fauci and Mr. Gates have turned the African continent into a dumping ground for expired, dangerous, and ineffective drugs, many of them discontinued for safety reasons in the US and Europe.

You will read how Dr. Fauci’s strange fascination with, and generous investments in, so-called “gain of function” experiments to engineer pandemic superbugs, give rise to the ironic possibility that Dr. Fauci may have played a role in triggering the global contagion that two US presidents entrusted him to manage.

You will also read about his two-decade strategy of promoting false pandemics as a scheme for promoting novel vaccines, drugs and Pharma profits. You will learn of his actions to conceal widespread contamination in blood and vaccines, his destructive vendettas against scientists who challenge the Pharma paradigm, his deliberate sabotaging of patent-expired remedies against infectious diseases, from HIV to COVID-19, to grease the skids for less effective, but more profitable, remedies. You will learn of the grotesque body counts that have accumulated in the wake of his cold-blooded focus on industry profits over public health.

All his strategies during COVID—falsifying science to bring dangerous and ineffective drugs to market, suppressing and sabotaging competitive products that have lower profit margins even if the cost is prolonging pandemics and losing thousands of lives—all of these share a common purpose: the myopic devotion to Pharma. This book will show you that Tony Fauci does not do public health; he is a businessman, who has used his office to enrich his pharmaceutical partners and expand the reach of influence that has made him the most powerful—and despotic—doctor in human history. For some readers, reaching that conclusion will require crossing some new bridges; many readers, however, intuitively know the real Anthony Fauci, and need only to see the facts illuminated and organized.

I wrote this book so that Americans—both Democrat and Republican—can understand Dr. Fauci’s pernicious role in allowing pharmaceutical companies to dominate our government and subvert our democracy, and to chronicle the key role Dr. Fauci has played in the current coup d’état against democracy.

*

Our thanks to the Unz Review

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] Google Patents, Assignee: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=vaccine+inassignee:centers+inassignee:for+inassignee:disease+inassignee:control&tbs=,ptss:g&num=100

[2] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, President’s Budget FY 2020, 2019 Enacted Column, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/budget/documents/fy2020/fy-2020-detail-table.pdf

[3] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dept. of HHS FY 2020 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-Justification of Estimates for Appropriation Committees- FY 2019 Enacted, 2020, p. 42-43, https://www.cdc.gov/budget/documents/fy2020/fy-2020-cdc-congressional-justification.pdf

[4] Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute, 15 U.S. Code § 3710c—Distribution of royalties received by Federal agencies, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/3710c

[5] FDA, Fact Sheet: FDA at a Glance, FDA (Nov. 18, 2020), https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/fda-basics/ fact-sheet-fda-glance

[6] Anthony S. Fauci, MD, Biography, NIAID https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio

[7] Adam Andrezejewski, “Dr. Anthony Fauci: The Highest Paid Employee in the Entire U.S. Federal Government,” FORBES (Jan. 25, 2021),
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ adamandrzejewski/2021/01/25/dr-anthony-fauci-the-highest-paid-employee-in-the-entire-us-federalgovernment/?sh=5ed2512386f0

[8] Saturday Night Live, “Dr. Anthony Fauci Cold Open—SNL, YOUTUBE” (Apr. 25, 2020), https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW56CL0pk0g

[9] Zack Budryk, “AIDS activists recruit Barbra Streisand for surprise Fauci birthday party on Zoom,” THE HILL (Dec. 24, 2020, 5:36 PM),
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/531636-aids-activistsrecruit-barbra-streisand-for-surprise-zoom-birthday-party

[10] Michael Specter, “How Anthony Fauci Became America’s Doctor,” The New Yorker (Apr. 10, 2020),
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/04/20/how-anthony-fauci-became-americas-doctor

[11] Peter Sullivan, “Fauci: Attacks on me are really also ‘attacks on science,’” The Hill(Jun. 9, 2021),
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/557602-fauci-attacks-on-me-are-really-also-attacks-on-science

[12] Donald G. McNeil Jr., “How Much Herd Immunity Is Enough?” New York Times(Dec. 24, 2020, updated Apr. 2, 2021),
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/health/herd-immunity-covidcoronavirus.html

[13] Tiana Lowe, “Fauci lies about lying about the efficacy of masks,” MSN (Jun. 21, 2021),
https://www. msn.com/en-us/health/medical/fauci-lies-about-lying-about-the-efficacy-of-masks/ar-AALhCrp

[14] Peter Hotez, “Mounting antiscience aggression in the United States,” PLOS BIOLOGY (Jul. 28, 2021),
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3001369

[15] Peter Hotez, “Will an American-Led Anti-Vaccine Movement Subvert Global Health?” Scientific American (Mar. 3, 2017),
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/will-an-american-led-antivaccine-movement-subvert-global-health/

[16] National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Health Awards by Location and Organization, (2021),
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/citation/niaid-grants-to-baylor-by-year-since-1993/

[17] Philanthropy News Digest, “Sabin Institute Receives $12 Million From Gates Foundation to Develop Hookworm Vaccine” (Jul 1, 2011),
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/sabin-institute-receives12-million-from-gates-foundation-to-develop-hookworm-vaccine

[18] Vipul Naik, “Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donations made to Baylor College of Medicine,”
https://donations.vipulnaik.com/donorDonee.php?donor=Bill+and+Melinda+Gates+Foundation&donee=Baylor+College+of+Medicine

[19] Rebecca G. Baker, “Bill Gates Asks NIH Scientists for Help in Saving Lives And Explains Why the Future Depends on Biomedical Innovation,” THE NIH CATALYST(Jan-Feb, 2014), https://irp.nih.gov/catalyst/v22i1/bill-gates-asks-nih-scientists-for-help-in-saving-lives

[20] Statista, Coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths worldwide per one million population as of September 30, 2021, by country (Oct. 6, 2021), https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deathsworldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

[21] Reported Cases and Deaths by Country or Territory, WORLDOMETER (Oct. 4, 2021), https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[22] S H Woolf, et al, “Effect of the covid-19 pandemic in 2020 on life expectancy across populations in the USA and other high income countries: simulations of provisional mortality data,” BMJ 2021;373:n1343 (June 24, 2021), https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1343

[23] Jemima Kelly, “Covid kills, but do we overestimate the risk?” Financial Times(Nov. 20, 2020), https://www.ft.com/content/879f2a2b-e366-47ac-b67a-8d1326d40b5e

[24] S H Woolf et al, “Effect of the covid-19 pandemic in 2020 on life expectancy across populations in the USA and other high income countries: simulations of provisional mortality data,” BMJ 2021;373:n1343 (June 24, 2021) https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1343

[25] Kaitlin Sullivan, “U.S. Life Expectancy Decreased by an ‘alarming’ amount during pandemic,” NBC NEWS ( Jun. 23, 2021),
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/u-s-life-expectancydecreased-alarming-amount-during-pandemic-n1272206

[26] Ibid.

[27] Alex Gutentag, “The War on Reality,” TABLET MAGAZINE (June 28, 2021), https://www. tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-war-on-reality-gutentag

[28] Lori Hinnant and Sam Mednick, “Virus-linked hunger tied to 10,000 child deaths each month,” AP (Jul. 27, 2020),
https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-africa-ap-top-news-understanding-theoutbreak-hunger-5cbee9693c52728a3808f4e7b4965cbd

[29] BBC News, “Covid-19 disruptions killed 228,000 children in South Asia, says UN report, BBC (Mar. 17, 2021), https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-56425115

[30] Megan Henney, “COVID’s economic fallout could elevate US mortality rate for years, study shows,” FOX BUSINESS (Jan. 5, 2021), https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/economic-fallout-fromcoronavirus-pandemic-could-elevate-us-mortality-rate-for-years

[31] Francesco Bianchi, Giada Bianchi, and Dongho Song, “The Long-term Impact Of The Covid-19 Unemployment Shock On Life Expectancy And Mortality Rates,” National Bureau of Economic Research (Dec. 2020, rev. Sep. 2021), https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w28304/w28304.pdf

[32] Ohio State University, “A third of teens, young adults reported worsening mental health during pandemic,” OSU Press Release (Jul 12, 2021),
https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/545757

[33] CDC, Emergency Department Visits for Suspected Suicide Attempts Among Persons Aged 12–25 Years Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic—United States, January 2019–May 2021, (Jun. 18, 2021), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7024e1.htm

[34] Sean CL Deoni et al, Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Early Child Cognitive Development: Initial Findings in a Longitudinal Observational Study of Child Health,medRxiv 2021.08.10.21261846; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.10.21261846

[35] Bill Chappell, Drug Overdoses Killed A Record Number Of Americans In 2020, Jumping By Nearly 30%, NPR (Jul. 14, 2021),
https://www.npr.org/2021/07/14/1016029270/drug-overdoses-killed-arecord-number-of-americans-in-2020-jumping-by-nearly-30

[36] CDC Health Alert Network, Increase in Fatal Drug Overdoses Across the United States Driven by Synthetic Opioids Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic, CDC (Dec. 20, 2020), https://emergency.cdc.gov/han/2020/han00438.asp

[37] Andrea Petersen, Amid Pandemic, More U.S. Adults Say They Considered Suicide, (Aug. 13, 2020 7:42 pm),
https://www.wsj.com/articles/amid-pandemic-more-u-s-adults-say-they-consideredsuicide-11597362131

[38] Rebecca T. Leeb et al, Mental Health–Related Emergency Department Visits Among Children Aged <18 Years During the COVID-19 Pandemic — United States, January 1–October 17, 2020, CDC (Nov. 13, 2020), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6945a3.htm

[39] Alex Gutentag, The War on Reality, TABLET MAGAZINE (June 28, 2021), https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-war-on-reality-gutentag

[40] Id.

[41] Amarica Rafanelli, Growing Up in a Pandemic: How Covid is Affecting Children’s Development, DIRECT RELIEF (Jan. 19, 2021, 10:41 AM),
https://www.directrelief.org/2021/01/growing-up-inthe-midst-of-a-pandemic-how-covid-is-affecting-childrens-development/

[42] James Freeman, The Limits of Anthony Fauci’s Expertise, WALL STREET JOURNAL (May 13, 2020 1:52 pm) https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-limits-of-anthony-faucis-expertise-11589392347

[43] Nigel Chiwaya & Jiachuan Wu, Unemployment claims by state: See how COVID-19 has destroyed the job market, NBC NEWS (Apr. 14, 2020, updated Aug.27, 2020), https://www.nbcnews.com/ business/economy/unemployment-claims-state-see-how-covid-19-has-destroyed-job-n1183686

[44] Anne Sraders & Lance Lambert, Nearly 100,000 establishments that temporarily shut down due to the pandemic are now out of business, FORTUNE (Sep. 28, 2020), https://fortune.com/2020/09/28/ covid-buisnesses-shut-down-closed/

[45] Deficit Tracker, BIPARTISAN POLICY (Sept. 20, 2021), https://bipartisanpolicy.org/report/deficittracker/

[46] Viral Inequity: Billionaires Gained $3.9tn, Workers Lost $3.7tn in 2020, TRT WORLD (Jan. 28, 2021),
https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/viral-inequality-billionaires-gained-3-9tn-workers-lost-37tn-in-2020-43674

[47] Chase Peterson-Withorn, Nearly 500 People Became Billionaires During The Pandemic Year, FORBES (Apr. 6, 2021),
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kerryadolan/2021/04/06/forbes-35th-annual-worldsbillionaires-list-facts-and-figures-2021/?sh=4c7b81775e58

[48] Heather Long, Nearly 8 million Americans have fallen into poverty since the summer, WASHINGTON POST (Dec. 16, 2020),
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/16/poverty-rising/

[49] Jared Spataro, 2 Years of Digital Transformation in 2 Months, MICROSOFT (Apr. 30, 2020),
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2020/04/30/2-years-digital-transformation-2months/

[50] Id.

[51] Oracle Cloud Manages COVID-19 Vaccination Program in the United States, ORACLE PRESS RELEASE (Dec. 15, 2020),
https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/oracle-cloud-managescovid-19-vaccination-program-121520.html

[52] Chase Petersen-Withorn, How Much Money America’s Billionaires Have Made During The Covid-19 Pandemic, FORBES (Apr. 30, 2021),
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2021/04/30/ american-billionaires-have-gotten-12-trillion-richer-during-the-pandemic/?sh=461b1067f557

[53] Samuel Stebbins and Grant Suneson, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk among US billionaires getting richer during coronavirus pandemic, USA TODAY, (Dec 1, 2020).
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/12/01/american-billionaires-that-got-richer-during-covid/43205617/

[54] Sue Halpern, The Terrifying Potential of the 5G Network, THE NEW YORKER (Apr. 26, 2019),
https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/the-terrifying-potential-of-the-5gnetwork

[55] Recommended Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule for ages 18 years or younger, United States, 2021, CDC, https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html

[56] Joseph Guzman, Stunning new report ranks US dead last in health care among richest countries-despite spending the most, THE HILL (Aug. 6, 2021),
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/566715-stunning-new-report-ranks-us-dead-last-in-healthcare

[57] Kaitlin Sullivan, U.S. Life Expectancy Decreased by an ‘alarming’ amount during pandemic, NBC NEWS ( Jun. 23, 2021),
ttps://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/u-s-life-expectancydecreased-alarming-amount-during-pandemic-n1272206

[58] Dr. Robert Gorter, Dr. Joseph Mercola, et al., “Why are IQ scores declining over the previous 20 years?,” The Gorter Model, (Jul. 1, 2018),
http://www.gorter-model.org/iq-scores-declining-previous20-years/

[59] Could Goldman Sachs Report Be Exposing Pharma’s Real End Game of Drug Dependency vs. Curing Disease, CHD (Apr. 18, 2018),
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/could-goldman-sachs-reportbe-exposing-pharmas-real-end-game-of-drug-dependency-vs-curing-disease/

[60] Lana Andelane, Autism may be an autoimmune disorder – study, NEWSHUB, )Oct 20, 2019).
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/lifestyle/2019/10/autism-may-be-an-autoimmune-disorder-study.html

[61] Children’s Health Defense, Campaign to Restore Child Health, CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE, (2018).
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/campaign-restore-child-health/

[62] Gianna Melillo, Study Highlights Prevalence of Comorbid Autoimmune Diseases, T1D in Pediatric Populations, AJMC, (Sep 9, 2020).
https://www.ajmc.com/view/study-highlights-prevalence-ofcomorbid-autoimmune-diseases-t1d-in-pediatric-populations

[63] J.B. HANDLEY, HOW TO END THE AUTISM EPIDEMIC, (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2018).

[64] Elizabeth Edmiston, et al, Autoimmunity, Autoantibodies, and Autism Spectrum Disorder, BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, (Mar 1, 2017).
https://www.biologicalpsychiatryjournal.com/article/ S0006-3223(16)32739-1/fulltext

[65] Heather K. Hughes et al, Immune Dysfunction and Autoimmunity as Pathological Mechanisms in Autism Spectrum Disorders, FRONTIERS IN CELLULAR NEUROSCIENCE, (Nov 13, 2018). https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fncel.2018.00405/full

[66] THOMAS F. BOAT & JOE T. WU, ED., MENTAL DISORDERS AND DISABILITIES AMONG LOW-INCOME CHILDREN, 241 National Academies Press, (Oct. 28, 2015),
https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK332896/

[67] Elizabeth Mumper, MD, Increasing Rates of Childhood Neurological Illness, THE INSTITUTE FOR FUNCTIONAL MEDICINE, (2017).
https://www.ifm.org/news-insights/increasing-rateschildhood-neurological-illness/

[68] Adela Hruby and Frank B. Hu, The Epidemiology of Obesity: A Big Picture,PHARMACOECONOMICS, (Jul 1, 2016). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC4859313/

[69] Michael E. McDonald and John F. Paul, Timing of Increased Autistic Disorder Cumulative Incidence, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, (Feb 16, 2010).
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es902057k

[70] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Table 1. Recommended Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule for ages 18 years or younger, United States, 2021,(2021), https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-child-combined-schedule.pdf

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.

***

Song Lyrics

The story goes you’re gonna make it if you try,
And if you don’t may your life waste away ‘cause its your fault

Like the sheen of a rotting fish, The glitter just dazzles,
For everyone who’s filthy rich, A million must suffer,
So start your climb up the money tree, The best slaves are those who think they’re free,

Oh say can you see Rome is Burning, Oh how it burns, Oh feel the burn,

As life unfolds people struggle to make ends meet,
Look around, what you see, the hunger, the homeless, the powerless streets

On your mind the need for change, channel your pain and your rage,
Stand up and link your arms for strength, Shout it out to the police state,
I can’t breathe that’s why I take a knee, We won’t take your new form o’slavery,

Oh say can you see Rome is Burning, Oh how it burns, oh feel the burn,
Oh how it burns, Oh feel the burn

Make no mistake, racism starts with the state,
To divide and rule the working class to keep us broken, not building the new

Lessons of history revealed, Organize or be displaced,
The rulers have no solutions, Only violence, wars and jails,
Stick together and fight for your just claims, Workers united will prevail,

Oh say can you see Rome is over, Oh build the New, Oh build the New!
Oh build the New, Oh build the New!, Oh build the new, Oh build the New!

Video: Click the “Watch on Youtube”

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Song: Rome Is Burning. To All Those People Who Have Gone into Action to End State Organized Racist Violence and Oppression and All Forms of Racism

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.

GR Editor’s Note

Some Definitions quoted in this important study

ACS: Acute coronary syndrome

Acute coronary syndrome is a term used to describe a range of conditions associated with sudden, reduced blood flow to the heart.

One such condition is a heart attack (myocardial infarction) — when cell death results in damaged or destroyed heart tissue. Even when acute coronary syndrome causes no cell death, the reduced blood flow changes how your heart works and is a sign of a high risk of heart attack.   Mayo Clinic

The PULS test (Protein Unstable Lesion Signature Test) measures the most clinically-significant protein biomarkers that measure the body’s immune system response to arterial injury.

Seventy-five percent of heart attacks are caused by unstable cardiac lesion ruptures. Detecting the presence of these lesions can be an indicator of your overall heart health and predict your risk for having a heart attack. (Life Lab)

 

***

Abstract

Our group has been using the PLUS Cardiac Test (GD Biosciences, Inc, Irvine, CA) a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers which generates a score predicting the 5 yr risk (percentage chance) of a new Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS).

The score is based on changes from the norm of multiple protein biomarkers including IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine, soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor (HGF)which serves as a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue, among other markers. Elevation above the norm increases the PULS score, while decreases below the norm lowers the PULS score.The score has been measured every 3-6 months in our patient population for 8 years.

Recently, with the advent of the mRNA COVID 19 vaccines (vac) by Moderna and Pfizer, dramatic changes in the PULS score became apparent in most patients.

This report summarizes those results. A total of 566 pts, aged 28 to 97, M:F ratio 1:1 seen in a preventive cardiology practice had a new PULS test drawn from 2 to 10 weeks following the 2nd COVID shot and was compared to the previous PULS score drawn 3 to 5 months previously pre- shot. Baseline IL-16 increased from 35=/-20 above the norm to 82 =/- 75 above the norm post-vac; sFas increased from 22+/- 15 above the norm to 46=/-24 above the norm post-vac; HGF increased from 42+/-12 above the norm to 86+/-31 above the norm post-vac. These changes resulted in an increase of the PULS score from 11% 5 yr ACS risk to 25% 5 yr ACS risk. At the time of this report, these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vac.

We conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of cardiac muscle and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.

emphasis added

*

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:  A hand holding an mRNA vaccine vial. (Spencer Davis / Unsplash)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Important Study: mRNA COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: A Warning
  • Tags: ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

With renewed interest to uproot French influence, Russia has ultimately began its inroads into the Sahel region, an elongated landlocked territory located between north Africa (Maghreb) and west Africa region, and also stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea. While it remains largely underdeveloped and greater part of the population impoverished, terrorist organizations including Boko Haram and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) are operating and have contributed to the frequent violence, extremism and instability in this vast region.

As usually referred to as the G5 Sahel, it consists of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger. Besides the instability, these countries are engulfed with various socio-economic problems primarily due to the system of governance and poor policies toward sustainable development. There are, in addition, rights abuse and cultural practices that affect development.

In July 2020, the United States raised concerns over growing number of allegations of human rights violations and abuses by state security forces in entire Sahel. The US response came after the released documents by Human Rights Watch regarding the same in early July. France, former colonial power, still attempts at dominating the region. France has announced the pulling out of the military force, abruptly ending its terrorism operations and thus creating a huge vacuum.

For fear and concerns about the new rise of terrorism, the Sahel-5 are turning to Russia. Last year after the political change on August 18 in Mali, a former French colony with the fractured economy and breeding field for armed Islamic jihadist groups, Russia offered a tremendous assistance. By showing support for the military government in Mali, Russia has utterly ignored or violated the protocols for implementing the “Silencing the Guns” agenda in West Africa, a flagship programme of the Africa Union’s Agenda 2063. Now Russia is capitalizing on this loophole opportunity, Chad and Mali as conduits, to penetrate into the Sahel.

Russia has lined up Foreign Ministers of these countries in the Sahel, the latest was the Minister of Foreign Affairs, African Integration and Chadians Abroad of the Republic of Chad, Cherif Zene Mahamat, who paid a working visit on December 6‒8. Prior to that, Malian Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop went in November. Both meetings discussed most extensively consolidating military assistance to fight growing terrorism, and review efforts to strengthen the political dialogue and promote some kind of partnerships relating to trade and the economy in the region.

In the middle of November, Chairperson of the African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat, together with Sergey Lavrov agreed on terms of helping with necessary equipment, weapons and ammunition in the Sahel. Lavrov referred to this in his opening remarks as “military and technical cooperation” with AU’s Chairperson Faki Mahamat – “a worthy representative in this high position of pan-regional importance.”

On December 7, Lavrov held diplomatic meeting with Chadian Cherif Mahamat.

“We discussed African affairs at length: the difficult situation in the Sahara-Sahel zone that was destabilized after NATO’s aggressive attack on Libya. This was followed by an inflow of terrorists, smugglers, and volumes of illegal weapons from the north to the south of Africa. These criminals were particularly attracted to this area and the Lake Chad region,” Lavrov told the media conference following the closed-door meeting.

In the process, it is necessary to mobilize all available resources of the Africans themselves and the international community for fighting terrorist groups. Nevertheless, it is also necessary for Russia’s efforts to maintain the joint forces of the Sahel Five, according to Lavrov. He further assured “we will continue supporting it with supply of arms and hardware and personnel training, including peacekeepers, as it is very important to help put an end to this evil and other challenges and threats, including drug trafficking and other forms of organized crime.”

According to several narratives and reports, Russia has agreed to push the Wagner mercenaries into the entire Sahara-Sahel, including the G5 Sahel group of Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger, which focused on combating terrorism. Many experts say Russia has set out to battle against neo-colonial tendencies of France, and stepping also to join what is often phrased “the scramble for resources” in Africa. In his remarks, Lavrov explicitly points to creating favorable conditions for the implementation of Russian projects in Chad, including in the field of energy and the extraction of mineral resources.

Further to the narratives, Russia has now embarked on fighting “neo-colonialism” which it considers as stumbling stone on its way to regain a part of the Soviet-era influence in Africa. Russia has sought to convince Africans over the past years of the likely dangers of neocolonial tendencies perpetrated by the former colonial countries and the scramble for resources on the continent. But all such warnings could largely fall on deaf ears as African leaders choose development partners with funds to invest in the economy.

It is necessary to acknowledge that neither France, Russia, the United States nor any colonizing force will truly solve the problems that confront Africa. Some African leaders sign non-transparent agreements, routinely ignore both the executive and legislative decisions on tendering national projects and natural resources. It has always been the case, such huge natural-resource projects given away without cabinet and parliament’s approval. Apparently, these resources extraction hardly deliver broad-based development dividends.

That however, there are vivid indications that Russia is broadening its geography of diplomacy covering poor African countries and especially fragile States that need Russia’s military assistance. Chad, Mali and Niger, for example, have appeared on its radar, Russia sees some potential there – as a possible gateway into the Sahel in Africa.

Russian Foreign Ministry has explained in a statement posted on its website, that Russia’s military-technical cooperation with African countries is primarily directed at settling regional conflicts and preventing the spread of terrorist threats and to fight the growing terrorism in the continent. Worth noting here that Russia, in its strategy on Africa is reported to be also looking into building military bases in the continent.

Over the past years, strengthening military-technical cooperation has been part of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation. Russia has signed bilateral military-technical cooperation agreement with many African countries. Researchers say it plans to build military bases as this article explicitly reported, among others.

Research Professor Irina Filatova at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow explains in an emailed discussion that “Russia’s influence in the Sahel has been growing just as French influence and assistance has been dwindling, particularly in the military sphere. It is for the African countries to choose their friends, but it would be better to deal directly with the government, than with (mercenaries of the Russian) Wagner group, whose connection with the government was barely recognized.”

In very particular cases, she unreservedly suggested: “If they wanted the Russians to come and fight Islamist groups, it would be much better to ask the government to send regular troops. Wagner’s vigilantes are not responsible to anybody, and the Russian government may refuse to take any responsibility for whatever they do in case something goes wrong.”

In another interview, Grigory Lukyanov, a Senior Researcher at the Russia’s Institute of Oriental Studies, explained that such relations are useful particularly in the field of resource extraction and security services, where Russia has competitive advantages.

According to foreign experts and researchers, the arrival of Russian mercenaries in the Sahel – of which thousands are estimated – would jeopardize other external commitment to fighting terrorism, and limit development assistance from international organizations. Reuters has reported that a possible contract could be worth US$10.8 million, or estimated more per month, depending on the contract, working with the Russian private military company Wagner Group.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has oftentimes spoken against such collaboration, the use of Russian mercenaries in Africa. Instead, he has suggested pursuing the creation and deployment of the G5 Sahel Joint-Force and the United Nations Integrated Strategy (UNIS) for the Sahel could bring tangible progress. The countries in the region are particularly encouraged to adopt, with support from international partners, the necessary measures to fully implement the support plan in developing the region.

The Sahel-Sahara, the vast semi-arid region of Africa separating the Sahara Desert to the north and tropical savannas to the south, is as much a land of opportunities as it is of challenges. Although it has abundant human and natural resources, offering tremendous potential for rapid growth, there are deep-rooted challenges – environmental, political and security – that may affect the prosperity and peace of the Sahel.

For this reason, the United Nations has come up with a unique support plan targeting 10 countries to scale up efforts to accelerate prosperity and sustainable peace in the region. Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, The Gambia, Guinea Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Nigeria and Senegal. The creation and deployment of the G5 Sahel Joint-Force and the United Nations Integrated Strategy (UNIS) for the Sahel could bring tangible progress.

The best is to consider national and regional institutions, bilateral and multilateral organizations, the private sector and civil society organizations to work towards operationalizing and implementing the United Nations Security Council resolutions on the Sahel aim at attaining regional peace, and further to accelerate the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

*

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.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Geopolitics: Russia Extends its Sphere of Influence in Africa’s Sahel
  • Tags: , ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Today, released Rwandan Prisoners living in a safe house in Tanzania were sent to Niger.

This Tribunal (ICTR) created by the west, mainly the USA was a major disaster for many reasons, as we all know.

One major failure is that it did not permit acquitted persons to rejoin their families, most of whom are in Europe, Canada, Britain and the USA. Europe, Britain and the USA: these former slave owning and slave trafficking countries and bloody colonizers of Africa (and elsewhere) set up the ICTR to judge the losing side of the RPF war of aggression on Rwanda. When men were acquitted, these countries refused to allow them to come and live with their families in Europe or Canada. Gros hypocrisy. Many men lost twenty years of their life, first in prison and then “held” in a safe house in Tanzania.

Some of these men were acquitted by the Tribunal, but some had been convicted on lesser charges and were released from prison after serving their sentences. The distinction between these men and the acquitted has some legal consequences even though we know they were all innocent of the charges trumped up against them by Kigali and the ICTR prosecutor. They all deserve our respect.

They were offered a chance to go to Niger and had to sign that they accepted the offer “freely”. But really, they had no choice since their housing, health care and support in Tanzania was being eliminated by the Mechanism/Tribunal.

They had to sign a document which includes terms such as “I express my desire and decision to be resettled in the Republic of Niger (tr.))” and that the decision was made “willingly and voluntarily, without coercion, inducement or threat from the Mechanism or any other person or entity (tr.)”

They will be housed for one year with an indemnity of 10,000$, with no health care, an identity card and a guarantee against extradition to Rwanda. Most of the men are rather old and need regular medical care. The Tribunal/Mechanism is washing its hand of all responsibility for the former prisoners. These men will be on their own.

Niger is very hot and dry and is infested with Islamic terrorists financed most likely by the Gulf allies/USA/Grande Bretagne/Europe. The city of Niamey is apparently safe. It is not an easy environment for Rwandans accustomed to a temperate climate.

We admire and thank the République de Niger for its generosity and openness. I personally visited Niger last October for a congress of the African Bar Association. We were well received, and this largely Muslim country made a good impression.

Future support

Rwandan prisoners in Africa may receive some welcome support. We have been informed of an effort by some Rwandans in Europe to intervene and support the Rwandan prisoners in Mali, Benin, Senegal and now in Niger. This is a good step, and we will support this effort if it materializes.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Deportation of Released Rwandan Prisoners from Tanzania to the République du Niger
  • Tags: ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First posted by Gr on November 16, 2021

Just a few months before the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) was publicly announced, scientists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) announced the completion of a Mark of the Beast “tattoo” technology for children to keep track of their vaccination records.

The microchip, which can be implanted directly into the skin, was designed with special invisible dye that can be picked up with a special mobile phone filter. That dye is not visible to the naked eye.

Lasting up to five years, this dye is detected using near-infrared light, which is shined onto the skin in the area where it was injected. It has already been tested on pigs and rats, and the presumable next step is to start injecting actual children with it.

Billionaire eugenicist Bill Gates called for this back in the early days of the plandemic, suggesting that digital jab “passports” for the Chinese Virus include people’s injection records.

“The system – which has not yet been tested in children – would provide quick and easy access to vaccination history, avoid the risk of clerical errors, and add little to the cost or risk of the procedure,” reported Scientific American, citing a study about the project that was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine.

Quantum dot tattoos to complete the Mark of the Beast system

Once again using the poor as an excuse to create an abomination like this, the scientists involved with the project claim that it will help developing countries to achieve better health outcomes in children.

“Especially in developing countries where medical records may not be as complete or as accessible, there can be value in having medical information directly associated with a person,” commented Mark Prausnitz, a bioengineering professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech), who was not involved in the research.

“This, I think, is a pretty interesting way to accomplish those goals.”

It also accomplishes the prophetic goal of merging people’s identifying information into a microchip injection or tattoo that can be scanned for purposes of buying and selling, accessing restricted buildings, driving and engaging in social activities.

According to MIT bioengineers Robert Langer and Ana Jaklenec, small patches full of microneedles are first stamped on children’s skin to inject them with vaccines. After that, their proof of injection is stored on the other injectable components.

With the simple scan of the wrist, forehead, or wherever else these components are injected, the government can quickly check whether or not a child is “up to date” on the vaccine schedule, which now includes Fauci Flu shots.

“The team ended up using a technology called quantum dots, tiny semiconducting crystals that reflect light and were originally developed to label cells during research,” reported Scientific American. “The dye has been shown to be safe in humans.”

Not everyone is on board with the plan, as you might expect. Privacy experts say that there are risks involved with having people walk around with microchips in their bodies that contain all of their personal information.

“Different people and different cultures will probably feel differently about having an invisible medical tattoo,” added Prausnitz.

Not at all a surprise is the fact that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded this Mark of the Beast research. It was launched because of a “direct request” from Gates himself, who claims he wants these microchips inside people’s bodies for the purpose of “eradicating disease.”

“If we don’t have good data, it’s really difficult to eradicate disease,” Jaklenec added in support of Gates’ agenda.

*

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 Vaccines.news

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

First posted on Global Research on December 4, 2021

***

There was a hidden gem in a blog post by Aaron Siri that nobody picked up. It was evidence that vaccinated people are 9X more likely to be admitted to the hospital than unvaccinated.

It is hard to get good, honest data out of hospitals nowadays for some reason. I have no clue as to why that is. You’d think things would be more transparent.

But Aaron Siri discovered someone who convinced their hospital to do something really unusual: track the vaccination status of each admitted patient to the hospital. Tracking was based on whether you got the vaccine or not, not “two weeks after you got the vaccine” which is a major definition difference. In short, honest tracking.

You’ll never guess what happened so I’ll tell you.

Siri wrote on his substack:

A concerned Physician Assistant, Deborah Conrad, convinced her hospital to carefully track the Covid-19 vaccination status of every patient admitted to her hospital.  The result is shocking.

As Ms. Conrad has detailed, her hospital serves a community in which less than 50% of the individuals were vaccinated for Covid-19 but yet, during the same time period, approximately 90% of the individuals admitted to her hospital were documented to have received this vaccine.

These patients were admitted for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to COVID-19 infections.  Even more troubling is that there were many individuals who were young, many who presented with unusual or unexpected health events, and many who were admitted months after vaccination.

As you might expect, the hospital rewarded Deborah Conrad for her courage and leadership to expose the truth by firing her:

The message is clear: If you speak the truth, you will be pay the price. It is imperative that information that doesn’t align with the “narrative” be suppressed. This is why doctors don’t speak out. And it’s why I had to quit my job in high tech to speak out as well.

But here’s the part Aaron didn’t point out that needs to be stated very clearly:

The only way you can get those numbers is if vaccinated people are 9 times more likely to be hospitalized than unvaccinated

It is mathematically impossible to get to those numbers any other way. Period. Full stop. This is known as an “inconvenient truth.”

However, it’s important we don’t leap to quick conclusions. A good part of this effect could be due to a greater portion of vaccinated people among the elderly.

I’m in the process of getting a stratification by age to see just how serious this is. They noted in the article, “there were many individuals who were young.” So we’ll see what the data says.

It does seem odd that a retired high tech executive is the one doing this research. I’m just doing it because nobody else is.

You can’t have it both ways

What I find super-interesting is we are led to believe that the hospitals are filled with the unvaccinated. So according to the narrative, the age skew of the vaccinated doesn’t make a difference; it pales in comparison to the risk caused by those who are unvaccinated.

But now, when the evidence goes against them, the narrative changes that the reason there are so many vaccinated is the age skew.

Isn’t that amazing? According to the “experts,” no matter which way the data goes, the unvaccinated are the problem!

This of course is why I don’t trust the medical community or the three letter agencies. I’m more interested in what the data says.

Stay tuned…

*

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 BigPharmaNews.com

Inside the Military’s Secret Undercover Army

December 11th, 2021 by William M Arkin

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.

***

 

 

Global Research Editor’s Note

Below are excerpts of an important article by William Arkin, published by Newsweek in May 2021.

While the covid crisis is not addressed in this article, does this deployment of an undercover force of 60,000 people namely a “secret army” have a bearing on the complex decision making process underlying the lockdown, the vaccine mandate and the “Great Reset” ?  

William Arkin is an outstanding analyst. We have been featuring his writings on Global Research since 2005.  See also his analysis on the dangers of nuclear war.  William Arkin Archive 

Michel C., Global Research, December 11, 2021

***

The largest undercover force the world has ever known is the one created by the Pentagon over the past decade. Some 60,000 people now belong to this secret army, many working under masked identities and in low profile, all part of a broad program called “signature reduction.” The force, more than ten times the size of the clandestine elements of the CIA, carries out domestic and foreign assignments, both in military uniforms and under civilian cover, in real life and online, sometimes hiding in private businesses and consultancies, some of them household name companies.

The unprecedented shift has placed an ever greater number of soldiers, civilians, and contractors working under false identities, partly as a natural result in the growth of secret special forces but also as an intentional response to the challenges of traveling and operating in an increasingly transparent world. The explosion of Pentagon cyber warfare, moreover, has led to thousands of spies who carry out their day-to-day work in various made-up personas, the very type of nefarious operations the United States decries when Russian and Chinese spies do the same.

Newsweek’s exclusive report on this secret world is the result of a two-year investigation involving the examination of over 600 resumes and 1,000 job postings, dozens of Freedom of Information Act requests, and scores of interviews with participants and defense decision-makers. What emerges is a window into not just a little-known sector of the American military, but also a completely unregulated practice. No one knows the program’s total size, and the explosion of signature reduction has never been examined for its impact on military policies and culture. Congress has never held a hearing on the subject. And yet the military developing this gigantic clandestine force challenges U.S. laws, the Geneva Conventions, the code of military conduct and basic accountability.

The signature reduction effort engages some 130 private companies to administer the new clandestine world. Dozens of little known and secret government organizations support the program, doling out classified contracts and overseeing publicly unacknowledged operations. Altogether the companies pull in over $900 million annually to service the clandestine force—doing everything from creating false documentation and paying the bills (and taxes) of individuals operating under assumed names, to manufacturing disguises and other devices to thwart detection and identification, to building invisible devices to photograph and listen in on activity in the most remote corners of the Middle East and Africa.

Special operations forces constitute over half the entire signature reduction force, the shadow warriors who pursue terrorists in war zones from Pakistan to West Africa but also increasingly work in unacknowledged hot spots, including behind enemy lines in places like North Korea and Iran. Military intelligence specialists—collectors, counter-intelligence agents, even linguists—make up the second largest element: thousands deployed at any one time with some degree of “cover” to protect their true identities.

Click here to read the full article published by Newsweek.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

We are living in a world and at a time when the creation of a new “life-saving” vaccine against the dreaded COVID-19 virus is actually acting as a force of division.

Pfizer, Astro Zeneca, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson “miracle cures” served nearly one full year after being first introduced to the public are now an instrument by which the “unvaccinated” are facing a form of apartheid. Now, unless you have been fully vaccinated, there are campuses you are no longer welcomed to attend university classes alongside the fully vaccinated. You can no longer be admitted into restaurants, gyms, theatres, bars, or public events. If you worked for the federal government and did not get the jab you will suddenly find yourself out of work with no compensation.

Worse, there are frequently marks of scorn in public opinion pages. If people are going to hospital because of COVID, it’s the “anti-vaxxers” fault. If vaccinated people end up in the hospital, it’s the “anti-vaxxers” fault. Why are we not done with this horrible illness? It’s being dragged on because of the damned “anti-vaxxers!”

Who knows? Before long we may even blame the “anti-vaxxers” for inflation and organized crime!

If we would only just take the vaccine, our troubles would all be over. The unvaccinated’s unwillingness to take a vaccine, even though it is an experimental vaccine with some pretty significant costs to some of the recipients, they are described as selfish, conspiracy theorists, and misguided by mis-information.

Beyond even these signals, it is hard even to get representatives of the two groups together to have a sane conversation. I have myself encountered the same gap just trying to find doctors or researchers from the “pro-Vaxx” (“pro-science” they prefer to call themselves) to engage in a civil conversation about COVID vaccination with people who, they say, have taken the “flat-earth society” position.

Divisions are so counter-productive and so unnecessary in our society, especially when the cause is so seemingly trivial. If at all possible, it would be advantageous to try to build some sort of a bridge connecting the growing chasm between rival families. And that is where this episode of the Global Research News Hour attempts to hail one person on the opposite end for a talk about our non-stopping pandemic.

Dr Tara Moriarty is active trying to serve Canadians by setting up ZOOM session to correspond with Canadians about the safety of these drugs and what she calls mis-information regarding claims to the contrary. Recently she engaged in a conversation with a so-called “vaccine hesitant” host just to see how she would react to some of the points we have been hearing about on this program. We leave it to listeners to listen to the facts and come to their own conclusions.

Dr Tara Moriarty is an Associate Professor at the University of Toronto in the Faculty of Dentistry with cross appointment to the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology in the Faculty of Medicine. Dr. Moriarty is also the Principal Investigator in the Moriarty Lab, an infectious diseases research laboratory which studies several fundamental mechanisms underlying blood borne dissemination of bacterial pathogens. Dr. Moriarty co-founded COVID-19 Resources Canada, CanCOVID and #ScienceUpFirst, and is active in health misinformation responses and research.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 336)

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.

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.

***

END GENOCIDE NOW is a campaign that aims to enlighten people about the mechanisms and manuscripts of tyranny, as well as the remedies for sovereignty. We have invited powerful voices in the freedom movement together in a series of interviews.

This is episode number 10: The Origin Of Violence

Have you ever sat down in self reflection and asked yourself, why do human beings kill each other? Today I get to speak with a man who has dedicated 14 years of his life in seclusion to explore that very question in depth.

Robert J. Burrowes is an author and world renown scholar and teacher of nonviolent action strategy, especially the Gandhian approach. He has spent 40 years actively researching and analysing the structure of violent elite dominance and applying his knowledge into organised strategic resistance.

In this interview, Robert shares his findings of where violence comes from and how we can best reclaim our freedom in this time of ever increasing oppression and surveillance.

*

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.

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of Why Violence? His email address is [email protected] and his website is here

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The Origin of Violence: “Why do Human Beings Kill One Another”? Robert J. Burrowes
  • Tags: , ,

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

December 10th, 2021 by Global Research News

Graphene COVID Kill Shots: Let the Evidence Speak for Itself

Dr. Ariyana Love, December 5 , 2021

Renowned Virologist Warns of ‘Collapse of Our Health System’ Due to Complications from COVID Vaccines

Patrick Delaney, December 7 , 2021

How to Detox from the COVID Shot

Makia Freeman, December 3 , 2021

Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data

The Election Wizard, December 5 , 2021

Video: Graphene Hydroxide in the mRNA Vaccine Vial: Assassination of Dr. Andreas Noack

Andreas Noack, December 5 , 2021

2,809 Dead Babies in VAERS Following COVID Shots as New Documents Prove Pfizer, the FDA, and the CDC Knew the Shots Were Not Safe for Pregnant Women

Brian Shilhavy, December 6 , 2021

Pfizer Smoking-gun “Secret Document”: Their Deadly COVID Vaccine

Jon Rappoport, December 8 , 2021

On the Heels of Austria and Germany Locking Down the Unvaccinated, EU Leader Calls for Throwing Out Nuremberg Code in Favor of Forced Vaccinating All Dissenters

Julian Conradson, December 6 , 2021

A Letter to the Unvaccinated

Dr. Angela Durante, December 4 , 2021

Research “Game-changer”: Spike Protein Increases Heart Attacks and Destroys Immune ​System

Mike Whitney, December 3 , 2021

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

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 6 , 2021

666 Cases of Heart Disease in 12 to 17-Year-Olds after COVID Shots – Less than 2 Cases Per Year Following All Vaccines for Past 30+ Years

Brian Shilhavy, December 6 , 2021

The Vaccine Death Report: Evidence of Millions of Deaths and Serious Adverse Events Resulting from the Experimental COVID-19 Injections

David John Sorensen, December 6 , 2021

The Covid-19 Pandemic Does Not Exist

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 29 , 2021

The Incidence of Cancer, Triggered by the Covid 19 “Vaccine”

Dr. Nicole Delépine, December 5 , 2021

FDA & CDC Ignore Damning Report 90+% of Hospital’s Admissions Were Vaccinated for COVID-19

Covert Geopolitics, December 8 , 2021

The Omicron Fraud. The WHO Now Says It’s “Super-mild”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 8 , 2021

An Australian Horror Story

Jeremy Salt, December 4 , 2021

Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (VAIDS): ‘We Should Anticipate Seeing this Immune Erosion More Widely’

Frontline Doctors, December 9 , 2021

“We are in Deep Trouble!” Following the Science behind the COVID Catastrophe

Michael Welch, December 3 , 2021

Fake Science, Invalid Data: There is No Such Thing as a “Confirmed Covid-19 Case”. There is No Pandemic

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 26 , 2021

If You Take the COVID Vax, You Can Never Achieve Full Immunity Again – Government Stats Unveil the Horrifying Truth

Ethan Huff, December 5 , 2021

Everyone Missed this One… Vaccinated People Are Up to Nine Times (9X) More Likely to be Hospitalized than Unvaccinated People

Steve Kirsch, December 4 , 2021

The World Gone Mad: The COVID Vaccine Derangement Syndrome. ” Fourth Covid-19 Shot. Many More to Come”

Vasko Kohlmayer, December 8 , 2021

Video: Digital Tyranny and the Rockefeller-Gates WHO “Vaxx-Certificate Passport”: Towards a World War III Scenario

Peter Koenig, November 28 , 2021

The Covid Outbreak: “Biggest Health Scam of the 21st Century.” Report by 1500 Health Professionals

United Health Professionals, December 4 , 2021

Australian Senator Who Opposes Vaccine Mandate Escorted to Quarantine Hotel: “This Has Been Premeditated”

The COVID World, December 6 , 2021

Video: Urgent: Dr. Peter McCullough Calls for Immediate Vaxx Halt

Dr. Peter McCullough, December 7 , 2021

Court-Ordered Pfizer Documents They Tried to Have Sealed for 55 Years Show 1223 Deaths, 158,000 Adverse Events in 90 Days Post EUA Release

Celia Farber, December 9 , 2021

Children Are the Faultline in the COVID Vaccine Narrative that Exposes the Fraud

Vasko Kohlmayer, December 6 , 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).

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The United States government has won an appeal at Britain’s High Court over the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Friday’s ruling, which overturns an earlier decision, means 50-year-old Assange may now be closer to being sent from London’s high-security Belmarsh prison to the US, where he would face spying charges over WikiLeaks’ publication of secret military documents a decade ago.

The court said that US assurances were enough to guarantee Assange would be treated humanely and directed a lower court judge to send the extradition request to the home secretary, Priti Patel, for review.

Patel, who oversees law enforcement in the United Kingdom, will make the final choice on whether to extradite Assange.

But the legal saga is far from over, with Assange’s legal team expected to contest the latest decision.

Assange’s partner, Stella Moris, said Friday’s ruling was a “grave miscarriage of justice”, and promised Assange’s legal team would “appeal this decision at the earliest possible moment”.

Assange watched the proceedings via video link, from Belmarsh prison.

Concerns for Assange’s mental health

A lower court in January this year had refused the US’s extradition request, saying that Assange’s mental health was too fragile to withstand the American judicial system.

Such concerns had been raised before. In late 2019, a group of 60 doctors from several countries wrote to Patel to express their worries for his mental and physical health, and later claimed that they had failed to receive any response.

In the January case, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser at the Old Bailey court in London said Assange was “a depressed and sometimes despairing man” who had the “intellect and determination” to circumvent any suicide prevention measures taken by prison authorities.

The US appealed, challenging that notion.

A lawyer working for the US, James Lewis, said Assange “has no history of serious and enduring mental illness” and does not meet the threshold of being so ill that he cannot resist harming himself.

US authorities have told British judges that if they agree to extradite Assange, he could serve any US prison sentence he receives in his native Australia.

US prosecutors have indicted Assange on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over WikiLeaks’ publication of thousands of leaked military and diplomatic documents.

The charges carry a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison, although Lewis said, “the longest sentence ever imposed for this offence is 63 months.”

Click here to read the full article.

*

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 Lawyers for Assange

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.

***

Remember when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asked a federal court to give the agency 55 years to fully release data on Pfizer-BioNTech’s Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine?” Well, now the FDA wants 75 years.

The FDA had previously agreed to release 500 pages per month of the more than 59,000 pages of data that exist. However, the agency now says another 20 years are needed to fully pore through the data, which it had no problem rushing through in a matter of months to grant Pfizer-BioNTech emergency use authorization (EUA) for the experimental drug.

“That discovery, and a desire to make sure it can work on other Freedom of Information Act requests at the same time, prompted the fresh request to the judge to allow production of roughly 12,000 pages by Jan. 31, 2022, and 500 pages per month thereafter,” reported The Epoch Times, citing attorney Aaron Siri who is working on the case.

“If you find what you are reading difficult to believe – that is because it is dystopian for the government to give Pfizer billions, mandate Americans to take its product, prohibit Americans from suing for harms, but yet refuse to let Americans see the data underlying its licensure,” Siri wrote on his Substack blog.

FDA says its 10 staff members who work on FOIA cannot review, release Pfizer data until 2096

The case Siri is working on against the FDA was brought on behalf of Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT), a group that says the FDA has not been complying in a timely manner with its requests for data.

Dr. Carole Browner, a research professor at the University of California – Los Angeles’s David Geffen School of Medicine, is part of the group, as are Peter Doshi, an associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, and Dr. Harvey Risch, a professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health.

Since the FDA spent just 108 days supposedly reviewing the 59,000 pages in order to grant the Pfizer-BioNTech injection an EUA, there is no reason why it should take 75 years to release that very same data to the public so they, too, can review it.

This is especially true as millions of Americans are being told they must take these experimental injections in order to keep their jobs or to continue sending their children off to public school.

Even worse is the fact that the FDA has now granted full authorization to Pfizer’s “Comirnaty” injection, which is supposedly the same as the EUA version though there is much controversy over whether or not the two are materially and legally the same.

“The entire purpose of FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) is government transparency,” Siri says.

“In multiple recent cases, in upholding the FOIA’s requirement to ‘make the records promptly available,’ courts have required agencies, including the FDA, to produce 10,000 or more pages per month, and those cases did not involve a request nearly this important – i.e., the data underlying licensure of a liability-free product that the federal government requires nearly all Americans to receive.”

Siri went on to explain that time is of the essence and the FDA needs to respond immediately, not in 75 years when most of the people alive today will already be dead.

In its defense, the FDA says that its Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research only has 10 staff members, two of whom are new. This is apparently not enough for the agency to “process” the 59,000-page document before the year 2096.

To move any faster, the FDA further claims, would divert “significant resources away from the processing of other FOIA requests that are also in litigation.”

*

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 Medical Extremism

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Beyond Belief: FDA Adds Another 20 Years to Timeline for Full Release of Pfizer COVID Vaccine Data – Not Until 2096 Now
  • Tags: , , ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Up until now, New Zealand GPs and hospitals have been provided with a fact sheet from Pfizer listing 21 possible adverse events as a result of vaccination.

All of these are minor, requiring little or no treatment other than rest, with the exception of severe allergic reactions, myocarditis and pericarditis (inflammation of the heart). As a result, most of the many thousands of New Zealanders reporting adverse effects post vaccination have been sent home with little more than advice to take an aspirin and rest. Some have been told that their conditions may be unrelated medical events, psychosomatic, or due to anxiety on their part.

Relying on the short official Pfizer fact sheet as a guide, Medsafe, our NZ medicines regulatory body, has only accepted one out of the 100+ deaths actually reported to them as related to vaccination. Most are listed as unrelated, under investigation, or unknowable. By contrast, the NZ Health Forum and other groups have collected unofficial reports of adverse effects and death proximate to vaccination. Out of 670+ reports of death compiled by the Forum, 270 have already been investigated by medical professionals and closely linked to known adverse effects. Following the publication of the new Pfizer document many more are expected to be connected with vaccination. Reports describe symptoms such as chest pain, brain fog, extreme fatigue, neurological symptoms, tachycardia, stroke, heart attacks, and many more. Collected data suggests that as many as two-thirds of adverse event enquiries made to medical staff by vaccine recipients have not been reported to CARM—the NZ system of adverse event reporting. Medsafe itself estimates in its Guide to Adverse Reaction Reporting that in NZ only 5% of adverse events are reported. As a result the NZ public is completely unaware of the extent of reported possible risks of vaccination.

The just released Pfizer document which is being circulated widely in the public domain and can downloaded from websites is entitled:

5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021

Therefore the reported side effects predate the vaccine rollout in New Zealand. The report itself was finalised by Pfizer on 30 April 2021. Did Pfizer supply this information to our government during the early days of our universal vaccination programme? If so the results should have been shared with our medical professionals, politicians, and the public. Many of the new 100+ listed new adverse event types now released by Pfizer in this 38 page document pose long term risks to health. Until very recently, the document was being withheld by Pfizer who maintained it should be kept confidential. There is a strong possibility that very large numbers of New Zealanders will suffer long term injury as a result.

How did this happen without anyone’s knowledge?

Even though the Pfizer vaccine had undergone very short trials and had provisional approval only, Medsafe did not update its CARM adverse event reporting system to make it mandatory rather than voluntary.

Medsafe did not advise GPs and Hospital staff to be on high alert for adverse events and report them rapidly and in detail.

The Government ignored the unprecedented numbers of adverse events being reported to Medsafe and circulating in the community and on social media.

The Government instituted a public relations, promotional, and media campaign advising the public that the Pfizer covid-19 mRNA vaccine was completely safe and free of serious side effects, giving the impression that there were no side effects—not even the known serious effects of heart inflammation that Pfizer had already admitted.

Unaccountably, conditions imposed by the contract that our Government signed with Pfizer for the supply of vaccines have not been made public. We suspect that the contract contains standard clauses similar to those used with drugs that have completed safety trials, such as a provision that public discussion of adverse events may only be undertaken in conjunction with the company supplying the drug. If this is the case, it will have hamstrung Medsafe and our Government in their approach to assessment and public discussion of adverse events.

What are the new risks of vaccination?

Anyone reading the new Pfizer adverse event report compilation will be staggered. The sheer density of the technical medical terms and disease names are nevertheless broken down into recognisable and serious categories of illness—kidney failure, stroke, cardiac events, pregnancy complications, inflammation, neurological disease, autoimmune failure, paralysis, liver failure, blood disorders, skin disease, musculoskeletal problems, arthritis, respiratory disease, DVT, blood clots, vascular disease, haemorrhage, loss of sight, Bell’s palsy, and epilepsy.

How has this affected New Zealand?

Whilst even the official Medsafe record of adverse effects and the unofficial lists show that the immediate risks of covid vaccination could be as much as 50 – 300 times greater than even the most risky of previous traditional vaccines (such as the smallpox jab), and whilst the long term effects are unknown, 90% of eligible New Zealanders have gone ahead with vaccination having accepted the assurances of safety and efficacy from the government, or having been forced to get vaccinated under threat of loss of employment and freedom of movement. Feeling the fear of covid that has been generated by reports in the international and local media, most people completing vaccination heaved a great sigh of relief—that is one huge worry off my mind, now I can get on with my life.

Those finding that no immediate insurmountable reaction had surfaced (the majority) understandably agreed with the government: “What is all the fuss about? Why shouldn’t everyone do this, or be made to do this? It is a social good that will protect everyone”

BUT there is a huge iceberg in the path of the good ship New Zealand hidden under the waves of relief. Thousands are quietly suffering debilitating illness, unacknowledged and in some cases untreated by their doctors. For those who survived vaccination without immediate injury this was not a problem because they didn’t know about it apart from one or two complaints from friends that might just be random coincidences.

This has brought about a division in New Zealand society which the government created in the name of public safety. Thousands of dedicated servants of the nation including teachers, health workers, and others are being stigmatised and forced out of their jobs in a manner horrifyingly reminiscent of the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany. The government did this despite knowing that the Pfizer vaccine was neither fully tested, safe, nor particularly effective. Judges handed down decisions in courts supporting the government mandates unaware of crucial mRNA vaccine safety data, all because Pfizer had withheld this information, and the government had not done its due diligence. Had the true position been known, the High Court’s NZ Bill of Rights analysis may well have been different and its provision which guarantees that every individual should be able to make their own medical choices might still be intact.

Pfizer’s conclusions

Pfizer concludes the released document with a statement “Review of the available data for this cumulative PM experience, confirms a favorable benefit:risk balance for BNT162b2.” PM stands for the Post Marketing data set they are evaluating of 42,086 reported adverse events. Pfizer makes this bald claim of benefit despite admitting that “the magnitude of underreporting is unknown”. This document contains no further substantive information in support of this claim of benefit:risk balance other than a mysterious reference to “the known safety profile of the vaccine”.

The benefit:risk argument is in essence saying: covid-19 is a serious illness and our calculations show that more people will be injured by the disease than are being injured by the vaccine, therefore there will be a net benefit. This argument falls over because of at least three very important factors: Firstly treatment options have improved and thereby the risk of serious illness and death from covid has been greatly reduced.

Secondly the risk of covid is not evenly spread. People with comorbidities (other conditions) and the elderly are at very high risk. Most other people are at very low risk. Thus vaccination could subject people at low risk from covid to a higher risk from vaccination. Approaches to preventive health education can reduce the covid risk to people with comorbidities more than vaccination can. For example a study published in the BMJ found that people following a plant based diet have a 73% reduced risk of serious illness. Data from the UK Biobank has been analysed by researchers from Manchester and Oxford Universities and the West Indies who found that shift workers (who typically have disrupted bioclocks) have three times the risk of being hospitalised with covid. Preventive remedies include changes in diet such as the introduction of more fresh fruit, vegetables, and fibre, and reductions in known unhealthy habits such as smoking, excess alcohol consumption, an overly sedentary lifestyle, a predominance of ultra processed foods, and many more.

The third and most significant reason the benefit:risk argument falls over is the sheer range of adverse reaction types observed by Pfizer and kept hidden until now.

How could a single vaccine have such a wide range of effects?

The technical reasons why mRNA vaccines can have such broad effects on human health are understood by those working in gene therapy. Perfectly stable DNA function is critical to life. In turn, cell function integrity is critical to maintaining DNA. Individual cells contain mechanisms to repair their own DNA as many as 70,000 times a day. From this perspective, the in vitro laboratory study recently published in Viruses 2021, 13,2056, is indicative. It suggests a possible mechanism for vaccine harm. The study found that the spike protein localises in the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair by impeding access of key DNA repair proteins. The findings reveal a potential molecular pathway by which the covid spike protein might impede adaptive immunity. They underscore the potential side effects of the full-length spike-based mRNA vaccines.

Despite a degree of cellular autonomy, the nervous system and the physiology must and does function as a whole. The entire nervous system including the immune system is a ‘part and whole’ network. The whole is in every part, the DNA is in every cell, but cell function is also related to a generalised and interconnected genetic network—the holistic functioning of the physiological network is critical to its efficiency. Thus physiological network stability (health) can be impaired by the introduction of pieces of active genetic code (biologic instructions) like those contained in mRNA vaccines.

An analogy will make this clear. We are familiar with computer networks. A very common backbone of most commercial systems is produced by Microsoft. Each computer contains the Microsoft system and the network also runs under its system. The system is supported by computer code—a set of complex instructions written by Microsoft. Individual computers can perform standalone tasks and can communicate with other computers to keep the organisation running smoothly. This can be compared to our physiology. There are many systems in the body: immune system, circulatory system, digestive system, limbic system, homeostatic mechanisms, musculoskeletal structure, neural networks, and so on. They perform apparently stand alone functions, but all run on the basis of the same genetic code contained in our DNA and communicate with one another during the process of maintaining health. Back to our analogy: office staff sometimes send messages full of spelling errors to one another but this doesn’t harm the network. If however a computer virus written in code is sent by one computer it can overwhelm and crash network function because it affects the operating system. Some networks are protected by good firewalls and others are vulnerable. The Covid vaccine introduces a sequence of information written in genetic code into our physiology. It is no wonder that it could elicit such a very broad range of adverse effects, some of which are so serious as to be analogous to a computer network crash. Some individuals have strong immune systems and are little affected, others experience problems in one or other systems. The fact that a sequence of foreign code has been introduced into the physiology produces major risks to health, risks that those working in gene therapy for the last few decades are very familiar with.

The extremely broad range of adverse effects revealed by the Pfizer document is the physiological signature of a general control system failure, a failure of the body’s overall integration and function. It is not plausible to suggest otherwise. That is why experts in genomics, even as I write, are pondering fundamental questions about the action and safety of mRNA vaccines. They are also urging caution.

Conclusion

The NZ government agreed commercial terms with a single company for vaccine supply. It is possible that vital information was withheld. The public was kept in ignorance of known risks. This has divided our society and undermined our fundamental Kiwi tolerance on the basis of not only incomplete but misleading safety data. The government is asleep at the wheel. Knowing full well that safety trials were incomplete, the government apparently accepted information supplied by multinational commercial interests at face value. This should be a ‘never again’ moment. There are huge lessons to be learned and an apology owed to the whole population. The provisions of the NZ BIll of Rights should be given constitutional status. The vaccine mandates should be withdrawn and those affected by them compensated. The proposed vaccination of 5 -11 year olds should be stopped.

Our thanks to Daily Telegraph New Zealand for having brought this article to our attention

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The chairman and former Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of international news agency and “fact checker” Reuters is also a top investor and board member of Pfizer.

James C. Smith’s influential roles in both organizations “raises serious conflict of interest concerns,” the National Pulse remarked, because Reuters has not only given extensive coverage to Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot in particular, but it has overwhelmingly moved to “silence skeptics” of the Pfizer shots as well as other COVID-19 shots.

Smith’s roles raise added concern because Reuters, considered a leading international news source and boasting a reach of billions of people, brands itself as a news agency with “integrity” and “freedom from bias.” In fact, a 2021 article praises Reuters as one of the “Top 4 Unbiased Independent World News Sources.”

The National Pulse linked to a compilation of Reuters articles mentioning Pfizer, pointing to about 22,000 over “the last year alone.” Such articles portray Pfizer in an overal positive light, and at times Reuters aims to discredit Pfizer’s critics. The Pulse observed that articles mentioning Pfizer heavily outweigh those mentioning Moderna, which numbered about 8,200.

What gives Smith’s conflict of interest even greater weight is Reuters’ self-appointed role as “fact checker” of news. A survey of Reuters’ more recent fact checks shows the majority are dedicated to defending COVID-19 shots against questioning of their safety or efficacy, or of the motives behind their production and promotion.

For example, one recent “fact check” claims that “there is no evidence currently that COVID-19 vaccines are linked to an increase in sportspeople collapsing or dying due to heart issues such as myocarditis.” It made this claim despite its acknowledgement that “several studies do indeed suggest a link between myocarditis and the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines.”

Former Pfizer vice president Dr. Michael Yeadon has documented at least two dozen recent incidents of athletes collapsing, suffering injury, or dying, mostly from heart issues, noting that the rate of such occurrences has spiked in recent weeks.

However, more often than not, reports from people suffering injury after COVID-19 vaccination testify that doctors have either claimed their symptoms aren’t real or have dismissed out of hand the possibility of any link of those symptoms to COVID-19 jabs.

Other examples of such COVID jab-defending articles include “No evidence that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine causes Alzheimer’s disease;” and “No evidence to support claim by ex-Pfizer scientist on COVID-19 vaccine safety in children,” referring to Dr. Yeadon’s declaration that “COVID-19 vaccines are ‘50 times more likely’ to kill children than COVID-19 itself.”

It is noteworthy that Smith also serves on the board of the World Economic Forum (WEF)’s Partnering Against Corruption Initiative and is a member of WEF’s International Business Advisory Boards of British American Business and the Atlantic Council.

Smith remains chairman of Reuters after having retired as president and CEO in February 2020, Pfizer’s website notes.

*

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 Twitter

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.

***

Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla said Wednesday “preliminary research” shows people may need a fourth COVID shot, as Fauci, CDC signal definition of fully vaccinated will change.

Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla said Wednesday people may need a fourth dose of the COVID vaccine sooner than expected after preliminary research showed the Omicron variant can undermine antibody protection in people with only two doses.

Pfizer and BioNTech released results from their initial lab study showing a third dose was protective against the new variant, but the initial two-dose series dropped significantly in its ability to protect against the new strain.

The two-dose series may still offer protection against severe sickness from Omicron, the companies claimed.

“Three doses against Omicron are almost equivalent to the two doses’ effectiveness against … the original variant,” Bourla said in an interview with TODAY. “If we need a new vaccine … we will be able to have a very good one.”

Bourla said the preliminary study was based on a synthetic, lab-created copy of the variant, and more data is needed from tests using the actual virus. Real-world results will be more accurate and are expected in the next two weeks, he said.

“When we see real-world data, we will determine if the Omicron is well covered by the third dose and for how long,” Bourla told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “And the second point, I think we will need a fourth dose.”

Bourla previously predicted a fourth dose would be needed 12 months after the third dose, but said with Omicron, “we may need it faster.”

Studies published in October in the New England Journal of Medicine confirmed any immune protection offered by two doses of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine drops off after roughly two months.

Bourla said what’s most important is the rollout of third doses of its COVID vaccine. He said the booster and its antiviral pill, paxlovid, will help control COVID during the winter.

“A third dose will give very good protection I believe,” Bourla said, “and treatments such as Pfizer’s oral antiviral pill, paxlovid, will help prevent hospitalizations and control COVID during the winter.

Pfizer submitted its application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization of paxlovid last month. The Biden administration purchased 10 million courses of the drug even though the FDA has not signed off on it.

Pfizer stocks rose Wednesday amid news the company’s COVID vaccine works against the Omicron variant after three doses.

“[There is] great news from Pfizer that a booster will work in adding solid protection against Omicron and stocks are celebrating,” said Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer of Bleakley Advisory Group.

As The Defender reported Tuesday, Global Justice Now released data showing “just eight top Pfizer and Moderna shareholders” and their CEOs made $10.31 billion since Omicron, emerged — despite reports, including by the doctor who discovered the variant, that it’s mild and may even be useful for achieving herd immunity.

Fauci: definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ will change to include third dose

It’s only a matter of time before the definition of fully vaccinated is changed to include a third dose, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said Wednesday.

“Right now, I don’t see that changing tomorrow or next week,” Fauci said during an appearance on CNN, but added that in his opinion, “it’s going to be a matter of when not if.”

“Certainly, when you want to talk about what optimal protection is, I don’t think anybody would argue that optimal protection is going to be with a third shot,” Fauci said, but it’s a “technical, almost semantic definition, and it is the definition for requirements.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, “fully vaccinated persons are those who are ≥14 days post completion of the primary series of an FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccine.”

The term fully vaccinated refers to a person who has received two doses of Pfizer or ModernaCOVID vaccines or a single shot of Johnson & Johnson.

Fauci previously said changing the definition of what qualifies a person as fully vaccinated to include a booster shot was “on the table.”

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC — which determines the definition for fully vaccinated — said in October she was open to the possibility of changing the definition when the booster rollout began.

The definition has implications because it is used by those imposing vaccine mandates across the country, including federal mandates for healthcare workers, government contractors and private businesses with more than 100 employees.

Fauci said the timing of the change may be related to the ongoing cases. “It has implications for that, and that’s the reason why it matters,” Fauci said.

*

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

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

Featured image is from CHD

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.

***

Many had anticipated the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse. The arbitrariness in the adjudication of self-defense and the question of jury’s and court’s objectivity within the context of the backlash of the anti-police brutality protest and efforts to address racism. However, rather than focus on the role that race and racism play in policing and the legal system, this article attempts to situate the Rittenhouse case within the larger context of the US imperialist-capitalist state.

A Social Structure of Violence

Kyle Rittenhouse was raised on a consistent diet of war, violence, and the allure of patriotic duty, ‘support the troops,’ ‘blue lives matter,’ which in most cases has been translated into an aspiration for honorific status. The aspirations for honorific status can be generalized to US society that has come to worship all things military[i] or armed authority (i.e., the military and police organizations). Examples of an American diet are an abundance of the military, first-person kill video games, e.g., Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, and Battlefield, and Hollywood’s endless homage to war, killing, and their representations of heroism and retribution with an AR-15 or M4. These images are but part of a society whose social structure is structured in violence.

The US was founded on violence. From the pre-revolutionary days of 1776 to the founding of a new nation on the grounds of the indigenous people of North American, and a subsequent conquest, genocide, a system of slavery, and a long history of racial oppression and exploitation, which followed brutal repression of rebellions. This violence was not limited to contiguous lands because this imperialism spread to Cuba, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and the Philippines in the late 20th century. Imperialism is a permanent feature; the US engages in military coups, support of dictatorships, invasions, occupations, the assassination of democratically elected officials, and the political and economic domination of other nations has come to represent the US States. And more recently, the so-called ‘war on terror’ (read: the war against Arabs and Muslims). All these imperialist actions require a great deal of state-sanctioned violence.

A man holds a “Free Kyle” sign near Bradford High School during President Donald Trump’s visit on September 1, 2020. (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Since World War II, the US has coordinated and solidified the interests of the political, corporate, and military elite into a permanent war economy in which its foreign and domestic policing are seen through the lens of military metaphysics (Mills 1954). Today, according to David M. Kennedy, the US military “wield unprecedented firepower and hold in their hands an almost incalculable capacity for focused violence. Not since the time of the Roman Empire have a single country’s arms weighed so heavily in the global scales” (2013:2).

As a result, the former US Army Colonel and historian, Andrew J. Bacevich wrote that

“Americans… have fallen prey to militarism, manifesting itself in a romanticized view of soldiers, a tendency to see military power as the truest measure of national greatness, and outsized expectations regarding the efficacy of force” (2013:2).

Militarism includes the entire colossus apparatus of coercive organizations, including policing and all aspects of the national security state. In addition, militarism comes with a high human and economic cost.

The US Social Character

David Riesman stated that “every society seems to get, more or less, the social character it needs” (1961:5). It is “simply the sum total of character traits to be found in the majority of the people in a given culture” (Fromm 1955:78). The point is that every society develops a particular social character that ensures the conformity of its members. The US has been no exception; its institutions of the state have socialized its social character. The dominant US social character has the beliefs and values that uphold the system of capitalism, such as excessive individualism and instrumental rationalism. And because of increased militarism, the social character also has a great tendency to accept violence and coercion as necessary to preserve their way of life. As a result, armed authority, the enforcers of capitalism, are regarded with the highest deference and fetishized. Just like imperialism is an integrative element of US capitalism at a macro-level, this is the fundamental essence of the US social character at the micro-level.

Fairly recent events have only further shaped the US social character. As David Harvey (2005) points out, the implementation of neoliberal policies that accelerated in the 1980s reduced the social welfare state, deregulated the economy, removed many tariffs and barriers, and weakened organized labor. Some of the consequences have been the displacement of manufacturing workers.

These changes also had their intended implications of increasing the profit margins of the capitalist class and reducing impediments that had prevented them from reaping enormous amounts of wealth. While some of the population was able to adapt, many were not. What followed was a series of social phenomena.

There was the deterioration of social conditions: a rise in unemployment, the underground economy, homelessness, and overall social malaise. The reduction of the welfare state and labor protections also occurred amid the backlash of the rise of social and revolutionary movements of the 1960s and 1970s, resulting in a buildup in coercive organizations – e.g., policing and prison nexus (Parenti 1999).

In short, the implementation of neoliberal policies created the further need for more institutional violence and coercion (see Montes 2016) by policing the economic and racially dispossessed nationally and imposing neoliberal policies abroad.

A neoliberal ideology that negated the political-economic causes that explained crime, homelessness, and even alarming mental health crises became essential in sustaining these changes. This ideological change recast policing as honorific crime-fighting and not as enforcers of capitalism and racial order. Increased racial and gender diversity, with Hollywood adding intrigue and heroism increased its occupational prestige. The lack of secured employment opened the floodgates for applicants. In the end, quality of life and militarized policing works to readjust capitalism with its latest version – i.e., neoliberalism and further accelerate the imperialistic side of the US social character.

In addition, since the US is not in an ascending global position but is in a state of decline, with the loss of its manufacturing industry, which includes technological and science production, a nation in debt, the US relies more on its military might (Harvey 2003). It does not make or engage in the level of innovation of a rising nation. The only hand it can play is its military hand. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the global ‘War on Terror,’ its involvement in so-called regime changes are all testament to how US capitalism relies on imperialism.

The problem is that the above conditions have created too many young men and not-so-young men who want to be ‘in the shit’ of combat. They have itchy fingers and want a baptism of blood, with all the glory it is supposed to provide, but the US-imperialist state cannot accommodate them all in its military and the national security state. So, they join the ranks of local policing and become prison guards and jail deputies. Those who cannot join or develop their own paramilitary groups in which they attempt to recreate their military ‘tribe’ experience (Junger 2016) or to develop the bond of solidarity they imagined exist in a real combat unit.

The desire to create a ‘tribe’ or group solidarity is not unique to members and ex-members of armed authorities or those who aspire to be in one. This tendency is an attempt to struggle against egoistic (excessive individualism) and anomic (lack of normative regulation) tendencies in US capitalist society.[ii] Max Weber described how capitalism was increasingly becoming an inescapable iron cage of rationalization (1958:182-183). As tradition and religious forces that once provided spiritual and moral guidance lose their hold, in their place is ends-means calculated, bureaucratic formal rationalism, resulting in the disenchantment of social life (Gerth and Mills 1946:50-51).

US Imperialism as Colorblind

The more excessive use of the white supremacy label works to distort and politicize within the parameters of the duopoly political party. For the Democratic Party and its supporters, white supremacy is a word used to describe the supporters of Trump, the participants of the capital protest, and the various right-wing groups that support Trump.

A message like ‘Make America Great Again’ and referring to people as either ‘rapists’ or ‘terrorists’ certainly invites this interpretation. This results in trickery, political manipulation, in which the mainstream media spins, distorts, misinforms to generate ratings, and propagates hatred and division.

However, the problem with using this label on individuals, a political party, and groups is not that it might not be true, but that it diverts our attention away from how white supremacy is central to the US imperialist state. When one political party accuses the other party of the state of acting racist, this displays the hypocrisy that pervades the US imperialist capitalist state.

The historical record bears out that US state operates within a racial hierarchy. One needs to only consider the following examples presented above: the conquest and genocide of the Indigenous people of the North American continent; the system of slavery and the subsequent de jure and de facto segregation and discrimination; war against national liberation movements, and the ‘war on terror’ (read: war on Arabs and Muslims).

Although imperialism is an integral part of US capitalism, capitalism is an equal opportunity system of exploitation and oppression.

Because wealth is based on the exploitation of other people’s labor and the extraction and privatization of lands and resources. Contrary to the system of capitalism being founded on the free market and free trade, many countries have experienced the violence and coercion of imperialism when it refuses to open their countries up to foreign markets, unfavorable trade, and direct foreign investments.

As a result, it is difficult to untangle imperialism from US capitalism. Therefore, capital (wealth) accumulation is directly correlated with the dispossession of people from the land, other means of production, and the fruits of their labor. In a capitalist society, there is a direct relationship between wealth and poverty.

Capitalism produces many victims, vectors, and points of resistance. One can see slave revolts, peasant revolts, anti-colonial, and worker’s rebellions all responding to the central problem of capitalism and its various manifestations of oppression, usurpation, and exploitation.

For example, the capitalist system has been destructive to many US whites living in urban, suburban, and rural parts of the United States. (One can also see this among European countries such as British colonialism of Ireland and the imperialist actions against Yugoslavia). The notion of white privilege, especially if many of them also find themselves a part of the permanent underclass, is offensive and obtuse. One can undoubtedly refer to the psychological wage of whiteness as a means to drive a wedge between white and black workers (Du Bois 1992), or Karl Marx’s “The Irish Question,” whose work reverberates how oppressed people are divided and conquered. The use of racial ideologies in the development of false political and class consciousness can also be seen in the development of the southern strategy, the ‘get tough on crime’ platforms of both the Republican and Democratic parties. These examples illustrate how animosity and scapegoats divide and disunite while providing political currency to the duopoly political party system.

A common denominator is found among imperialist powers and regimes, including the US, which uses some form of racial or cultural hierarchy, as was also operating in Nazi Germany. These powers were also highly skilled in integrating and inducing their citizens (including those with second-class status, resulting from their racial, economic, or gender oppression) to participate in the very machinations of the imperialist state. The political institutions, political parties, and legal systems, in most cases, did not operate in opposition to their political order. Perhaps, another way of looking at this is to understand that the US imperialist state retains its racial character, even as the perception of US nationalism as a racially diverse amalgamation of people. Yet, its racial character of a racial hierarchy continues to be dominant.

This is problematic because white supremacy is not just a ‘white racist thing,’ or exclusive to the Republic Party, Trump, and his supporters, or right-wing groups, but is organized in the social structure. In this context, one does not need to be a racist to support, pledge allegiance, or kill abroad or nationally. Neither does one need be a racist to protect the privilege of a few, suppress resistance from ‘insurgents,’[iii] and carry out the biddings of an imperialist capitalist state, which is grounded in subtle and not so subtle racial ideologies, masked in diversity and nationalism. As pointed out above, US imperialist capitalism is not solely dependent on racial hierarchy. It has many vectors that are made hidden and are part of its false consciousness, which makes it easier to use the label of white supremacy within a narrow perimeter for political expediency.

War Against All and the Victimology of Self-Defense

The very birth of the United States, as a colonial settler’s state and the threats from the Indigenous people on the ‘frontier,’ slave revolts, workers’ strikes, a civil rights mobilization, and urban rebellion has historically created a narrative of how the good wholesome, law-abiding people were under attack by unprovoked people. For Michael Parenti, the role of the usurper and the usurped have been reversed by the representation of the paradigm of the wagon train versus the swarthy hordes (1989). The image is that it could be happening in the US wild west, Vietnam [Iraq, or a city or town in the United States], but the general scene is the same.

“There is a fort, or encampment, or a wagon train, and inside the encampment are the human beings. They are white, they are human, they are warm, they are attractive, they talk, and they are nice. Outside come the swarthy hordes, the savages. They can be Indians, they can be Bushman, they can be Arabs on camels…. They are subhuman and they are attacking the human beings. And the wagon forms a circle, and the human beings know what to do. They leveled their guns and began to knock off, shoot these screaming savages” (Parenti 1989).

We are never told why the ‘swarthy horde’ attack the human beings. We are never told that they are protecting their land, their people and way of life or that they are fighting against social injustices. If any of this is acknowledged, then we are told that protest is acceptable if it is nonviolent. Yet, the regular structured violence, which is necessary to maintain a particular ‘peace and stability’ is normalized and is never discussed.

This is the quintessential representation of victimhood because it denies the real victim the right to resist and fight back against the injustice of colonialism, exploitation, police brutality, racism, etc. What then is left is the narrative of those in power. Their innocence, and how they are just defending themselves against the ‘savages’ – also, read protester and the ‘rioter.’ The reason people protest and rebel, taking part in extra-parliamentary actions is never fully explained. However, the reason is apparent: it would illustrate the guilt of the US state, its duopoly political party system, and all its supporters and their role in creating the conditions in which people feel the need to resist usurpation and inequality. In this context, we should also understand how exploited and racially oppressed people attempt to seek shelter, reward, and honorific status as protectors of the encircled encampment, making them also culpable.

Enter Kyle Rittenhouse, Travis McMichael and Greg McMichael, and George Zimmerman (to name some of the most recent cases) who decided to enter the encircled encampment as so-called ‘defenders’ against the ‘swarthy horde,’ or dangerous classes and races of insurgents.

For them and the US imperialist state is in a war against all.

It is not just the supposed external threat (e.g., ‘the war on terror,’ China, and Russia) but the supposed internal threat of insurgents that are said to be bent on destroying ‘America’ and its status quote. A status quote that Howard Zinn argued is protected by guards (i.e., the armed authorities and the middle class), who will not develop a political class consciousness until they too realize that their lives are as expendable as the prisoners [the exploited working class and dispossessed] of the system (1995).

In addition, Barnard Harcourt (2018) reminds us that in any potential revolutionary situation, the population comprises roughly of 15% insurgents or revolutionaries, 70% of the passive majority, and 15% of the counterrevolutionaries (i.e., the government, its political parties, the courts, its armed authority, and their supporters). The objective of the insurgent and the counterrevolutionary is to win (gain the trust) of the passive majority. Historically, as well as currently, this has been no easy task. The complex and sophisticated US imperialist state’s ability to co-opt, confuse, and distract and misdirect our attention, resulting in more people lining up to join the counterrevolutionaries. The allure and worship of all things military or armed authority have become a dominant component in the US social character, especially in this period of the overall US global decline.

*

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.

Vince Montes is a lecturer in sociology at California State University – East Bay. He earned a Ph.D. in sociology and historical studies at the Graduate Faculty of the New School for Social Research, New York, NY. His research includes US imperialism, capitalism, and political control.

Sources

Bacvich, Andrew J. 2005. The New American Militarism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Du Bois, W.E.B. 1992. Black Reconstruction in America, 1860-1880. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Durkheim, Emile. 1953. Suicide. New York: NY: The Free Press.

Fromm, Erich. 1955. The Sane Society. New York, NY: Holt Paperbacks.

Gerth, Hans and C. Wright Mills. 1946. From Max Weber. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Greenwald, Glenn. “Petraeus Scandal is Reported with Compelled Veneration of All Things Military.” Guardian, 12 Nov. 2012.

Harcourt, Barnard. 2018. The Counterrevolution. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Harvey, David. 2005. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

__________. 2003. New Imperialism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Junger, Sebastian. 2016. Tribe. London, England: HarperCollins Publishers.

Kennedy, David M. 2013. The Modern American Military. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Marx, Karl. 1869. “The Irish Question.” Phil Gasper (ed.), The Communist Manifesto. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books, Pp. 163-164.

Mills, C. Wright 1956. The Power Elite. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Montes, Vince. 2016. “Coercive Occupations as State Facilitation: Understanding U.S. State’s Strategy of  Control.” Radical Criminology, Issue 6, fall, 71-129.

Parenti, Christian. 1999. Lockdown America. New York, NY: Verso.

Parenti, Michael. 1989. “Rambo and the Swarthy Hordes.” Video, 54:20. Produced by Radio WEOS Geneva, NY. https://youtu.be/S33DKRcqvkQ.

Riesman, David. 1961. The Lonely Crowd. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Weber, Max. 1958. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Zinn, Howard. 1995. A Peoples History of the United States, 1492-Present. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.

Notes

[i] See Greenwald 2012 for the use of this concept.

[ii] See Emile Durkheim 1953 Suicide for the concepts of egoism and anomie.

[iii] The US state perceives any group or individual who challenges the status quote as a threat is considered an insurgent (see Harcount 2018).

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.

***

You are surely well aware of the divide that has cemented itself in society as a result of vaccination segregation. Not all people who chose to take the experimental COVID jab are afraid of the unjabbed, and more than a few are quite critical of the segregation measures that have been implemented.

However, it cannot be ignored that public health officials have done everything they could to drive a fear-based hysteria of the unvaccinated as some sort of disease-peddling class of unclean citizens.

How many times have we heard terms like “pandemic of the unvaccinated”? There is no evidence for this, in fact there is growing evidence to the contrary. The dreaded Omicron variant – which causes common cold-like symptoms – has been spread round the world by the vaccinated. And more and more regions are now finding that COVID-positive vaccinated patients are filling up death tallies.

Nonetheless, in an age of double speak and memory holes, unhinged health tyrants like Australia’s Dan Andrews have continued pushing the narrative of a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.”

The logical conclusion of such a mentality is that those who are vaccinated should not be around those who are not vaccinated. It is the logical conclusion of an illogical premise, however. If considered for just moment, the insinuation that the vaccinated are not safe around the unvaccinated is like saying that the jab will protect you from the virus, but not from people who may or may not have the virus.

This isn’t much different than saying that wearing a helmet will protect your head from trauma, but not from other people who don’t wear helmets and may or may not have hit their heads.

At any rate, reason and rationality are not required in the COVID era, and Andrews’ sentiments have been echoed to an alarming degree by the man in charge of public health for the province of Ontario.

Dr. Kieran Moore has consistently been one of the most egregious disseminators of anti-unvaccinated propaganda in the anglosphere.

A montage that has gone viral (pun intended) presents a collection of the various claims he has made since the summer about the dangers of the unvaccinated walking among us.

Could imagine a phrase with more contempt for a fellow citizen? He could have phrased it a number of different ways, but instead he said, “unvaccinated amongst us.” Apparently, it is “us” i.e., the double-jabbed, and “the unvaccinated” that is the group of people who walk “amongst us” like zombies looking to eat our brains.

When Canadian Thanksgiving approached in October, he said, “if it’s a mixed group of vaccinated and unvaccinated … I would suggest you keep your masks on … ” It is bad enough to think that families should not show their smiles to one another after almost two years of separation, but the messaging of fear was even worse.

The idea that families should only gather in “mixed” groups clearly sends the message that individuals should be worried about being around a loved one who has made a different medical choice. There is no data to suggest this is valid, and it is an absurd and dangerous way to live.

In November, he addressed questions from the media surrounding the issue of fake vaccine passports being used to enter into establishments, which I can attest to as being widespread across the province. He said that any transmission on these settings where the unvaccinated had snuck their way in had “to be because unvaccinated are mixing with vaccinated … ”

That particular press conference took place the day before Remembrance Day – a day for honouring fallen veterans who died fighting socialists and communists – and he threw more fuel on the unvaccinated fire by saying “we don’t want vaccinated and unvaccinated populations mixing … ”

There is a word for this sort of separation of people based on biological considerations; it is called apartheid.

Two days ago, Dr. Moore was at it again, “a basic means of protecting individuals is stopping the mixing of unvaccinated and vaccinated.”

It is amazing that the vaccinated class is so scared of the unvaccinated. Such a disbelief in the efficacy of vaccines would usually render someone an “anti-vaxxer,” you would think.

This is no laughing matter, as it is having real consequences on the personal lives of many people. I personally know more than a few people who have been unceremoniously cut out of their family traditions because they will not be coerced into taking an abortion-tainted jab against their will.

It is having a demoralizing effect on marriages as well, as some couples are divided on the issue, which means they cannot go into public places together like they used to, when one does not have proof of vaccination. In some cases, a spouse will cave to the pressure and take the jab against his or heer will, which cannot be good for marital cohesion.

Perhaps what is most sad is the veritable hatred that has arisen because of such rhetoric. A screenshot of a text conversation has made the rounds on social media in Ontario – I can attest to its veracity as I have spoken to the person who posted it – and it is heartbreaking.

A 12-year-old boy was reportedly told by his peers to kill himself because he wasn’t jabbed and “will kill others.”

This is where such hateful rhetoric leads, and I am positive there are many more cases of this that we are unaware of.

Jesus Christ gave a prescription of what fate should befall those who “scandalize one of these little ones:” “It would be better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.” (Matthew 18:6)

*

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: Protests against vaccination segregation are occurring all over the world. (Source: 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.

***

People are walking round in a COVID trance or a COVID hypnosis as I covered in a previous article How the Masses Were Hypnotized Into the COVID Cult.

The orchestrators of the COVID scamdemic understand human psychology very well and have been able to cleverly hack or exploit psychological weaknesses in the masses to engender compliance and obedience. In that article I discussed Desmet’s ideas of mass formation and how those who deeply buy into the official narrative are part of a cult – the COVID Cult.

In this article, I will emphasize 5 experiments or syndromes which also shed light on how people come to conform, adapt to absurdity and obey authority, even if it goes against their personal moral code and principles. We must be aware of these tendencies within ourselves as we strive to remain sovereign and free individuals.

COVID Trance Like Behavior: The Asch Conformity Experiments

Peer pressure is not just something with which only kids or teenagers have to deal. The desire to belong is a deep-seated human drive. The Asch Conformity Experiments, conducted in 1951, were a set of experiments used to determine the degree to which people would adjust their behavior based on the need to fit in and not stand out. Solomon Asch told the participants it was an experiment about visual perception. He first had them answer a simple question alone where they were comparing the length of 3 different lines on the right to the one on the left, and answering which line on the right was closest in length to the one on the left. 99% of people answered correctly.

Then, he put the participant in a room with others, where some of the others were actually confederates with the experimenter. The confederates would at times deliberately give the wrong answer. This had the effect of swaying the participant to give the wrong answer, denying their own eyes or senses in order to conform with the group. Asch found people would go along with the group 37% of the time, but for different reasons: some because they thought they must be wrong (when so many others or “the group” has a different answer), and others because they wanted to avoid the discomfort of standing out. Asch also discovered that when he gave the participant a partner (i.e. another participant who was participating at the same time), then conformity dropped from 37% to 5%.

You can watch an except of the experiment here. The following is a revealing excerpt:

“Sometimes we go along with the group because what they say convinces us they are right. This is called informational conformity. Sometimes we conform because we are apprehensive that the group will disapprove if we are deviant. This is called normative conformity … The partnership variation shows that much of the power of the group came not merely from its numbers, but from the unanimity of its oppostion. When that unanimity is punctured, the group’s power is greatly reduced.”

COVID Trance Like Behavior: The Milgram Experiments

The Milgram Experiment, conducted in 1961 and repeated many times, shows that ordinary people can be tricked into following orders and committing horrible acts if they believe the commands are coming from a legitimate authority.

The results show that generally 50-65% of people would obey authority even if it conflicted with their morals and conscience. The experiment was set up by telling volunteers they would be helping with research to see how well people learnt via punishment. They needed to read questions to someone in another room, and if that person answered incorrectly, they were to administer an electric shock, each time at an increasing voltage. As the experiment went on, they could hear the yells of pain after they inflicted the punishment, and they were led to believe they were causing it (although they were not; the person in the other room was a confederate of the experiment). Although some of the volunteers clearly felt uncomfortable and objected, the experimenter in charge, who wore a white coat and introduced himself as a scientist, would merely say things like “the experiment requires that you continue” – and many did continue all the way to the highest voltage of shock.

You can watch an except of the experiment here. The following is narrated by Stanley Milgram himself:

“The results, as I observed them in the laboratory, are disturbing. They raise the possiblity that human nature cannot be counted on to insulate men from brutality and inhumane treatment at the direction of malevolent authorities. A substantial proportion of people do what they are told to do, irrespective of the content of the act, and without limitations of conscience, so long as they perceive that the command comes from a legitimate authority. If in this study, an anonymous experimenter could succesfully command adults to subdue a 50 year old man, and force on him painful electric shocks against his protests, one can only wonder what government, with its vastly greater authority and prestige, can command of its subjects.”

COVID Trance Like Behavior: Stanford Prison Experiment

The Stanford Prison Experiment was conducted in 1971 and has a website dedicated to it here. Student volunteers were told they would be adopting the roles of prison guard and prisoner, participating in an experiment to study the psychological effects of prison life. The experimenters set up a simulated prison and carefully noted the effects of it on the behavior of all those within its walls. Shockingly and very quickly, those playing the role of prison guard fell into sadism, and those playing the role of prisoner fell into depression. These were volunteer strangers who had no previous affiliation or connection with each other. The experiment was stopped after 6 days for ethical reasons and concern about mental, emotional and physical health of the participants:

“Blindfolded and in a state of mild shock over their surprise arrest by the city police, our prisoners were put into a car and driven to the “Stanford County Jail” for further processing. The prisoners were then brought into our jail one at a time and greeted by the warden, who conveyed the seriousness of their offense and their new status as prisoners. Each prisoner was systematically searched and stripped naked. He was then deloused with a spray … The guards were given no specific training on how to be guards. Instead they were free, within limits, to do whatever they thought was necessary to maintain law and order in the prison and to command the respect of the prisoners … On the fifth night, some visiting parents asked me to contact a lawyer in order to get their son out of prison. They said a Catholic priest had called to tell them they should get a lawyer or public defender if they wanted to bail their son out! I called the lawyer as requested, and he came the next day to interview the prisoners with a standard set of legal questions, even though he, too, knew it was just an experiment.

At this point it became clear that we had to end the study. We had created an overwhelmingly powerful situation – a situation in which prisoners were withdrawing and behaving in pathological ways, and in which some of the guards were behaving sadistically. Even the “good” guards felt helpless to intervene … I ended the study prematurely for two reasons. First, we had learned through videotapes that the guards were escalating their abuse of prisoners in the middle of the night when they thought no researchers were watching and the experiment was “off.” Their boredom had driven them to ever more pornographic and degrading abuse of the prisoners.

Second, Christina Maslach, a recent Stanford Ph.D. brought in to conduct interviews with the guards and prisoners, strongly objected when she saw our prisoners being marched on a toilet run, bags over their heads, legs chained together, hands on each other’s shoulders. Filled with outrage, she said, “It’s terrible what you are doing to these boys!” Out of 50 or more outsiders who had seen our prison, she was the only one who ever questioned its morality.”

COVID Trance Like Behavior: Stockholm Syndrome

These next 2 are syndromes, not experiments. The term Stockholm syndrome was first used by the media in 1973 when 4 hostages were taken during a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden. The hostages defended their captors after being released and would not agree to testify against them in court. They had developed a connection with and an affinity for their captors. Stockholm syndrome is thus defined as a condition in which hostages develop a psychological bond with their captors during captivity. Wikipedia quotes this research from the book Stockholm Syndrome by C. S. Sundaram, which lists 4 key components that characterize Stockholm syndrome:

  • A hostage’s development of positive feelings towards the captor
  • No previous relationship between hostage and captor
  • A refusal by hostages to cooperate with police forces and other government authorities
  • A hostage’s belief in the humanity of the captor, ceasing to perceive them as a threat, when the victim holds the same values as the aggressor.

Even before the advent of the COVID scamdemic, I believe the world was suffering from societal Stockholm syndrome, i.e. a society-wide disorder of citizens liking and defending their political leaders who were actively exploiting them.

COVID Trance Like Behavior: Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy

Munchausen syndrome was first described in 1951, relating to a group of patients who invented stories about their supposed illnesses, and convinced doctors to perform unnecessary surgical procedures on them. The theory is that these people were unconsciously doing this because they craved attention or care. Munchausen syndrome by proxy is a variation, but contains a key difference. It is a specific form of child abuse first described in 1977 which describes situations in which the parents or the caregivers, almost always the mother, invent illness stories about their children and attempt to substantiate the stories by fabricating physical symptoms and signs. Usually, families or caregivers bring the child to the hospital with symptoms that cannot be explained easily via physiologic ways, and these symptoms occur only when the child is with the parents.

The Underlying Patterns

Now that you know about these 5 experiments and syndromes, can you see how they fit into the COVID plandemic and at least partially explain all the COVID trance behavior? Think about all the conformitythat has happened, as people in many places still continue obediently wearing their masks, getting their fake-vaccine and chastising those who don’t follow all the ridiculous, illegal and illogical COVID rules. Think about all those who were influenced into getting the clot shot to conform with the expectations of their spouse, partner, family or friends. Think about all the blind obedience and lack of critical thinking that has happened, as white coated misleaders like Dr. Anthony Fraud-ci instructed the masses to “follow the science” and that if you disbelieved him, you would be going against science itself. Think about all the heavy-handed and sadistic brutality dished out by sociopathic cops, especially in places like Australia, to those who dared to peacefully protest, walk around without a mask or simply walk outside their home for a few hours. Think about how those cops (who were so inclined) relished the chance to become prison guards while the rest of the citizenry was relegated to prisoner status. Think about all the support and praise leaders, whether political or scientific, have received over the last 20+ months, while they have been actively engaged in violating fundamental and inherent human rights, such as the right to work, to trade, to travel and to breathe air in an unrestricted manner, not to mention the rights of medical freedom and bodily autonomy. Finally, think about the psychopathic nature of the state, which has invented a virus, a pandemic and an emergency in order to turn the citizenry into patients that must be “cared” for, even when the majority never wanted that care and even when that “care” is actually grave harm.

Final Thoughts

In so many ways, Operation Coronavirus is a psychological operation. It is the grand psy-op. It works by leveraging fear to induce conformity, docility, obedience and a blind trust in authority. It works, as Huxley and Orwell both said in different ways, by attempting to make you love your servitude and love your captor-abuser. It works by attempting to make you doubt your own sanity and capacity to assess your own state of health. Although it is vital to expose the numerous medical and scientific fallacies of the official COVID narrative (and there are many), as I and others have been diligently doing since the start, it is, I would suggest, even more critical to understand the powerful psychological manipulationthat has taken place. We must do this in order to break free of the COVID trance propaganda and reclaim our sovereignty.

*

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.

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles, author of the book Cancer: The Lies, the Truth and the Solutions and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com. Makia is on Steemit and Odysee/LBRY.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research 

Sources

https://thefreedomarticles.com/mass-hypnosis-psychosis-initiation-ritual-covid-cult/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOUEC5YXV8U

https://www.prisonexp.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5688899/

Featured image is from The Freedom Articles

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Grand Psyop: Five Experiments and Syndromes to Account for Mass COVID Trance Behavior
  • Tags: ,

Secret ‘CIA-funded’ Group Linked to UK Ministers

December 10th, 2021 by Matt Kennard

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Two current ministers and two recent justice ministers have been funded by an opaque transatlantic right-wing group which includes members of the intelligence community. Declassified finds eight current Conservative parliamentarians are associated with the organisation.

The group, known as Le Cercle, was described by former Conservative minister Alan Clark in his diaries as “a right-wing think (or rather thought) tank, funded by the CIA, which churns Cold War concepts around”.

Le Cercle has existed since the 1950s but has no public presence, and has never revealed its funders. Even the group’s existence is only occasionally disclosed. It is unclear how influential Le Cercle – which is believed to meet twice a year, once in Washington DC and once elsewhere – actually is.

Declassified has found that eight current Conservative parliamentarians are associated with the group. Two current ministers – business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng and his deputy minister Greg Hands – have been funded by Le Cercle.

Kwarteng was given £5,258 to travel to Bahrain in June 2019 for a trip jointly funded by Le Cercle and the Gulf regime, which is one of the UK’s closest allies.

Three former justice ministers are associated with the group. David Lidington, the justice secretary from 2017-18, and Crispin Blunt, a justice minister from 2010-12, were previously funded by Le Cercle to attend meetings in Washington DC and Madrid.

Rory Stewart, who served as a justice minister under Theresa May, was previously chair of Le Cercle.

Several high-profile US figures are also linked to the group. US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who sat on America’s most powerful court from 1986 until his death in 2016, attended at least one Le Cercle meeting while sitting on the court.

Other ministers known to have been funded by the group include former foreign secretaries William Hague and Margaret Beckett, the latter being the only known Labour associate.

Current education secretary Nadhim Zahawi, a former business minister, is another previous chair of Le Cercle.

Zahawi and Stewart both claim, despite their senior roles in Le Cercle, that they don’t know how the networking group is funded. A “Whitehall security source” told the Daily Telegraph that Stewart was an MI6 officer before he entered politics.

Kenny MacAskill MP, a former Scottish justice secretary, told Declassified:

“Given the nature of this group and its links with other states and security organisations much more candour is required. It’s essential in a democracy that those accepting hospitality from an organisation such as this are fully transparent”.

Le Cercle

Le Cercle was founded in the 1950s by conservative French prime minister Antoine Pinay, and Konrad Adenauer, the former German Chancellor. Described as “one of the most influential, secretive, and…exclusive political clubs in the West”, it is also known as the Pinay Cercle.

The only information about the group to have recently appeared in public comes from a 2012 letter written by its then chair Lord Lothian, who is Michael Ancram, a former chair of the Conservative party.

The letter was written to the Saudi deputy foreign minister, Abdulaziz bin Abdullah and published by WikiLeaks in 2015. It stated that “the group is largely European and American” and its members include “Members of Parliament, diplomats, members of the intelligence community, commentators and businessmen from over twenty-five countries.”

Le Cercle’s meetings were said to cover “mostly foreign policy but also some domestic issues” and are held under “strict” Chatham House rules, where everything said is off-the-record. Attendance ranges from 80 to 100 people.

Other chairs of the group have included Conservative life peer Lord Lamont, a former chancellor. Lamont was funded to attend the same Le Cercle meeting in Bahrain in 2019 as Kwasi Kwarteng.

‘Security conference’

Former foreign minister Alan Duncan writes in his diaries he attended a Le Cercle meeting at St James’s Court Hotel in Westminster in June 2016. He described it as “a long-standing, slightly crazy security conference which I’ve been going to for years.”

The only significant article on Le Cercle published in the British press appeared in the Independent in 1997. It named Duncan, then a Conservative MP, as one of the group’s “leading political lights”.

Duncan, minister for Europe and the Americas from 2016-19, is a former oil trader with close links to the UK’s allied regimes in the Gulf.

He was the key government official involved in evicting Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy in 2019. Declassified last week revealed that Duncan is a 40-year “good friend” of Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett, the judge who will soon decide Julian Assange’s fate in his extradition case.

Attendees at Le Cercle meetings have included the former US director of national intelligence, John Negroponte, former US national security advisers Henry Kissinger and John Bolton, as well as the former US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Margaret Thatcher is also listed as a one-time attendee. It is not known if any of these political figures attended while in post.

The Independent article, based on anonymous sources within Le Cercle, noted the group meets “discreetly in the dining-room of the Beefsteak and other right-wing clubs”. Beefsteak is an elite members-only club near Leicester Square.

“American regulars” were said to include two directors of the CIA: William Colby, who headed the agency from 1973-76, and William J. Casey, who was director from 1981-87.

Le Cercle’s current political activities are unclear. South African media outlet the Daily Maverick found declassified documents in Pretoria which showed Le Cercle “had support for apartheid South Africa at the top of their agenda”.

The apartheid regime, they found, “helped fund the organisation, and hosted several meetings.”

‘Shadowy body’

In November 2009, Le Cercle paid £1,020 for David Lidington, then a shadow foreign minister, to fly to Washington “to speak to a meeting of Le Cercle about Middle East policy”. The trip also included “meetings with US administration officials about various foreign policy matters.”

Image on the right: David Lidington, justice secretary from 2017-18, was previously funded by Le Cercle. (Photo: UK government)

David Lidington, justice secretary from 2017-18, was previously funded by Le Cercle. (Photo: UK government)

Lidington went on to serve as Europe minister and justice secretary, remaining an MP until 2019.

Le Cercle paid for William Hague and his wife to go to Morocco in 2002, the year after Hague stood down as Conservative Party leader. In December 2006, the group also paid for Crispin Blunt to attend its conference in Delhi, India.

A year later, it paid for Blunt to attend its meeting in Madrid alongside Labour MP Margaret Beckett. The amounts given to Hague, Blunt and Beckett to finance their attendance at the Le Cercle meetings were not declared to parliament’s register of interests.

For the next eleven years, no funding from Le Cercle was publicly registered by British MPs.

Then in December 2018, Conservative MPs Greg Hands, Crispin Blunt and Mark Garnier were funded by Le Cercle to the tune of £12,756 to fly business class to Washington DC for four days to attend its meeting.

In 2019, Rory Stewart confirmed to PoliticsHome that he was chair of Le Cercle from 2013-14, while Nadhim Zahawi held the post from 2015-18. But neither previously declared their roles despite being members of parliament’s powerful Foreign Affairs Committee at the time.

Sir Alistair Graham, the former Chair of the Commission for Standards in Public Life, called the omission “disturbing” and Le Cercle “a shadowy body”.

Le Cercle’s administrator last year was Beverley Gayner who was working as a research assistant in Zahawi’s parliamentary office.

It is unclear which other British MPs are involved with Le Cercle or have attended its meetings. Stewart and Zahawi told PoliticsHome they paid their own expenses to attend international Le Cercle meetings. This suggests more MPs are involved than can be deduced from publicly available information.

‘Possible action’

Only some information from insiders has appeared in public about Le Cercle. In 1993, Harper Collins, one of the “big five” publishing houses, published Free Agent, a memoir by Brian Crozier, who was a member of Le Cercle from 1971 to 1985.

MI5 and MI6 tried, unsuccessfully, to ban the book, but it is now out of print.

Crozier worked with the CIA and MI6 and was also a former official in the Foreign Office’s cold war propaganda unit, the Information Research Department. He wrote that the “inspirer and long-serving organiser” of the Pinay Cercle was Jean Violet, who worked for the SDECE, then France’s external intelligence agency.

Crozier wrote that “within the wider Cercle, a smaller gathering called the Pinay Group met on occasion to discuss possible action.” It is unclear what activities the group engaged in.

Crozier noted that immediately after his first election victory in 1980, President-elect Ronald Reagan appointed a friend “to liaise” with the Pinay Cercle.

In 1979, Crozier presented a “planning paper” to Le Cercle intended to secure changes of government in the UK and Germany. He noted that in the UK the victory of Margaret Thatcher had completed the process.

Other listed objectives were “undercover financial transactions for political aims” and “international campaigns aiming to discredit hostile personalities or events”.

*

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.

Matt Kennard is chief investigator at Declassified UK. He was a fellow and then director at the Centre for Investigative Journalism in London. Follow him on Twitter @kennardmatt

Mark Curtis is the editor of Declassified UK, and the author of five books and many articles on UK foreign policy.

Featured image: Antonin Scalia, who sat on the US Supreme Court from 1986 to 2016, and was an associate of Le Cercle. (Photo: Creative Commons)

Ten Contradictions that Plague Biden’s Democracy Summit

December 10th, 2021 by Medea Benjamin

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.

***

President Biden’s virtual Summit for Democracy on December 9-10 is part of a campaign to restore the United States’ standing in the world, which took such a beating under President Trump’s erratic foreign policies. Biden hopes to secure his place at the head of the “Free World” table by coming out as a champion for human rights and democratic practices worldwide.

The greater possible value of this gathering of 111 countries is that it could instead serve as an “intervention,” or an opportunity for people and governments around the world to express their concerns about the flaws in U.S. democracy and the undemocratic way the United States deals with the rest of the world. Here are just a few issues that should be considered:

1.The U.S. claims to be a leader in global democracy at a time when its own already deeply flawed democracy is crumbling, as evidenced by the shocking January 6 assault on the nation’s Capitol. On top of the systemic problem of a duopoly that keeps other political parties locked out and the obscene influence of money in politics, the U.S. electoral system is being further eroded by the increasing tendency to contest credible election results and widespread efforts to suppress voter participation (19 states have enacted 33 laws that make it more difficult for citizens to vote).

A broad global ranking of countries by various measures of democracy puts the U.S. at #33, while the U.S. government-funded Freedom House ranks the United States a #61 in the world for political freedom and civil liberties, on a par with Mongolia, Panama and Romania.

2. The unspoken U.S. agenda at this “summit” is to demonize and isolate China and Russia. But if we agree that democracies should be judged by how they treat their people, then why is the U.S. Congress failing to pass a bill to provide basic services like health care, child care, housing and education, which are guaranteed to most Chinese citizens for free or at minimal cost?

And consider China’s extraordinary success in relieving poverty. As UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said,

“Every time I visit China, I am stunned by the speed of change and progress. You have created one of the most dynamic economies in the world, while helping more than 800 million people to lift themselves out of poverty – the greatest anti-poverty achievement in history.”

China has also far surpassed the U.S. in dealing with the pandemic. Little wonder a Harvard University report found that over 90% of the Chinese people like their government. One would think that China’s extraordinary domestic achievements would make the Biden administration a bit more humble about its “one-size-fits-all” concept of democracy.

3. The climate crisis and the pandemic are a wake-up call for global cooperation, but this Summit is transparently designed to exacerbate divisions. The Chinese and Russian ambassadors to Washington have publicly accused the United States of staging the summit to stoke ideological confrontation and divide the world into hostile camps, while China held a competing International Democracy Forum with 120 countries the weekend before the U.S. summit.

Inviting the government of Taiwan to the U.S. summit further erodes the 1972 Shanghai Communiqué, in which the United States acknowledged the One-China policy and agreed to cut back military installations on Taiwan.

Also invited is the corrupt anti-Russian government installed by the 2014 U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine, which reportedly has half its military forces poised to invade the self-declared People’s Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in Eastern Ukraine, who declared independence in response to the 2014 coup. The U.S. and NATO have so far supported this major escalation of a civil war that already killed 14,000 people.

4. The U.S. and its Western allies—the self-anointed leaders of human rights—just happen to be the major suppliers of weapons and training to some of the world’s most vicious dictators. Despite its verbal commitment to human rights, the Biden administration and Congress recently approved a $650 million weapons deal for Saudi Arabia at a time when this repressive kingdom is bombing and starving the people of Yemen.

Heck, the administration even uses U.S. tax dollars to “donate” weapons to dictators, like General Sisi in Egypt, who oversees a regime with thousands of political prisoners, many of whom have been tortured. Of course, these U.S. allies were not invited to the Democracy Summit—that would be too embarrassing.

5. Perhaps someone should inform Biden that the right to survive is a basic human right. The right to food is recognized in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights as part of the right to an adequate standard of living, and is enshrined in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

So why is the U.S. imposing brutal sanctions on countries from Venezuela to North Korea that are causing inflation, scarcity, and malnutrition among children? Former UN special rapporteur Alfred de Zayas has blasted the United States for engaging in “economic warfare” and compared its illegal unilateral sanctions to medieval sieges. No country that purposely denies children the right to food and starves them to death can call itself a champion of democracy.

6. Since the United States was defeated by the Taliban and withdrew its occupation forces from Afghanistan, it is acting as a very sore loser and reneging on basic international and humanitarian commitments. Certainly Taliban rule in Afghanistan is a setback for human rights, especially for women, but pulling the plug on Afghanistan’s economy is catastrophic for the entire nation.

The United States is denying the new government access to billions of dollars in Afghanistan’s foreign currency reserves held in U.S. banks, causing a collapse in the banking system. Hundreds of thousands of public servants have not been paid. The UN is warning that millions of Afghans are at risk of starving to death this winter as the result of these coercive measures by the United States and its allies.

7. It’s telling that the Biden administration had such a difficult time finding Middle Eastern countries to invite to the summit. The United States just spent 20 years and $8 trillion trying to impose its brand of democracy on the Middle East and Afghanistan, so you’d think it would have a few proteges to showcase.

But no. In the end, they could only agree to invite the state of Israel, an apartheid regime that enforces Jewish supremacy over all the land it occupies, legally or otherwise. Embarrassed to have no Arab states attending, the Biden administration added Iraq, whose unstable government has been racked by corruption and sectarian divisions ever since the U.S. invasion in 2003. Its brutal security forces have killed over 600 demonstrators since huge anti-government protests began in 2019.

8. What, pray tell, is democratic about the U.S. gulag at Guantánamo Bay? The U.S. Government opened the Guantanamo detention center in January 2002 as a way to circumvent the rule of law as it kidnapped and jailed people without trial after the crimes of September 11, 2001. Since then, 780 men have been detained there. Very few were charged with any crime or confirmed as combatants, but still they were tortured, held for years without charges, and never tried.

This gross violation of human rights continues, with most of the 39 remaining detainees never even charged with a crime. Yet this country that has locked up hundreds of innocent men with no due process for up to 20 years still claims the authority to pass judgment on the legal processes of other countries, in particular on China’s efforts to cope with Islamist radicalism and terrorism among its Uighur minority.

9. With the recent investigations into the March 2019 U.S. bombing in Syria that left 70 civilians dead and the drone strike that killed an Afghan family of ten in August 2021, the truth of massive civilian casualties in U.S. drone strikes and airstrikes is gradually emerging, as well as how these war crimes have perpetuated and fueled the “war on terror,” instead of winning or ending it.

If this was a real democracy summit, whistleblowers like Daniel Hale, Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange, who have risked so much to expose the reality of U.S. war crimes to the world, would be honored guests at the summit instead of political prisoners in the American gulag.

10. The United States picks and chooses countries as “democracies” on an entirely self-serving basis. But in the case of Venezuela, it has gone even farther and invited an imaginary U.S.-appointed “president” instead of the country’s actual government.

The Trump administration anointed Juan Guaidó as “president” of Venezuela, and Biden invited him to the summit, but Guaidó is neither a president nor a democrat, and he boycotted parliamentary elections in 2020 and regional elections in 2021. But Guaido did come tops in one recent opinion poll, with the highest public disapproval of any opposition figure in Venezuela at 83%, and the lowest approval rating at 13%.

Guaidó named himself “interim president” (without any legal mandate) in 2019, and launched a failed coup against the elected government of Venezuela. When all his U.S.-backed efforts to overthrow the government failed, Guaidó signed off on a mercenary invasion which failed even more spectacularly. The European Union no longer recognizes Guaido’s claim to the presidency, and his “interim foreign minister” recently resigned, accusing Guaidó of corruption.

Conclusion

Just as the people of Venezuela have not elected or appointed Juan Guaidó as their president, the people of the world have not elected or appointed the United States as the president or leader of all Earthlings.

When the United States emerged from the Second World War as the strongest economic and military power in the world, its leaders had the wisdom not to claim such a role. Instead they brought the whole world together to form the United Nations, on the principles of sovereign equality, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, a universal commitment to the peaceful resolution of disputes and a prohibition on the threat or use of force against each other.

The United States enjoyed great wealth and international power under the UN system it devised. But in the post-Cold War era, power-hungry U.S. leaders came to see the UN Charter and the rule of international law as obstacles to their insatiable ambitions. They belatedly staked a claim to universal global leadership and dominance, relying on the threat and use of force that the UN Charter prohibits. The results have been catastrophic for millions of people in many countries, including Americans.

Since the United States has invited its friends from around the world to this ”democracy summit,” maybe they can use the occasion to try to persuade their bomb-toting friend to recognize that its bid for unilateral global power has failed, and that it should instead make a real commitment to peace, cooperation and international democracy under the rules-based order of the UN Charter.

*

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.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.

They are frequent contributors to Global Research.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

At the St Justine Hospital in Montreal, a group of protesters gathered to express their disdain for the government’s recent decision to launch a vaccination campaign for children aged five to 11 years old.

A few months ago, a ruling had also been put in place by the CAQ government to render it illegal to demonstrate within fifty meters of a school or hospital.

It is why, almost a minute after people arrived on scene, policemen came for the protesters — warning them that they will all receive fines if they remained on-site.

The protesters decided to stay — so the police officers tried to disperse the crowd in order to arrest them, while writing up infraction tickets for the protesters.

The police also roped off the area with an orange band where protesters were not allowed to demonstrate.

Is this what we call freedom of expression?

*

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

France-Britain Tensions Are Rising over Migration

December 10th, 2021 by Uriel Araujo

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.

***

On Thursday, the US, Canada and their European allies expanded Belarus sanctions for ‘orchestrating’ the Polish-Belarusian migration crisis. Meanwhile, Europe has its own refugee’s problem, as exemplified by the recent Franco-British developments.

In general, the relations between the UK and the EU are deteriorating. Aside from several points of contention pertaining to fishing rights and the issue of the Brexit withdrawal agreement and the Northern Ireland Protocol, there is the English Channel crisis today. While much is talked about the Polish-Belarusian situation, this year alone over 25,000 asylum seekers reached Britain by means of small boats across the Channel. This has increased UK-France tensions.

On November 24, over 27 people drowned while crossing la Manche (as the French call the Channel), including a pregnant woman. This took place a few miles off the French port of Calais. Such tragedy prompted UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to send an open letter to France’s President Emmanuel Macron proposing a series of measures to avoid such incidents. They included enhancing intelligence sharing and more joint patrols, as well as signing a bilateral return agreement.

However, Paris’ response was not friendly. French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin, for instance, even barred his British counterpart Priti Patel from participating in a multilateral summit on the topic of migration at Calais. He described Johnson’s public letter as “disappointing” and “unacceptable”. Darmanin also urged Britain to open a legal route for asylum seekers so as to prevent them from crossing the Channel in small boats and thus risking their lives. According to him, UK immigration clerks can currently process asylum requests in an office in Northern France. However, tensions are high between the two countries and that makes any cooperation harder. According to the Canard Enchainé newspaper, Macron even described Johnson as a “clown” in private conversations with his aides.  The Twitter-published letter was seen as a lack of seriousness and respect.

Paris basically places all the blame on London, claiming the migrants are attracted by the British labor market, which allows one to work in England “without any identification” and thus Britain would be more “economically attractive” to illegal migration. French European Affairs Minister Clément Beaune accused the UK of maintaining an “economic model of, sometimes, quasi-modern slavery” and states that “one of the engines of the English economic policy — not all of it, obviously — is to employ workers illegally”. This much is not completely unfounded, although a bit of an exaggeration, but such description in fact holds truth to a greater or lesser degree to most of Europe too. Last year, the EU received over 400,000 asylum applications, while the United Kingdom got 29,000.

French Prime Minister Jean Castex formally rejected Johnson’s proposal – for Paris to have British security forces personnel patrolling on the French side of the coast – describing it as an infringement of French sovereignty. He added that sending migrants back to France “is not an option” either.

The current crisis is partly caused by Brexit: basically the British have lost the leverage to persuade any EU country to cooperate in regards to keeping migrants away from the other side of the (sea) border. Some French politicians have argued Paris should withdraw from the Anglo-French Touquet Treaty so as to retaliate what they perceive as London’s violations of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement. The Touquet Treaty is a 2004 agreement that allows for reciprocal border controls of British and French officials in each other’s countries. Scrapping it would, of course, only make matters worse.

One possible solution to the quarrel, according to Lancaster University Management School scholar Renaud Foucart, would involve EU countries taking back some migrants from England, as already is so with the European bloc and Turkey – in the other direction. This is unlikely though, due to the current political climate between London and the European Union. According to this academic, a smaller bilateral deal between Britain and France is much more likely and it could involve the UK subsidizing French border police. However, Franco-British relations are at their lowest in decades, so the current crisis could go on for a while.

Beyond French-English tensions, there is in fact the European migration crisis today, with some European countries deciding to build walls along their borders to keep refugees and migrants out. Pope Francis this week described this state of affairs as a “shipwreck of civilization”. One thing that makes sharing responsibility difficult even within the EU itself is the fact that its member-states have different situations and different positions within the bloc, pertaining to their demographics and economics, as well as leverage and power – even though the EU works on the premise that all member-states are “equal”. The truth is that not all countries are on the same foot in terms of being able to welcome asylum-seekers and of migration management in general. The European system in fact protects its wealthiest nations against a too high migrant flow by means of handing over responsibility to southeastern and eastern European countries.

Whether on the Channel or at Poland’s border, a large part of the refugees come from war-ravaged middle-eastern countries such as Syria and the European powers – England included – can no doubt be blamed for such a situation since they have been arming and funding terrorist groups in that region. Of course Britain is responsible for its own humanitarian problems, but the fact that France and the EU currently blame the UK alone for today’s Channel situation reminds one of the way the bloc deals with the Polish-Belarusian migration crisis. It is basically a war of narratives and a blame game.

*

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.

Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.

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.

***

While the OTF presents itself as independent internet freedom activists, their funding, staff, history and choice of targets all point to the conclusion that they are a digital weapon being used against Washington’s enemies. 

The Open Technology Fund (OTF) is one of the most influential and celebrated organizations in the hacking and internet freedom communities. Well over two billion people globally use OTF-produced software, including communications app Signal and web browser Tor, services that are specifically marketed to privacy-conscious consumers looking to circumvent government censorship and surveillance. Yet its close links to the U.S. national security state raise many worrying questions about whether the world is making a mistake by trusting the organization and its products.

Through its research and sponsorship, the OTF is responsible for apps and services that can boast a massive reach. It is estimated that more than two-thirds of all smartphones are equipped with OTF offerings, apps that brand themselves as the obvious choice for privacy-minded users.

The OTF describes itself as “an independent non-profit organization committed to advancing global Internet freedom,” adding that it “supports projects focused on counteracting repressive censorship and surveillance, enabling citizens worldwide to exercise their fundamental human rights online.”

There is strong evidence, however, to suggest that the Open Technology Fund is not what it claims to be: that it is neither independent nor truly committed to online freedom and privacy.

First, while technically a private company, it is directly funded and controlled by the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM), a government body responsible for overseeing U.S.-funded state media outlets overseas, including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Voice of America and Radio and Televisión Martí. The OTF derives essentially all of its funding from USAGM, which, in turn, receives money from Congress through the Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related programs ($808 million in 2019).

Secondly, until 2019, the OTF was officially a government project managed by the infamous Radio Free Asia. Together, The New York Times described these outlets as a “worldwide propaganda network built by the CIA.” Even a brief look at their content suggests that this is essentially an accurate description, with USAGM brought into existence to manage CIA-created media outlets.

This alone would be enough to raise questions. However, the OTF’s definition of freedom should sound even more alarm bells. In its most recently published annual report, it describes its mission as:

…Advanc[ing] internet freedom in repressive environments by supporting the research, development, implementation, and maintenance of technologies that provide secure and uncensored access to USAGM content as well as the broader internet. This critical support helps to counter attempts by authoritarian governments to restrict freedom online.

Internet freedom, according to the OTF, is explicitly defined in relation to access to U.S. state propaganda arms. If individuals in a country have access to Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, then their internet is free. If not, they live in a totalitarian state. Internet freedom boils down to the freedom of the U.S. government to reach you. Any other understanding of the concept is, at best, an afterthought.

The report also states that the OTF exists primarily for two purposes:

(1) to “[p]rovide unrestricted access to the internet to individuals living in information-restrictive countries to help ensure they are able to safely access USAGM content,” and

(2) to [p]rotect journalists, sources, and audiences from repressive surveillance and digital attacks to help ensure they are able to safely create and engage with USAGM content.” This is unlikely to be the idea of freedom that many privacy-conscious users of Signal and Tor have in mind.

That this operation is pointed specifically at U.S. enemies is made clear on the fund’s website, which states that “leading censors like China and Russia” are “exporting their censorship and surveillance tactics to like-minded regimes abroad,” and that the OTF must “capitalize on its unique capability within the U.S. government to support internet freedom efforts,” thereby positioning Washington as the unquestioned defender of liberty around the world.

Of course, China and Russia do indeed have very serious censorship concerns, but they are hardly alone in that regard. Thus, while the fund speaks in the language of privacy and social justice, its targets are overwhelmingly U.S. enemy states. Meanwhile American allies with equally poor or worse free speech environments (such as Saudi Arabia or Qatar) are quietly overlooked.

A board of state functionaries

Not only was the Open Technology Foundation created by the national security state, it continues to employ high government officials in key positions. Its five-person board consists entirely of important state functionaries:

  • Karen Kornbluh was formerly U.S. ambassador to the OECD, Barack Obama’s policy director, deputy chief of staff at the Treasury Department, and a senior figure at the FCC during the Clinton administration.
  • Ben Scott was previously policy adviser for innovation at the Department of State, where, in the OTF’s words, he crafted the government’s 21st Century Statecraft agenda.
  • Top Democratic fundraiser Michael Kemper served as the DNC’s deputy finance chairman as well as deputy finance coordinator for President Obama. He also held a position on the White House Council for Community Solutions from 2010 to 2012.
  • William Schneider is a Republican who was Ronald Reagan’s under secretary of state for Security Assistance, Science and Technology. He is also a member of the notorious neoconservative group, the Project for a New American Century. In 1998, he signed a letter to President Bill Clinton, urging him to attack Iraq. A science expert, he has consistently argued that the U.S. should use nuclear weapons as a standard part of its warfare.
  • Even more central to the post-9/11 wars, however, is the fifth member of the board, Ryan Crocker. Crocker was United States ambassador to both Iraq (2007-2009) and Afghanistan (2011-2012). So important was he to the occupations that General David Petraeus, supreme commander of the occupation forces, said that he was merely Crocker’s “military wingman.” George W. Bush described him as “America’s Lawrence of Arabia.”

For such a group of individuals, who have spent their lives dedicated to enhancing U.S. state power, it appears unlikely that freedom from state surveillance would be high on their list of priorities. Underlining that the Open Technology Fund’s concern with privacy and freedom of speech goes only so far is its choice of CEOs, who have included the former director of programming for Voice of America, the former president of Radio Free Asia, and an ex-State Department and National Endowment for Democracy official.

Thus the OTF – a “private” company that was created by government agencies and was a government body itself until 2019 – is staffed by top U.S. officials who have been chosen by the USAGM. The veneer of independence actually serves two important purposes: it provides the U.S. government a modicum of plausible deniability if any misdeeds are exposed and ensures that the organization is not subject to Freedom of Information Act requests, making the OTF far harder to scrutinize.

This semi-privatization technique is a new trend in U.S. statecraft. In recent years, the government has farmed out much of its most controversial clandestine work to NGOs and shadowy “private” companies that rely largely or solely on federal contracts. For example, NGOs like Creative Associates International have been employed to organize regime-change ops in Cuba or act as a front group for the CIA in Pakistan. Last year, a private American security firm was also responsible for a failed coup attempt in Venezuela.

OTF genesis

Radio Free Asia — the Open Technology Fund’s former parent organization — was established by the CIA in 1951, in the wake of the American retreat from China. Between 1945 and 1949, the United States occupied mainland China in an attempt to support the nationalist Kuomintang forces and prevent Communist forces under Mao Zedong from coming to power. In this, they failed, and the Kuomintang fled to the island of Taiwan, just off China’s coast. The powerful U.S. Navy prevented the Communists from pursuing them, allowing the Kuomintang to establish a one-party state on the island. This remains the basis of the current U.S.-China-Taiwan dispute.

During the 1950s, Radio Free Asia bombarded the mainland with anti-Communist propaganda in an attempt to weaken and, ultimately, unseat the Communist Party. However, results were poor and the project was put on ice, returning only in the 1990s after the fall of the Soviet Union, when U.S. planners began to believe a total eradication of communist states was possible.

Yasha Levine, an investigative journalist and author of “Surveillance Valley: The Secret Military History of the Internet,” explained to MintPress that Beijing began blocking Radio Free Asia’s website almost as soon as it was launched in 1996. Consequently, its bosses began searching for a way of circumventing the Great Firewall of China. It was out of this project that the Open Technology Fund was born.

OTF’s role in US-backed “pro-democracy” protests

The OTF has played a key role in U.S.-backed protest movements around the world. During the 2019-2020 Hong Kong protests, it was quietly channeling millions of dollars to protest leaders in an attempt to keep them going. It was also carrying out large-scale data-gathering operations on Chinese social media platforms Weibo and Wechat. CIA cutout organization the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was engaged in similar activities.

For months, the Hong Kong protests dominated Western news media, with wall-to-wall positive coverage of the events. Yet locals themselves appeared to be far more split on the action. A poll conducted by Reuters showed that, by August 2020, only 44% of Hong Kongers supported the protest movement.

The Open Technology Fund has also been crucial to Washington’s activities in Cuba. There, it sponsored the development of Psiphon, an open-source tool that allows users to hide their identity and bypass government restrictions.

The NED had, for years, been spending big to build and train a network of activists across the island. When the time came, they were ready. “During the protest in July, Psiphon enabled over 2.8 million users to connect to the uncensored internet, allowing them to share their stories on social media and messaging apps,” boasted the company’s CEO, Michael Hull. “Giving [Cubans] those tools so they can talk to each other is the most important thing that we can do,” a senior Biden administration official told McClatchy’s D.C. Bureau. “We’re looking to further expand our support for the Open Technology Fund and those sorts of [operations],” they added. As with Hong Kong, worldwide media coverage of the Cuban protests was intense. Yet the demonstrations fell apart even quicker, as few Cubans had an appetite for regime change.

A map from a 2018 OTF report shows regions where so-called “Internet freedom communities” have applied for OTF assistance

The OTF is also known to have supported similar recent actions in Belarus, Iran and Venezuela. In Belarus, it trained the opposition to President Alexander Lukashenko, its agents carrying out ten separate tours of the country, holding meetings with representatives of what it deemed “independent mass media, human rights defenders and civil activists.” In total, it conducted at least 225 consultations with Belarussian groups in 16 months during 2017 and 2018 alone. They also provided training sessions for these activists. Sure enough, widespread demonstrations followed, with the goal of removing Lukashenko. The leaders of the movement were “installed and maintained” by the OTF, according to The Guardian.

While these operations are couched in the language of promoting democracy, it is clear at whom the OTF aims its tools. In its latest published yearly report, for example, the words “China” or “Chinese” appear 81 times, “Russia” or “Russian” 27 times, “Iran” 24 times and “Venezuela” 13 times. Yet Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Qatar — three U.S. allies with particularly egregious media freedom records — are mentioned only once, in passing.

“An anarchist Lockheed Martin”

This long and sordid history certainly raises questions about the legitimacy and safety of the OTF’s two most popular products, Signal and Tor. Between 2013 and 2016, the OTF channeled more than $3 million to Signal, while it gave twice that amount — more than $6 million — to Tor between 2012 and 2020. (Tor continues to be sponsored by a number of U.S. government agencies).

Certainly, all parties involved keep this information quiet. There is no mention of the OTF on Signal’s website. Meanwhile, reading the three organizations’ Wikipedia pages would barely clue an individual in on their connections. This is not a coincidence. Emails Levine obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that Tor Project director and co-founder Roger Dingledine (who once interned at the NSA) was acutely aware of how bad the optics were.

“We also need to think about a strategy for how to spin this move in terms of Tor’s overall direction. I would guess that we don’t want to loudly declare war on China, since this only harms our goals?” he wrote to the director of OTF parent company USAGM. “But we also don’t want to hide the existence of funding from [USAGM], since ‘they’re getting paid off by the feds and they didn’t tell anyone’ sounds like a bad Slashdot title for a security project. Is it sufficient just to always talk about Iran, or is that not subtle enough?”

The wording of this email suggests Dingledine views Tor as a U.S. government weapon aimed at its enemies, and not as a neutral and independent privacy project, but was searching for a way to present it as such. The director of USAGM reassured him, responding that his organization would, “do any spin you want to do to help preserve the independence of Tor.”

Levine was highly critical of Tor’s role in society. “Tor is a military contractor that makes software for the U.S. government. They’re an anarchist Lockheed Martin; they give the U.S. government offensive capability on the internet. Of course, they are not making missiles, but they are making cyber weapons for Washington,” he told MintPress.

American agents use the browser to communicate. Ironically, the influx of new users actually helps them disappear into the crowd. Without the hackers, drug dealers, cyberpunks, crypto-enthusiasts, political activists and privacy-minded individuals using it, the identities and locations of U.S. agents would become obvious to foreign states monitoring online activities. In other words, when you use Tor, you’re helping the CIA.

Does Tor or Signal’s proximity to American intelligence mean that their products are fundamentally compromised? Enthusiasts point to their checkable, open source code as proof that they are secure. Even Levine does not challenge this. However, the enormous complexity of the operating systems they run on is a serious cause for concern. While many have checked Tor and Signal’s source code, few except state actors pore over the countless billions of lines of code of the software on our phones or computers — and they are doing it to find ways to exploit or attack the millions of holes and backdoors in the operating systems. Big governments can ultimately find a way to get to the data before it is encrypted, Levine argued, meaning that:

Signal and Tor offer a false sense of security. It depends who you are trying to hide from. If it is your local police department and you are using Signal, it is probably good enough. But if you are engaged in some kind of political protest building, organizing and challenging state power on some level, I would not be dependent on Signal to do it.”

Since at least 2014, the FBI has been closely monitoring Tor, assessing users’ exit nodes (the false IP address that a server sees). Independent tests conducted by Columbia University found that researchers were able to identify over 81% of Tor users in real-world tests.

Ultimately, then, Signal and Tor could be compared to an expensive home security system. The product might be high quality and secure enough to stop petty thieves or even committed professional burglars. But if the FBI wants to enter your house, they will simply ram the door down. “On a fundamental level, I don’t think that privacy exists,” Levine said. “To think that, as a regular consumer, you can take on the state with some app that you download for free… It’s just ridiculous. It’s a joke.”

A dubious endorsement

Unfortunately, both Signal and Tor have developed large and devoted followings, being used the world over and endorsed by groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and high profile privacy advocates. “The problem with Signal is not the technology, it is the marketing behind it. It has this cachet of being radical anarchist software that is backed by people like Edward Snowden. It has cultural capital,” Levine told MintPress; “They have created a cult of security around this app that does not exist. Not just for Signal, but for any other app.”

Perhaps more worryingly, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has also heartily endorsed the OTF, stating that the organization has “earned trust over the years through its open source ethos, transparency, and a commitment to independence from its funder, USAGAM.” “OTF’s funding is focused on tools to help individuals living under repressive governments,” EFF adds.

Unfortunately, the EFF is fundamentally intertwined with the national security state itself, with several of its staff serving on the OTF advisory council. In the 1990s, the EFF collaborated with the FBI to pass the so-called “Let’s Just Wiretap Everyone Bill,” rewriting the bureau’s draft legislation to make it sound more palatable to the public. That bill became the basis for a great deal of the FBI’s continuing invasive online surveillance. The OTF has also sponsored a number of EFF projects. MintPress contacted the EFF for comment, but did not receive a reply.

A concealed weapon in the global cyberwar

While at face value Tor and Signal may be robust, the fact that significant parts of the internet freedom and anti-surveillance movement are intertwined with the U.S. national security state does seem an absurd contradiction. The NSA lied for years, even under oath, that it was not spying on Americans. In reality, it was collecting reams of data on just about everyone. The U.S. was even intimately surveilling its closest international allies, such as German chancellor Angela Merkel. Given such a history, what could possibly be done to assuage fears that a similar operation is not currently being executed?

While the OTF presents itself as independent internet freedom activists, their funding, staff, history and choice of targets all point to the conclusion that they are a digital weapon being used against Washington’s enemies.

Thus, their talk of “freedom of information” is reminiscent of discussions about “free markets.” Freedom of information is currently being championed by the government that dominates and controls the internet and is in a position to use that leverage to carry out its international ambitions. And while the U.S. talks piously about freedom of information, whenever foreign-owned communications companies begin to succeed — such as Chinese-owned Huawei or TikTok — there is a meltdown, followed by an all-out attack from Washington, which fears they will be weaponized in similar ways Washington has weaponized Silicon Valley.

A silent war is being waged for control of cyberspace. And in war, truth is always the first casualty.

*

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.

Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.orgThe GuardianSalonThe GrayzoneJacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research

Featured image is from Countercurrents

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on OTF – The “Independent” Internet Freedom Organization that Makes All Your Favorite Privacy Apps – Is Staffed Full of Spies
  • Tags: , ,
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Laos’ Railway Opens: The West Kicks and Screams as China and Laos Move Forward Together

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.

***

A coalition of the World’s largest multi-national corporations is working to manipulate you into eating more “equitable” food through a business strategy designed to help major “food players” and other large businesses facilitate “the coming food systems transition.”

They plan to do so with the help of a new strategy that assesses the supposed morality of individual food items and uses that metric to make business decisions and levy performance reviews.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development calls itself “the premier global, CEO-led community of over 200 of the world’s leading sustainable businesses working collectively to accelerate the system transformations needed for a net zero, nature positive, and more equitable future.”

In addition to food industry giants like Kellogg’s and Nestle, WBCSD’s member list includes Big Tech players —Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. Many of the groups’ most prominent members are also members of the World Economic Forum, which highlighted the initiative in a recent post on its own website.

Speaking of Microsoft — recall reports from nearly a year ago that founder Bill Gates had suddenly become the largest farmland owner in America, after having quietly bought up 242,000+ acres of it.

The new framework for assessing the globalist’s approval of various food items is titled “The True Value of Food: A powerful aid to business decision-making.” It is presented in a document complete with photos of objectively bland looking, plant-based food. Its introduction contends that “there is a problem” with the current food system.

The problem addressed is not that our food is increasingly becoming overly-processed, genetically modified garbage, but rather that “the global food system humans have created is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and biodiversity loss,” and that it  “perpetuates inequality.”

“A transformation in how we produce and consume food is an imperative to sustain a global population of 8 to 11 billion people,” it insists. “This transformation has already begun and will accelerate over the next decade.”

“True Value of Food (TVoF) analyses incorporates the direct and indirect positive and negative impacts associated with a product from farm to fork,” the document explains.

“Further refinement of TVoF’s methods will make it easier for companies to routinely integrate economic, social, health and environmental factors into their strategic and operational assessments of business opportunities and risks, and in performance reviews,” WEF explained.

So how does the metric work? WBCSD offers a cookie as an example — noting that the sweet treat loses points because of the associated “socio-economic cost” to the workers on the cacao plantation and the “health costs”—which of course are “borne by the British taxpayer,” and therefore counted as a cost to society.

What’s better than a cookie? The WBCSD suggests consuming “an oatmilk porridge” as an alternative. The porridge bowl scores much better on the TVoF scale, because of its lower environmental, health, and socio-economic costs. These categories take into account factors like “food waste” and “air pollution,” in order to determine the “true cost” of the food in question. According to the WBCSD, the cookie and porridge can easily be swapped, since they have “a similar consumer value.”

The cookie’s score could be improved by using coconut oil instead of butter, fortifying the cookie with “nutrients,” and paying farmers more.

The Council notes the while “the food transition is underway,” CEOs of major companies must “act now” and begin “leveraging” the TVoF metric immediately. It offers an action plan for companies to “incorporate the TVoF into their decision making” such as by using the concept to choose investments, suppliers, and transportation options and to formulate performance metrics.

*

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 Human Events

Macron’s Revenge for AUKUS Betrayal

December 10th, 2021 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

What distinguishes great powers like France is their sense of history and their profound understanding of the temporality of historical experience — or, how their past, present, and future are thought to be connected in their international diplomacy. 

That is why the AUKUS pact between the US, UK and Australia was a catastrophic mistake. Australia can be forgiven for being an inconsequential third-tier nation, but the US and Britain should have known that France will duly settle scores when the time comes. 

And it has come in the most unexpected way as French President Emmanuel Macron hit the Anglo-Saxon axis in West Asia where it hurts most — in the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. 

Macron wrapped up a diplomatic coup of mammoth proportions in securing a $19 billion contract for 80 French-made Rafale fighter jets, the biggest international order ever made for the warplanes, during a visit to the UAE on December 3. 

The arms deal includes 80 Rafale fighter jets and 12 military helicopters. The deal will directly support 7,000 jobs in France and guarantee the supply chain of the Dassault Aviation until the end of 2031, a French official told journalists. Shares in Dassault Aviation SA, the Rafale’s maker, rose more than 9 percent. 

Yet, this is much more than a “stand-alone” business deal. For, Macron has tapped the impatience in the Emirati mind over President Biden’s hesitancy in approving an F-35 deal amid concerns about Abu Dhabi’s relationship with China, including the prevalence of Huawei 5G technology in the country.  

The Biden Administration is sitting on the UAE’s F-35 stealth fighter deal that formed something of an adjunct to the so-called Abraham Accords on the establishment of diplomatic relations between Tel Aviv and Abu Dhabi, that gave former president Donald Trump a foreign-policy triumph in West Asia in the final days of his term in office.

In April, a US state department spokesman said about the $23 billion deal, “We can confirm that the administration intends to move forward with these proposed defence sales to the UAE, even as we continue reviewing details and consulting with Emirati officials to ensure we have developed mutual understandings with respect to Emirati obligations before, during and after delivery… we anticipate a robust and sustained dialogue with the UAE to (ensure) any defence transfers meet our mutual strategic objectives to build a stronger, interoperable, and more capable security partnership.” 

The Biden Administration added a caveat that the UAE must roll back its robust ties with China and impose restrictions on where, and under what circumstances, the F-35s can be used. 

Plainly put, UAE will pay a fortune to buy the F-35 but its usage will be under American control and, secondly, it may not even be the most advanced version of the newly-developed fighter aircraft (which Israel got). 

If the UAE leadership felt humiliated, it didn’t show its feelings. But the new thinking in the UAE regional policies lately speaks for itself. The Rafale deal can be compared to Turkey’s deal with Russia for S-400 missiles after the US prevarication over Ankara’s interest in Patriot missiles. The UAE too has turned away from the US to other sources for purchase of advanced weaponry, without strings attached.

France has weakened the US’ pressure tactic. Amidst the Gulf Arab states’ growing uncertainty about the US’ focus on the region, the Élysée Palace said in a statement, “This contract cements a strategic partnership that is stronger than ever and directly contributes to regional stability.” 

President Macron and Abu Dhabi’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan (R) are presented with the Rafale agreement 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken had a call with with UAE Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan on Sunday. The state department readout said they “discussed important regional matters, reaffirmed their countries’ strong partnership and discussed ways to broaden and deepen their wide-ranging cooperation.” 

Truly, Blinken has egg on his face. Within a fortnight or so of his initiative to form an exclusive West Asian grouping (dubbed as “Quad.2”) with Israel, UAE and India, lo and behold, Abu Dhabi has moved in a contrarian direction toward normalising with Syria, Turkey and Iran (all of whom are not on talking terms with the US and/or Israel.) 

By the way, the rulers of Syria, Turkey, Iran, the UAE and Saudi Arabia also have something special in common — all five of them have been excluded from Biden’s guest list of 110 invitees to his “Summit of Democracy” on December 9-10. 

Biden’s snub must be hurting. With only three days to go for Biden’s summit, the UAE National Security Advisor Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who is also the brother of the Crown Prince, is travelling to Tehran at the invitation of Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and advisor to Supreme Leader. 

The Tehran Times reported that “Enhancing mutual ties and sharing views on the latest developments in the region are among the main objectives of the top UAE security official’s visit to Tehran.”

Of course, AUKUS pact killed a much bigger deal involving the sale of 12 diesel-powered French submarines to Australia worth US$36.5 billion. But, for Macron, the Rafale deal with the UAE may be the beginning only with more surprises to follow. 

From Abu Dhabi, Macron headed for Saudi Arabia for a meeting with the Saudi Crown Prime Mohammed bin Salman. The symbolism was overpowering. Macron became the the first major western leader to visit Saudi Arabia and meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman since he was implicated in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi three years ago. 

“Prince Mohammed received Macron at a royal palace in Jeddah, where they shared a long handshake. Saudi media and influencers swiftly disseminated a photograph of the two men smiling and walking side by side, ” Bloomberg reported. 

While cementing France’s position in the Persian Gulf, Macron is also signalling that France can serve as an alternative to the US in West Asia amidst growing talk among Gulf states for easing their reliance on Washington. He discussed with Prince Mohammad an initiative to resolve the political crisis in Lebanon. 

Biden entered the White House condemning Saudi Arabia as a “pariah” state over human rights abuses and vowed that he wouldn’t deal with the Crown Prince. 

But Washington has lately begun backtracking, realising the imperative need to engage with Riyadh on many of their policy goals, especially the energy markets. A White House delegation travelled to Riyadh last week on the eve of the Opec+ meeting on Thursday seeking more oil supply to cool prices that fed rising inflation in the US. 

With Macron on the prowl, Biden is coming under pressure to swallow his pride and speak with the Saudi Crown Prince who is the de facto ruler. That may be the ultimate price he has to pay for the AUKUS betrayal meted out to France. 

*

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: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (R) greets French President Emmanuel Macron upon his arrival in Jeddah, Dec 4, 2021 (All images in this article are from Indian Punchline)

Vaccine Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (VAIDS): ‘We Should Anticipate Seeing this Immune Erosion More Widely’

By Frontline Doctors, December 09, 2021

A Lancet study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated people in Sweden was conducted among 1.6 million individuals over nine months. It showed that protection against symptomatic COVID-19 declined with time, such that by six months, some of the more vulnerable vaccinated groups were at greater risk than their unvaccinated peers.

Speaking out against the mRNA “Vaccine”: Dr Sam White’s Legal Victory against the UK General Medical Council– And the Gutter Media Response

By John Goss, December 09, 2021

Dr Sam White has shown the way to all other medical practitioners with a massive legal win over the corrupted General Medical Council. To achieve this he had to resign first. Let there be no mistake – what he did in the self-sacrifices he made, he did for everyone.

What Putin Really Told Biden

By Pepe Escobar, December 09, 2021

The White House: Biden made it “clear” to Putin that the US and allies will respond with “decisive economic and other measures” to a military escalation in Ukraine. At the same time, Biden called on Putin to de-escalate around Ukraine and “return to diplomacy.” Kremlin: Putin offered Biden to nullify all restrictions on the functioning of diplomatic missions. He remarked that cooperation between Russia and the US is still in an “unsatisfactory” state.

The Chief Outcome of the Biden-Putin Summit: Putin Rejects Biden’s Demand that the U.S. Take Control Over the Negotiations Between Ukraine and Its Former Donbass Region

By Eric Zuesse, December 09, 2021

The two-hour December 7th Biden-Putin conversation (via video-conference) focused mainly on the conflict between Ukraine and its breakaway former Donbass region, which is in Ukraine’s far east and borders on Russia.

Court-Ordered Pfizer Documents They Tried to Have Sealed for 55 Years Show 1223 Deaths, 158,000 Adverse Events in 90 Days Post EUA Release

By Celia Farber, December 09, 2021

A group called “Public Health and Medical Professional For Transparency Documents” sued the FDA for the release of Pfizer’s documents concerning adverse events from their Covid “vaccine”, which Pfizer fought to have concealed 55 years, but a courageous judge ordered them released anyway.

Video: #Yes, It’s a “Killer Vaccine”: Michel Chossudovsky

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 10, 2021

The unspoken truth is that the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and a justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire World into a spiral of mass unemployment, bankruptcy, extreme poverty and despair.

China Winter Olympics: US Boycott — Actually “Who Is Boycotting Whom?”

By Peter Koenig, December 09, 2021

Ms. Psaki explained the boycott as a response to “Beijing’s human rights violations”, adding what she calls “genocide and crimes against humanity”. She was of course referring to the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), a landlocked autonomous region of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), by surface the largest single territory of China, located in the northwest of the country, close to Central Asia.

Vaccine Mandates Result from the Abuse of True Science

By Dr. Birsen Filip, December 09, 2021

There is an alarming degree of uniformity between the governments of many western countries when it comes to instituting tyrannical measures like mandatory medical injections at workplaces and vaccine passports.

J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve

By Doctors for COVID Ethics, December 09, 2021

Official sources, namely EudraVigilance (EU, EEA, Switzerland), MHRA (UK) and VAERS (USA), have now recorded many more deaths and injuries from the COVID-!9 “vaccine” roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began.

Video: Funeral Director John O’Looney: “Deaths due to Heart Attack, Stroke, Aneurysm, as Direct Result of Thrombosis Embolisms in the Lungs”

By John O’Looney, December 09, 2021

What we are seeing is a large number of deaths due to heart attack, stroke, and aneurysm, as a direct result of thrombosis embolisms in the lungs. This is well-documented by the local coroners across the country. Yet nobody seems to be concerned on the alarming rise in them.

RFK, Jr. Testifies Against COVID Vaccine Mandate for Kids in Battle for Health Freedom Down on the Bayou

By Dr. Robert Malone, December 09, 2021

Dr. Robert W. Malone, a developer of mRNA vaccine technology, recounts his experience earlier this week at the Louisiana statehouse where CHD team members, including Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., testified against adding Pfizer’s COVID vaccine to the state’s childhood vaccine schedule.

The Assassination of Malcolm X: The “Actual Assassins” Known to the FBI were Never Brought to Justice

By Abayomi Azikiwe, December 09, 2021

Malcolm X, also known as Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, was assassinated on February 21, 1965 at the Audubon Ballroom in the Washington Heights section of Manhattan in New York City. There were three people arrested, tried and convicted in his murder yet two men have always maintained that they were not guilty in the crime.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: ‘We Should Anticipate Seeing this Immune Erosion More Widely’

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.

***

Dear readers of my Substack, I want to tell you urgently that I am sitting here, as shocked as I can remember being, since I began reporting on pharmaceutical and government/ pharmaceutical predation in 1987/1988, at a rock magazine called SPIN. I’ve spent most of my life shocked, often disoriented, wondering if I can believe my own eyes, and trying to square the countless attacks on my own sanity with what appears to be the impossibly dark truth. For years I processed the relentless violence as some kind of possibility that I had missed something. I don’t anymore. Everybody who has failed to oppose this is complicit in mass murder. There are not “two sides.” Pfizer itself can explain exactly why all the people dropping dead have died, but they felt it should be hidden for 55 years, so they could continue to murder and maim without interference. The mass media is the engine of the catastrophe, the sine qua non.

Most smoking guns are not really smoking guns, but this one is.

A group called “Public Health and Medical Professional For Transparency Documents” sued the FDA for the release of Pfizer’s documents concerning adverse events from their Covid “vaccine”, which Pfizer fought to have concealed 55 years, but a courageous judge ordered them released anyway.

They wrote on their website:

”Four days after the Pfizer vaccine was approved for ages 16+, we submitted a Freedom of Information Act Request to the FDA for all of the data within Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine biological product file. We have now sued the FDA for not releasing the data. Click below for court documents and for productions of Pfizer’s documents from the FDA.”

See this.

My God.

In the 90 days following EUA release of the “vaccine” they recorded 1,223 deaths, and 158,000 adverse reactions, including fetal deaths, spontaneous abortions and more. They call this, in their encrypted, trans-human Pharma-lingo, the “post marketing experience.” [See link above]

Whose experience? Pfizer’s, or the dead?

I failed to catch on to this when it was released a few days ago, for which I apologize. Mark Crispin Miller sent it out today and I realized I’d missed something incredibly important. I opened the document and began to read, as my mind short-circuited. One thinks one has seen it all, but no.

I’d heard Alex Jones apoplectically reporting on it this week but for some reason I still didn’t drop what I was doing and go to it. Mike Adams reported comprehensively on it here.

Normally I write prose, sentences, but now I am dropping a massive boulder of words, a sheer word cloud, so you can have a visual sense of the extent of the “adverse events” Pfizer outrageously and blithely calls “..of special interest.” [Note: The events are in fact a master list of potential events that encompass all adverse events they have ever collected. See update and correction here.

These “events” have never been “of special interest” to the protected class of mass media vaccine propagandists, but they are REAL. They are now here in black and white, from Pfizer’s own documents. They mirror exactly what everybody who has been trying to sound the alarm has ever said; There is no mystery anymore.

Anybody who tells you these “vaccines” are safe is somewhere between hypnotized, dishonest, and malicious.

As these Pfizer documents lay bare, our bodies are nothing but their field of sadistic experimentation, their wealth gain, their total self-appointed right to destroy life, while raking in billions, maybe trillions, and even guilt-tripping their endless victims for not promoting “vaccines” once they have been crippled. Even the dead are expected to promote vaccines from the grave, via their surviving loved ones.

Yet you are an “anti-vaxxer.”

And this is a fate worse, they make clear, than death.

But no need to believe “anti-vaxxers” anymore—here’s the data from Pfizer, of everything these predators have “observed” in their victims, whose lives they are ostensibly so insistent upon “saving” and who were healthy before the shots, but spellbound by fear, and sacrificed by an unspeakably cold-blooded media:


APPENDIX 1. LIST OF ADVERSE EVENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST

1p36 deletion syndrome;2-Hydroxyglutaric aciduria;5’nucleotidase increased;Acoustic neuritis;Acquired C1 inhibitor deficiency;Acquired epidermolysis bullosa;Acquired epileptic aphasia;Acute cutaneous lupus erythematosus;Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis;Acute encephalitis with refractory, repetitive partial seizures;Acute febrile neutrophilic dermatosis;Acute flaccid myelitis;Acute haemorrhagic leukoencephalitis;Acute haemorrhagic oedema of infancy;Acute kidney injury;Acute macular outer retinopathy;Acute motor axonal neuropathy;Acute motor-sensory axonal neuropathy;Acute myocardial infarction;Acute respiratory distress syndrome; [note: that sounds like “Covid 19.”] Acute respiratory failure;Addison’s disease;Administration site thrombosis;Administration site vasculitis;Adrenal thrombosis;Adverse event following immunisation;Ageusia;Agranulocytosis;Air embolism;Alanine aminotransferase abnormal;Alanine aminotransferase increased;Alcoholic seizure;Allergic bronchopulmonary mycosis;Allergic oedema;Alloimmune hepatitis;Alopecia areata;Alpers disease;Alveolar proteinosis;Ammonia abnormal;Ammonia increased;Amniotic cavity infection;Amygdalohippocampectomy;Amyloid arthropathy;Amyloidosis;Amyloidosis senile;Anaphylactic reaction;Anaphylactic shock;Anaphylactic transfusion reaction;Anaphylactoid reaction;Anaphylactoid shock;Anaphylactoid syndrome of pregnancy;Angioedema;Angiopathic neuropathy;Ankylosing spondylitis;Anosmia;Antiacetylcholine receptor antibody positive;Anti-actin antibody positive;Anti-aquaporin-4 antibody positive;Anti-basal ganglia antibody positive;Anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody positive;Anti-epithelial antibody positive;Anti-erythrocyte antibody positive;Anti-exosome complex antibody positive;Anti- GAD antibody negative;Anti-GAD antibody positive;Anti-ganglioside antibody positive;Antigliadin antibody positive;Anti-glomerular basement membrane antibody positive;Anti-glomerular basement membrane disease;Anti-glycyl-tRNA synthetase antibody positive;Anti-HLA antibody test positive;Anti-IA2 antibody positive;Anti-insulin antibody increased;Anti-insulin antibody positive;Anti-insulin receptor antibody increased;Anti- insulin receptor antibody positive;Anti-interferon antibody negative;Anti-interferon antibody positive;Anti-islet cell antibody positive;Antimitochondrial antibody positive;Anti-muscle specific kinase antibody positive;Anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein antibodies positive;Anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein associated polyneuropathy;Antimyocardial antibody positive;Anti-neuronal antibody positive;Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody increased;Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positive;Anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody positive vasculitis;Anti-NMDA antibody positive;Antinuclear antibody increased;Antinuclear antibody positive;Antiphospholipid antibodies positive;Antiphospholipid syndrome;Anti-platelet antibody positive;Anti-prothrombin antibody positive;Antiribosomal P antibody positive;Anti-RNA polymerase III antibody positive;Anti-saccharomyces cerevisiae antibody test positive;Anti-sperm antibody positive;Anti-SRP antibody positive;Antisynthetase syndrome;Anti-thyroid antibody positive;Anti-transglutaminase antibody increased;Anti-VGCC antibody positive;Anti- VGKC antibody positive;Anti-vimentin antibody positive;Antiviral prophylaxis;Antiviral treatment;Anti-zinc transporter 8 antibody positive;Aortic embolus;Aortic thrombosis;Aortitis;Aplasia pure red cell;Aplastic anaemia;Application site thrombosis;Application site vasculitis;Arrhythmia;Arterial bypass occlusion;Arterial bypass thrombosis;Arterial thrombosis;Arteriovenous fistula thrombosis;Arteriovenous graft site stenosis;Arteriovenous graft thrombosis;Arteritis;Arteritis

CONFIDENTIAL Page 1

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000083

Page 30

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

coronary;Arthralgia;Arthritis;Arthritis enteropathic;Ascites;Aseptic cavernous sinus thrombosis;Aspartate aminotransferase abnormal;Aspartate aminotransferase increased;Aspartate-glutamate-transporter deficiency;AST to platelet ratio index increased;AST/ALT ratio abnormal;Asthma;Asymptomatic COVID- 19;Ataxia;Atheroembolism;Atonic seizures;Atrial thrombosis;Atrophic thyroiditis;Atypical benign partial epilepsy;Atypical pneumonia [Note: This sounds like the original definition of Covid-19 out of Wuhan];Aura;Autoantibody positive;Autoimmune anaemia;Autoimmune aplastic anaemia;Autoimmune arthritis;Autoimmune blistering disease;Autoimmune cholangitis;Autoimmune colitis;Autoimmune demyelinating disease;Autoimmune dermatitis;Autoimmune disorder;Autoimmune encephalopathy;Autoimmune endocrine disorder;Autoimmune enteropathy;Autoimmune eye disorder;Autoimmune haemolytic anaemia;Autoimmune heparin-induced thrombocytopenia;Autoimmune hepatitis;Autoimmune hyperlipidaemia;Autoimmune hypothyroidism;Autoimmune inner ear disease;Autoimmune lung disease;Autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome;Autoimmune myocarditis;Autoimmune myositis;Autoimmune nephritis;Autoimmune neuropathy;Autoimmune neutropenia;Autoimmune pancreatitis;Autoimmune pancytopenia;Autoimmune pericarditis;Autoimmune retinopathy;Autoimmune thyroid disorder;Autoimmune thyroiditis;Autoimmune uveitis;Autoinflammation with infantile enterocolitis;Autoinflammatory disease;Automatism epileptic;Autonomic nervous system imbalance;Autonomic seizure;Axial spondyloarthritis;Axillary vein thrombosis;Axonal and demyelinating polyneuropathy;Axonal neuropathy;Bacterascites;Baltic myoclonic epilepsy;Band sensation;Basedow’s disease;Basilar artery thrombosis;Basophilopenia;B-cell aplasia;Behcet’s syndrome;Benign ethnic neutropenia;Benign familial neonatal convulsions;Benign familial pemphigus;Benign rolandic epilepsy;Beta-2 glycoprotein antibody positive;Bickerstaff’s encephalitis;Bile output abnormal;Bile output decreased;Biliary ascites;Bilirubin conjugated abnormal;Bilirubin conjugated increased;Bilirubin urine present;Biopsy liver abnormal;Biotinidase deficiency;Birdshot chorioretinopathy;Blood alkaline phosphatase abnormal;Blood alkaline phosphatase increased;Blood bilirubin abnormal;Blood bilirubin increased;Blood bilirubin unconjugated increased;Blood cholinesterase abnormal;Blood cholinesterase decreased;Blood pressure decreased;Blood pressure diastolic decreased;Blood pressure systolic decreased;Blue toe syndrome;Brachiocephalic vein thrombosis;Brain stem embolism;Brain stem thrombosis;Bromosulphthalein test abnormal;Bronchial oedema;Bronchitis;Bronchitis mycoplasmal;Bronchitis viral;Bronchopulmonary aspergillosis allergic;Bronchospasm;Budd- Chiari syndrome;Bulbar palsy;Butterfly rash;C1q nephropathy;Caesarean section;Calcium embolism;Capillaritis;Caplan’s syndrome;Cardiac amyloidosis;Cardiac arrest;Cardiac failure;Cardiac failure acute;Cardiac sarcoidosis;Cardiac ventricular thrombosis;Cardiogenic shock;Cardiolipin antibody positive;Cardiopulmonary failure;Cardio-respiratory arrest;Cardio-respiratory distress;Cardiovascular insufficiency;Carotid arterial embolus;Carotid artery thrombosis;Cataplexy;Catheter site thrombosis;Catheter site vasculitis;Cavernous sinus thrombosis;CDKL5 deficiency disorder;CEC syndrome;Cement embolism;Central nervous system lupus;Central nervous system vasculitis;Cerebellar artery thrombosis;Cerebellar embolism;Cerebral amyloid angiopathy;Cerebral arteritis;Cerebral artery embolism;Cerebral artery thrombosis;Cerebral gas embolism;Cerebral microembolism;Cerebral septic infarct;Cerebral thrombosis;Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis;Cerebral venous thrombosis;Cerebrospinal thrombotic

CONFIDENTIAL Page 2

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000084

Page 31

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

tamponade;Cerebrovascular accident;Change in seizure presentation;Chest discomfort;Child- Pugh-Turcotte score abnormal;Child-Pugh-Turcotte score increased;Chillblains;Choking;Choking sensation;Cholangitis sclerosing;Chronic autoimmune glomerulonephritis;Chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus;Chronic fatigue syndrome;Chronic gastritis;Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy;Chronic lymphocytic inflammation with pontine perivascular enhancement responsive to steroids;Chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis;Chronic respiratory failure;Chronic spontaneous urticaria;Circulatory collapse;Circumoral oedema;Circumoral swelling;Clinically isolated syndrome;Clonic convulsion;Coeliac disease;Cogan’s syndrome;Cold agglutinins positive;Cold type haemolytic anaemia;Colitis;Colitis erosive;Colitis herpes;Colitis microscopic;Colitis ulcerative;Collagen disorder;Collagen-vascular disease;Complement factor abnormal;Complement factor C1 decreased;Complement factor C2 decreased;Complement factor C3 decreased;Complement factor C4 decreased;Complement factor decreased;Computerised tomogram liver abnormal;Concentric sclerosis;Congenital anomaly;Congenital bilateral perisylvian syndrome;Congenital herpes simplex infection;Congenital myasthenic syndrome;Congenital varicella infection;Congestive hepatopathy;Convulsion in childhood;Convulsions local;Convulsive threshold lowered;Coombs positive haemolytic anaemia;Coronary artery disease;Coronary artery embolism;Coronary artery thrombosis;Coronary bypass thrombosis;Coronavirus infection;Coronavirus test;Coronavirus test negative;Coronavirus test positive;Corpus callosotomy;Cough;Cough variant asthma;COVID-19;COVID-19 immunisation;COVID-19 pneumonia;COVID-19 prophylaxis;COVID-19 treatment;Cranial nerve disorder;Cranial nerve palsies multiple;Cranial nerve paralysis;CREST syndrome;Crohn’s disease;Cryofibrinogenaemia;Cryoglobulinaemia;CSF oligoclonal band present;CSWS syndrome;Cutaneous amyloidosis;Cutaneous lupus erythematosus;Cutaneous sarcoidosis;Cutaneous vasculitis;Cyanosis;Cyclic neutropenia;Cystitis interstitial;Cytokine release syndrome;Cytokine storm;De novo purine synthesis inhibitors associated acute inflammatory syndrome;Death neonatal;Deep vein thrombosis;Deep vein thrombosis postoperative;Deficiency of bile secretion;Deja vu;Demyelinating polyneuropathy;Demyelination;Dermatitis;Dermatitis bullous;Dermatitis herpetiformis;Dermatomyositis;Device embolisation;Device related thrombosis;Diabetes mellitus;Diabetic ketoacidosis;Diabetic mastopathy;Dialysis amyloidosis;Dialysis membrane reaction;Diastolic hypotension;Diffuse vasculitis;Digital pitting scar;Disseminated intravascular coagulation;Disseminated intravascular coagulation in newborn;Disseminated neonatal herpes simplex;Disseminated varicella;Disseminated varicella zoster vaccine virus infection;Disseminated varicella zoster virus infection;DNA antibody positive;Double cortex syndrome;Double stranded DNA antibody positive;Dreamy state;Dressler’s syndrome;Drop attacks;Drug withdrawal convulsions;Dyspnoea;Early infantile epileptic encephalopathy with burst-suppression;Eclampsia;Eczema herpeticum;Embolia cutis medicamentosa;Embolic cerebellar infarction;Embolic cerebral infarction;Embolic pneumonia;Embolic stroke;Embolism;Embolism arterial;Embolism venous;Encephalitis;Encephalitis allergic;Encephalitis autoimmune;Encephalitis brain stem;Encephalitis haemorrhagic;Encephalitis periaxialis diffusa;Encephalitis post immunisation;Encephalomyelitis;Encephalopathy;Endocrine disorder;Endocrine ophthalmopathy;Endotracheal intubation;Enteritis;Enteritis leukopenic;Enterobacter pneumonia;Enterocolitis;Enteropathic spondylitis;Eosinopenia;Eosinophilic

CONFIDENTIAL Page 3

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000085

Page 32

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

fasciitis;Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis;Eosinophilic oesophagitis;Epidermolysis;Epilepsy;Epilepsy surgery;Epilepsy with myoclonic-atonic seizures;Epileptic aura;Epileptic psychosis;Erythema;Erythema induratum;Erythema multiforme;Erythema nodosum;Evans syndrome;Exanthema subitum;Expanded disability status scale score decreased;Expanded disability status scale score increased;Exposure to communicable disease;Exposure to SARS-CoV-2;Eye oedema;Eye pruritus;Eye swelling;Eyelid oedema;Face oedema;Facial paralysis;Facial paresis;Faciobrachial dystonic seizure;Fat embolism;Febrile convulsion;Febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome;Febrile neutropenia;Felty’s syndrome;Femoral artery embolism;Fibrillary glomerulonephritis;Fibromyalgia;Flushing;Foaming at mouth;Focal cortical resection;Focal dyscognitive seizures;Foetal distress syndrome;Foetal placental thrombosis;Foetor hepaticus;Foreign body embolism;Frontal lobe epilepsy;Fulminant type 1 diabetes mellitus;Galactose elimination capacity test abnormal;Galactose elimination capacity test decreased;Gamma-glutamyltransferase abnormal;Gamma-glutamyltransferase increased;Gastritis herpes;Gastrointestinal amyloidosis;Gelastic seizure;Generalised onset non-motor seizure;Generalised tonic-clonic seizure;Genital herpes;Genital herpes simplex;Genital herpes zoster;Giant cell arteritis;Glomerulonephritis;Glomerulonephritis membranoproliferative;Glomerulonephritis membranous;Glomerulonephritis rapidly progressive;Glossopharyngeal nerve paralysis;Glucose transporter type 1 deficiency syndrome;Glutamate dehydrogenase increased;Glycocholic acid increased;GM2 gangliosidosis;Goodpasture’s syndrome;Graft thrombosis;Granulocytopenia;Granulocytopenia neonatal;Granulomatosis with polyangiitis;Granulomatous dermatitis;Grey matter heterotopia;Guanase increased;Guillain- Barre syndrome;Haemolytic anaemia;Haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis;Haemorrhage;Haemorrhagic ascites;Haemorrhagic disorder;Haemorrhagic pneumonia;Haemorrhagic varicella syndrome;Haemorrhagic vasculitis;Hantavirus pulmonary infection;Hashimoto’s encephalopathy;Hashitoxicosis;Hemimegalencephaly;Henoch-Schonlein purpura;Henoch- Schonlein purpura nephritis;Hepaplastin abnormal;Hepaplastin decreased;Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia;Hepatic amyloidosis;Hepatic artery embolism;Hepatic artery flow decreased;Hepatic artery thrombosis;Hepatic enzyme abnormal;Hepatic enzyme decreased;Hepatic enzyme increased;Hepatic fibrosis marker abnormal;Hepatic fibrosis marker increased;Hepatic function abnormal;Hepatic hydrothorax;Hepatic hypertrophy;Hepatic hypoperfusion;Hepatic lymphocytic infiltration;Hepatic mass;Hepatic pain;Hepatic sequestration;Hepatic vascular resistance increased;Hepatic vascular thrombosis;Hepatic vein embolism;Hepatic vein thrombosis;Hepatic venous pressure gradient abnormal;Hepatic venous pressure gradient increased;Hepatitis;Hepatobiliary scan abnormal;Hepatomegaly;Hepatosplenomegaly;Hereditary angioedema with C1 esterase inhibitor deficiency;Herpes dermatitis;Herpes gestationis;Herpes oesophagitis;Herpes ophthalmic;Herpes pharyngitis;Herpes sepsis;Herpes simplex;Herpes simplex cervicitis;Herpes simplex colitis;Herpes simplex encephalitis;Herpes simplex gastritis;Herpes simplex hepatitis;Herpes simplex meningitis;Herpes simplex meningoencephalitis;Herpes simplex meningomyelitis;Herpes simplex necrotising retinopathy;Herpes simplex oesophagitis;Herpes simplex otitis externa;Herpes simplex pharyngitis;Herpes simplex pneumonia;Herpes simplex reactivation;Herpes simplex sepsis;Herpes simplex viraemia;Herpes simplex virus conjunctivitis neonatal;Herpes simplex visceral;Herpes virus

CONFIDENTIAL Page 4

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000086

Page 33

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

infection;Herpes zoster;Herpes zoster cutaneous disseminated;Herpes zoster infection neurological;Herpes zoster meningitis;Herpes zoster meningoencephalitis;Herpes zoster meningomyelitis;Herpes zoster meningoradiculitis;Herpes zoster necrotising retinopathy;Herpes zoster oticus;Herpes zoster pharyngitis;Herpes zoster reactivation;Herpetic radiculopathy;Histone antibody positive;Hoigne’s syndrome;Human herpesvirus 6 encephalitis;Human herpesvirus 6 infection;Human herpesvirus 6 infection reactivation;Human herpesvirus 7 infection;Human herpesvirus 8 infection;Hyperammonaemia;Hyperbilirubinaemia;Hypercholia;Hypergammaglobulinaemia benign monoclonal;Hyperglycaemic seizure;Hypersensitivity;Hypersensitivity vasculitis;Hyperthyroidism;Hypertransaminasaemia;Hyperventilation;Hypoalbuminaemia;H ypocalcaemic seizure;Hypogammaglobulinaemia;Hypoglossal nerve paralysis;Hypoglossal nerve paresis;Hypoglycaemic seizure;Hyponatraemic seizure;Hypotension;Hypotensive crisis;Hypothenar hammer syndrome;Hypothyroidism;Hypoxia;Idiopathic CD4 lymphocytopenia; [Note: sounds like “AIDS” except Fauci re-defined AIDS in 1993, after the “Amsterdam Surprise” as only occurring when HIV was “present” so all thousands the non HIV, “idiopathic CD4 lympho-cytopenia cases were excluded, creating a tautological definition that came to be “HIV/AIDS.” ] Idiopathic generalised epilepsy;Idiopathic interstitial pneumonia;Idiopathic neutropenia;Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis;IgA nephropathy;IgM nephropathy;IIIrd nerve paralysis;IIIrd nerve paresis;Iliac artery embolism;Immune thrombocytopenia;Immune- mediated adverse reaction;Immune-mediated cholangitis;Immune-mediated cholestasis;Immune-mediated cytopenia;Immune-mediated encephalitis;Immune-mediated encephalopathy;Immune-mediated endocrinopathy;Immune-mediated enterocolitis;Immune- mediated gastritis;Immune-mediated hepatic disorder;Immune-mediated hepatitis;Immune- mediated hyperthyroidism;Immune-mediated hypothyroidism;Immune-mediated myocarditis;Immune-mediated myositis;Immune-mediated nephritis;Immune-mediated neuropathy;Immune-mediated pancreatitis;Immune-mediated pneumonitis;Immune-mediated renal disorder;Immune-mediated thyroiditis;Immune-mediated uveitis;Immunoglobulin G4 related disease;Immunoglobulins abnormal;Implant site thrombosis;Inclusion body myositis;Infantile genetic agranulocytosis;Infantile spasms;Infected vasculitis;Infective thrombosis;Inflammation;Inflammatory bowel disease;Infusion site thrombosis;Infusion site vasculitis;Injection site thrombosis;Injection site urticaria;Injection site vasculitis;Instillation site thrombosis;Insulin autoimmune syndrome;Interstitial granulomatous dermatitis;Interstitial lung disease;Intracardiac mass;Intracardiac thrombus;Intracranial pressure increased;Intrapericardial thrombosis;Intrinsic factor antibody abnormal;Intrinsic factor antibody positive;IPEX syndrome;Irregular breathing;IRVAN syndrome;IVth nerve paralysis;IVth nerve paresis;JC polyomavirus test positive;JC virus CSF test positive;Jeavons syndrome;Jugular vein embolism;Jugular vein thrombosis;Juvenile idiopathic arthritis;Juvenile myoclonic epilepsy;Juvenile polymyositis;Juvenile psoriatic arthritis;Juvenile spondyloarthritis;Kaposi sarcoma inflammatory cytokine syndrome;Kawasaki’s disease;Kayser-Fleischer ring;Keratoderma blenorrhagica;Ketosis- prone diabetes mellitus;Kounis syndrome;Lafora’s myoclonic epilepsy;Lambl’s excrescences;Laryngeal dyspnoea;Laryngeal oedema;Laryngeal rheumatoid arthritis;Laryngospasm;Laryngotracheal oedema;Latent autoimmune diabetes in adults;LE cells present;Lemierre syndrome;Lennox-Gastaut syndrome;Leucine aminopeptidase increased;Leukoencephalomyelitis;Leukoencephalopathy;Leukopenia;Leukopenia neonatal;Lewis-Sumner syndrome;Lhermitte’s sign;Lichen planopilaris;Lichen planus;Lichen sclerosus;Limbic encephalitis;Linear IgA disease;Lip oedema;Lip swelling;Liver function test abnormal;Liver function test decreased;Liver function test increased;Liver induration;Liver injury;Liver iron concentration abnormal;Liver iron concentration

CONFIDENTIAL Page 5

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000087

Page 34

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

increased;Liver opacity;Liver palpable;Liver sarcoidosis;Liver scan abnormal;Liver tenderness;Low birth weight baby;Lower respiratory tract herpes infection;Lower respiratory tract infection;Lower respiratory tract infection viral;Lung abscess;Lupoid hepatic cirrhosis;Lupus cystitis;Lupus encephalitis;Lupus endocarditis;Lupus enteritis;Lupus hepatitis;Lupus myocarditis;Lupus myositis;Lupus nephritis;Lupus pancreatitis;Lupus pleurisy;Lupus pneumonitis;Lupus vasculitis;Lupus-like syndrome;Lymphocytic hypophysitis;Lymphocytopenia neonatal;Lymphopenia;MAGIC syndrome;Magnetic resonance imaging liver abnormal;Magnetic resonance proton density fat fraction measurement;Mahler sign;Manufacturing laboratory analytical testing issue;Manufacturing materials issue;Manufacturing production issue;Marburg’s variant multiple sclerosis;Marchiafava-Bignami disease;Marine Lenhart syndrome;Mastocytic enterocolitis;Maternal exposure during pregnancy;Medical device site thrombosis;Medical device site vasculitis;MELAS syndrome;Meningitis;Meningitis aseptic;Meningitis herpes;Meningoencephalitis herpes simplex neonatal;Meningoencephalitis herpetic;Meningomyelitis herpes;MERS-CoV test;MERS-CoV test negative;MERS-CoV test positive;Mesangioproliferative glomerulonephritis;Mesenteric artery embolism;Mesenteric artery thrombosis;Mesenteric vein thrombosis;Metapneumovirus infection;Metastatic cutaneous Crohn’s disease;Metastatic pulmonary embolism;Microangiopathy;Microembolism;Microscopic polyangiitis;Middle East respiratory syndrome;Migraine-triggered seizure;Miliary pneumonia;Miller Fisher syndrome;Mitochondrial aspartate aminotransferase increased;Mixed connective tissue disease;Model for end stage liver disease score abnormal;Model for end stage liver disease score increased;Molar ratio of total branched-chain amino acid to tyrosine;Molybdenum cofactor deficiency;Monocytopenia;Mononeuritis;Mononeuropathy multiplex;Morphoea;Morvan syndrome;Mouth swelling;Moyamoya disease;Multifocal motor neuropathy;Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome;Multiple sclerosis;Multiple sclerosis relapse;Multiple sclerosis relapse prophylaxis;Multiple subpial transection;Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children;Muscular sarcoidosis;Myasthenia gravis;Myasthenia gravis crisis;Myasthenia gravis neonatal;Myasthenic syndrome;Myelitis;Myelitis transverse;Myocardial infarction;Myocarditis;Myocarditis post infection;Myoclonic epilepsy;Myoclonic epilepsy and ragged-red fibres;Myokymia;Myositis;Narcolepsy;Nasal herpes;Nasal obstruction;Necrotising herpetic retinopathy;Neonatal Crohn’s disease;Neonatal epileptic seizure;Neonatal lupus erythematosus;Neonatal mucocutaneous herpes simplex;Neonatal pneumonia;Neonatal seizure;Nephritis;Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis;Neuralgic amyotrophy;Neuritis;Neuritis cranial;Neuromyelitis optica pseudo relapse;Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder;Neuromyotonia;Neuronal neuropathy;Neuropathy peripheral;Neuropathy, ataxia, retinitis pigmentosa syndrome;Neuropsychiatric lupus;Neurosarcoidosis;Neutropenia;Neutropenia neonatal;Neutropenic colitis;Neutropenic infection;Neutropenic sepsis;Nodular rash;Nodular vasculitis;Noninfectious myelitis;Noninfective encephalitis;Noninfective encephalomyelitis;Noninfective oophoritis;Obstetrical pulmonary embolism;Occupational exposure to communicable disease;Occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2;Ocular hyperaemia;Ocular myasthenia;Ocular pemphigoid;Ocular sarcoidosis;Ocular vasculitis;Oculofacial paralysis;Oedema;Oedema blister;Oedema due to hepatic disease;Oedema mouth;Oesophageal achalasia;Ophthalmic artery thrombosis;Ophthalmic herpes simplex;Ophthalmic herpes zoster;Ophthalmic vein thrombosis;Optic neuritis;Optic

CONFIDENTIAL Page 6

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000088

Page 35

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

neuropathy;Optic perineuritis;Oral herpes;Oral lichen planus;Oropharyngeal oedema;Oropharyngeal spasm;Oropharyngeal swelling;Osmotic demyelination syndrome;Ovarian vein thrombosis;Overlap syndrome;Paediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal infection;Paget-Schroetter syndrome;Palindromic rheumatism;Palisaded neutrophilic granulomatous dermatitis;Palmoplantar keratoderma;Palpable purpura;Pancreatitis;Panencephalitis;Papillophlebitis;Paracancerous pneumonia;Paradoxical embolism;Parainfluenzae viral laryngotracheobronchitis;Paraneoplastic dermatomyositis;Paraneoplastic pemphigus;Paraneoplastic thrombosis;Paresis cranial nerve;Parietal cell antibody positive;Paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria;Partial seizures;Partial seizures with secondary generalisation;Patient isolation;Pelvic venous thrombosis;Pemphigoid;Pemphigus;Penile vein thrombosis;Pericarditis;Pericarditis lupus;Perihepatic discomfort;Periorbital oedema;Periorbital swelling;Peripheral artery thrombosis;Peripheral embolism;Peripheral ischaemia;Peripheral vein thrombus extension;Periportal oedema;Peritoneal fluid protein abnormal;Peritoneal fluid protein decreased;Peritoneal fluid protein increased;Peritonitis lupus;Pernicious anaemia;Petit mal epilepsy;Pharyngeal oedema;Pharyngeal swelling;Pityriasis lichenoides et varioliformis acuta;Placenta praevia;Pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis;Pneumobilia;Pneumonia;Pneumonia adenoviral;Pneumonia cytomegaloviral;Pneumonia herpes viral;Pneumonia influenzal;Pneumonia measles;Pneumonia mycoplasmal;Pneumonia necrotising;Pneumonia parainfluenzae viral;Pneumonia respiratory syncytial viral;Pneumonia viral;POEMS syndrome;Polyarteritis nodosa;Polyarthritis;Polychondritis;Polyglandular autoimmune syndrome type I;Polyglandular autoimmune syndrome type II;Polyglandular autoimmune syndrome type III;Polyglandular disorder;Polymicrogyria;Polymyalgia rheumatica;Polymyositis;Polyneuropathy;Polyneuropathy idiopathic progressive;Portal pyaemia;Portal vein embolism;Portal vein flow decreased;Portal vein pressure increased;Portal vein thrombosis;Portosplenomesenteric venous thrombosis;Post procedural hypotension;Post procedural pneumonia;Post procedural pulmonary embolism;Post stroke epilepsy;Post stroke seizure;Post thrombotic retinopathy;Post thrombotic syndrome;Post viral fatigue syndrome;Postictal headache;Postictal paralysis;Postictal psychosis;Postictal state;Postoperative respiratory distress;Postoperative respiratory failure;Postoperative thrombosis;Postpartum thrombosis;Postpartum venous thrombosis;Postpericardiotomy syndrome;Post-traumatic epilepsy;Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome;Precerebral artery thrombosis;Pre-eclampsia;Preictal state;Premature labour;Premature menopause;Primary amyloidosis;Primary biliary cholangitis;Primary progressive multiple sclerosis;Procedural shock;Proctitis herpes;Proctitis ulcerative;Product availability issue;Product distribution issue;Product supply issue;Progressive facial hemiatrophy;Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy;Progressive multiple sclerosis;Progressive relapsing multiple sclerosis;Prosthetic cardiac valve thrombosis;Pruritus;Pruritus allergic;Pseudovasculitis;Psoriasis;Psoriatic arthropathy;Pulmonary amyloidosis;Pulmonary artery thrombosis;Pulmonary embolism;Pulmonary fibrosis;Pulmonary haemorrhage;Pulmonary microemboli;Pulmonary oil microembolism;Pulmonary renal syndrome;Pulmonary sarcoidosis;Pulmonary sepsis;Pulmonary thrombosis;Pulmonary tumour thrombotic microangiopathy;Pulmonary vasculitis;Pulmonary veno-occlusive disease;Pulmonary venous thrombosis;Pyoderma gangrenosum;Pyostomatitis vegetans;Pyrexia;Quarantine;Radiation leukopenia;Radiculitis

CONFIDENTIAL Page 7

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000089

Page 36

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

brachial;Radiologically isolated syndrome;Rash;Rash erythematous;Rash pruritic;Rasmussen encephalitis;Raynaud’s phenomenon;Reactive capillary endothelial proliferation;Relapsing multiple sclerosis;Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis;Renal amyloidosis;Renal arteritis;Renal artery thrombosis;Renal embolism;Renal failure;Renal vascular thrombosis;Renal vasculitis;Renal vein embolism;Renal vein thrombosis;Respiratory arrest;Respiratory disorder;Respiratory distress;Respiratory failure;Respiratory paralysis;Respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis;Respiratory syncytial virus bronchitis;Retinal artery embolism;Retinal artery occlusion;Retinal artery thrombosis;Retinal vascular thrombosis;Retinal vasculitis;Retinal vein occlusion;Retinal vein thrombosis;Retinol binding protein decreased;Retinopathy;Retrograde portal vein flow;Retroperitoneal fibrosis;Reversible airways obstruction;Reynold’s syndrome;Rheumatic brain disease;Rheumatic disorder;Rheumatoid arthritis;Rheumatoid factor increased;Rheumatoid factor positive;Rheumatoid factor quantitative increased;Rheumatoid lung;Rheumatoid neutrophilic dermatosis;Rheumatoid nodule;Rheumatoid nodule removal;Rheumatoid scleritis;Rheumatoid vasculitis;Saccadic eye movement;SAPHO syndrome;Sarcoidosis;SARS-CoV-1 test;SARS-CoV-1 test negative;SARS-CoV-1 test positive;SARS-CoV-2 antibody test;SARS-CoV-2 antibody test negative;SARS-CoV-2 antibody test positive;SARS-CoV-2 carrier;SARS-CoV-2 sepsis;SARS-CoV-2 test;SARS- CoV-2 test false negative;SARS-CoV-2 test false positive;SARS-CoV-2 test negative;SARS- CoV-2 test positive;SARS-CoV-2 viraemia;Satoyoshi syndrome;Schizencephaly;Scleritis;Sclerodactylia;Scleroderma;Scleroderma associated digital ulcer;Scleroderma renal crisis;Scleroderma-like reaction;Secondary amyloidosis;Secondary cerebellar degeneration;Secondary progressive multiple sclerosis;Segmented hyalinising vasculitis;Seizure;Seizure anoxic;Seizure cluster;Seizure like phenomena;Seizure prophylaxis;Sensation of foreign body;Septic embolus;Septic pulmonary embolism;Severe acute respiratory syndrome;Severe myoclonic epilepsy of infancy;Shock;Shock symptom;Shrinking lung syndrome;Shunt thrombosis;Silent thyroiditis;Simple partial seizures;Sjogren’s syndrome;Skin swelling;SLE arthritis;Smooth muscle antibody positive;Sneezing;Spinal artery embolism;Spinal artery thrombosis;Splenic artery thrombosis;Splenic embolism;Splenic thrombosis;Splenic vein thrombosis;Spondylitis;Spondyloarthropathy;Spontaneous heparin-induced thrombocytopenia syndrome;Status epilepticus;Stevens-Johnson syndrome; [Note: This, SJS, can result in the skin coming off the body altogether, from the body’s attempt to rid itself of poison.] Stiff leg syndrome;Stiff person syndrome;Stillbirth;Still’s disease;Stoma site thrombosis;Stoma site vasculitis;Stress cardiomyopathy;Stridor;Subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus;Subacute endocarditis;Subacute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy;Subclavian artery embolism;Subclavian artery thrombosis;Subclavian vein thrombosis;Sudden unexplained death in epilepsy;Superior sagittal sinus thrombosis;Susac’s syndrome;Suspected COVID- 19;Swelling;Swelling face;Swelling of eyelid;Swollen tongue;Sympathetic ophthalmia;Systemic lupus erythematosus;Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index abnormal;Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index decreased;Systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index increased;Systemic lupus erythematosus rash;Systemic scleroderma;Systemic sclerosis pulmonary;Tachycardia;Tachypnoea;Takayasu’s arteritis;Temporal lobe epilepsy;Terminal ileitis;Testicular autoimmunity;Throat tightness;Thromboangiitis obliterans;Thrombocytopenia;Thrombocytopenic purpura;Thrombophlebitis;Thrombophlebitis migrans;Thrombophlebitis

CONFIDENTIAL Page 8

FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000090

Page 37

090177e196ea1800\Approved\Approved On: 30-Apr-2021 09:26 (GMT)


BNT162b2

5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-authorization Adverse Event Reports

neonatal;Thrombophlebitis septic;Thrombophlebitis superficial;Thromboplastin antibody positive;Thrombosis;Thrombosis corpora cavernosa;Thrombosis in device;Thrombosis mesenteric vessel;Thrombotic cerebral infarction;Thrombotic microangiopathy;Thrombotic stroke;Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura;Thyroid disorder;Thyroid stimulating immunoglobulin increased;Thyroiditis;Tongue amyloidosis;Tongue biting;Tongue oedema;Tonic clonic movements;Tonic convulsion;Tonic posturing;Topectomy;Total bile acids increased;Toxic epidermal necrolysis;Toxic leukoencephalopathy;Toxic oil syndrome;Tracheal obstruction;Tracheal oedema;Tracheobronchitis;Tracheobronchitis mycoplasmal;Tracheobronchitis viral;Transaminases abnormal;Transaminases increased;Transfusion-related alloimmune neutropenia;Transient epileptic amnesia;Transverse sinus thrombosis;Trigeminal nerve paresis;Trigeminal neuralgia;Trigeminal palsy;Truncus coeliacus thrombosis;Tuberous sclerosis complex;Tubulointerstitial nephritis and uveitis syndrome;Tumefactive multiple sclerosis;Tumour embolism;Tumour thrombosis;Type 1 diabetes mellitus;Type I hypersensitivity;Type III immune complex mediated reaction;Uhthoff’s phenomenon;Ulcerative keratitis;Ultrasound liver abnormal;Umbilical cord thrombosis;Uncinate fits;Undifferentiated connective tissue disease;Upper airway obstruction;Urine bilirubin increased;Urobilinogen urine decreased;Urobilinogen urine increased;Urticaria;Urticaria papular;Urticarial vasculitis;Uterine rupture;Uveitis;Vaccination site thrombosis;Vaccination site vasculitis;Vagus nerve paralysis;Varicella;Varicella keratitis;Varicella post vaccine;Varicella zoster gastritis;Varicella zoster oesophagitis;Varicella zoster pneumonia;Varicella zoster sepsis;Varicella zoster virus infection;Vasa praevia;Vascular graft thrombosis;Vascular pseudoaneurysm thrombosis;Vascular purpura;Vascular stent thrombosis;Vasculitic rash;Vasculitic ulcer;Vasculitis;Vasculitis gastrointestinal;Vasculitis necrotising;Vena cava embolism;Vena cava thrombosis;Venous intravasation;Venous recanalisation;Venous thrombosis;Venous thrombosis in pregnancy;Venous thrombosis limb;Venous thrombosis neonatal;Vertebral artery thrombosis;Vessel puncture site thrombosis;Visceral venous thrombosis;VIth nerve paralysis;VIth nerve paresis;Vitiligo;Vocal cord paralysis;Vocal cord paresis;Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease;Warm type haemolytic anaemia;Wheezing;White nipple sign;XIth nerve paralysis;X-ray hepatobiliary abnormal;Young’s syndrome;Zika virus associated Guillain Barre syndrome.


[It goes on from there.]

*

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 National File

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Court-Ordered Pfizer Documents They Tried to Have Sealed for 55 Years Show 1223 Deaths, 158,000 Adverse Events in 90 Days Post EUA Release
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

 

 

***

La Prise de la Bastille 2021. The Storming of the Bastille 2021

The Storming of the Bastille occurred in Paris on the afternoon of July 14, 1789. The Bastille was a medieval armory, fortress, and political prison. It was the symbol of Royal Authority under the reign of Louis XVI.

“Danser Encore” (April 2021( in Paris confronts the lies of a corrupt French government which serves the interests of the financial establishment.

What is required is to Break the Legitimacy and Authority of  the architects of the infamous Covid Project.

Video

*

Comments

Je suis émue d’entendrer cette chanson de partout par les artistes, les citoyens …Nous on veux continuer à danser encore… et Vivre en Liberté

This is a wonderful Form of protest. It reminds the people not to forget what it means to be human! 💚

Thank you, thank you, thank you beautiful people. What a beautiful exhibition of the essence of what makes us human. I think you’ve made it painfully clear how essential it is for us humans to sing, dance and love with one another. To me this speaks so much louder than any protest. Conviction and belief must be rooted in love.

Merci merci du fond du cœur. J’aurais tellement voulu être là .J’étais émue jusqu’aux larmes .. il n’y a que vous les chanteurs , musiciens, acteurs , peintres, poètes , artistes qui puissent nous consoler , nous élever , nous rappeler le vrai sens de la vie , nous relier à nos émotions , nous amener de la joie. J’écoute votre chanson tous les jours et elle me donne du courage. Que ne l’entendons nous pas sur les ondes au lieu de de toutes es mièvreries . Merci merci merci , revenez nous vite et pourquoi pas à Bruxelles ❤️🙏💃

Chers amis épris de liberté, une chanson fait le tour du monde! Cela vous donne du courage et de la confiance!

***

The Development of a Broad Based Grassroots Network 

What we need is the development of a broad based grassroots network (nationally and internationally) which confronts both the powerful financial elites as well as the corrupt governments involved in carrying out the lockdown and closure of economic activity as a means to combating “V the Virus”.

The logic of the Prise de la Bastille 1789 was to break the legitimacy of France’s Royal Authority.

Today’s Prise de la Bastille 2021″ is not a “protest movement” narrowly defined. We do not seek to negotiate with corrupt government officials.  “The Storming of the Bastille 2021” is a mass movement which questions the legitimacy and authority of Big Money, Big Pharma, the Military Industrial complex. It underscores the criminal nature of the lockdown policies and the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine. It confronts the lies of the politicians in high office.

Its objective is to repeal the fear campaign and break the official “Covid Consensus”. That consensus is extremely fragile because it is based on “a pack of lies”. The truth is a very powerful and peaceful weapon.

More than 7 billion people Worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis.

The legitimacy of politicians and their powerful corporate sponsors must be questioned, including the police state measures adopted to enforce the various policies. (Face masks, social distancing, public gatherings, etc. )

This network would be established (nationally and internationally) at all levels of society, in towns and villages, work places, parishes. Trade unions, farmers organizations, professional associations, business associations, student unions, veterans associations, church groups would be called upon to integrate this movement.

The first task would be to disable the fear campaign and media disinformation as well put an end to the Big Pharma’s Covid vaccination programme.

The corporate media would be directly challenged, without specifically targeting mainstream journalists, many of whom have been instructed to abide by the official narrative.

This endeavour would require a parallel process at the grassroots level, of sensitizing and educating fellow citizens on the nature of  virus, the PCR test, the impacts of the lockdown, the face mask and social distancing.

“Spreading the word” through social media and independent online media outlets will be undertaken bearing in mind that Google as well as Facebook are instruments of censorship.

The creation of such a movement, which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the financial elites as well as the structures of political authority at the national level, is no easy task. It will require a degree of solidarity, unity and commitment unparalleled in World history.

Storming the Bastille 2021 will also require breaking down political and ideological barriers within society (i.e. between political parties) and acting with a single voice.

We must also understand that the “corona project” is an integral part of the U.S. imperial agenda. It has geopolitical and strategic implications. It will also require eventually unseating the architects of this diabolical “pandemic” and indicting them for crimes against humanity.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, May 14, 2021, December 9, 2021

*

Parts of the above text pertaining to The Storming of La Bastille 2021 were published in Chapter XIII of Michel Chossudovsky’s E Book, entitled:

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

***

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. 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

  • Posted in English, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Video: “The Storming of The Bastille 2021”. “Danser Encore”… Breaking the Covid Consensus
  • Tags:

Vaccine Mandates Result from the Abuse of True Science

December 9th, 2021 by Dr. Birsen Filip

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.

***

There is an alarming degree of uniformity between the governments of many western countries when it comes to instituting tyrannical measures like mandatory medical injections at workplaces and vaccine passports. In doing so, they have departed from liberal values and principles, by no longer recognizing or respecting private spheres, personal goals, or individual freedom and rights. They have also ignored the fact that living in a liberal democratic society means the state is limited to a reasonable level of activity or interference that is neither detrimental nor destructive to various types of freedoms, including negative, positive, individual, subjective, and objective freedom.

At this point, it is clear that vaccine passports and mandates have nothing to do with safeguarding public health or mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic. Rather, they are purely coercive measures designed to punish disobedience by taking away one’s ability to provide for his family, shape his future, engage in activities that bring him happiness, and live his life in ways that allow him to flourish and advance his well-being.

That is to say, they are effectively capable of destroying people’s dreams, goals, self-respect, self-esteem, self-development, aspirations, etc. They are also damaging for public health and the common good, as a society cannot provide a safe, secure and healthy environment for its citizens without an adequate number of people to provide key social services, including police forces, health care workers, fire fighters, sanitation workers, and teachers.

Recent data from Israel, the UK, and other nations with high vaccination rates suggest that the COVID-19 injections are of very limited effectiveness in terms of preventing the spread of the virus, and it is unclear how long any personal protection that they might provide actually lasts. In the case of Israel, the poor performance of the COVID-19 injections has resulted in a third injection being pushed on people that were previously thought to be fully vaccinated (i.e., two shots).

Consequently, the Israeli Health Ministry recently reported that, in less than one year, “nearly 90% of people over the age of 60 had their third shot, compared with around 70% of people ages 40-49 and fewer than 50% of people ages 20-29.” Israel managed to achieve such high inoculation rates for third doses despite the fact that Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech are still in the process of conducting or setting up clinical trials to test the effects of COVID-19 booster shots on people.

The COVID-19 injections did not follow the proper evaluation and approval processes for creating an effective vaccine, which typically takes between 10 to 15 years. Nonetheless, anyone that has dared to question the unknown future risks of these new vaccines, criticize vaccine passports and mandates, or point out inconvenient details like the fact that fully vaccinated people can still get infected and transmit the virus to others, has been publicly shamed and labelled as “unscientific,” “anti-vaxxer,” “selfish,” and “conspiracy theorists.” No one has been spared from the attacks of vaccine zealots, including professors, politicians, scientists, lawyers, nurses and doctors. Essentially, divergent views, ideas, approaches and perspectives, which are crucial for the progress and evolution of science, have been ridiculed or strongly rejected in the mainstream narrative. In fact, this has been true of virtually anyone that supports informed choice over obedience, and freedom over submission.

Totalitarian governments of the pandemic, unelected health experts and biased news reporters have been incessantly glorifying the vaccine mandates, often with religious undertones. In the United States, this has led to the emergence of a “false prophet” in the form of Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose dictates are widely treated with a deference that resembles a “divine pattern” by devoted adherents in a number of countries.

Unfortunately, the faithful followers of this “false prophet” fail to understand that “prophecies are entirely beyond the scope of scientific method.”1 They also might not realize that science is concerned with objective facts and true images of the real world, while simultaneously opposing fear, hate, subjective opinions, coercion, faith and revelation. In fact, adherents of true scientific approaches renounce faith, revelation, and divine patterns on the basis that science explores the unknown “to establish what is,” rather than to “dictate what ought to be and what ends people should aim at.”2 They are of the opinion that “no science can tell anyone what one wants, what one should uphold, what one should grind into the dust.”3 Accordingly, any true scientist would regard vaccine mandates as wholly unscientific.

The development of science throughout history has frequently featured significant disagreements between scientists on a wide range of issues, including concepts, priorities, principles, methodologies, procedures, points of view, explanations, theories, assumptions, approaches, and goals. Such disagreements and doubts have often led to the refutation and abandonment of theories, assumptions, principles, methods, and goals in favor of new ones that emerged. Ultimately, this process has resulted in the expansion of knowledge and realization of progress. That means, in science, progress and “advances consist in finding out” where people had been wrong.4

True scientists are fully aware of what they do not know, and are prone to exercising caution until they acquire more knowledge. They do not hide information and empirical evidence in order to defend certain ideas, or specific products. On the contrary, they would be more than happy “to prove” that their “anticipations were false” and overthrow them.5 It is not the “possession of knowledge, of irrefutable truth, that makes the man of science, but his persistent and recklessly critical quest for truth.”6 True scientists would avoid “rash and premature prejudices” and developments.7 Meanwhile, the treatment of the COVID-19 injections by Dr. Fauci and his followers could be described as idolization, which halts the road to scientific progress. In fact, this sort of idolization is an abuse of science, in that it is the “wrong view of science” that “betrays itself in the craving to be right.”8 Many current western political leaders support the tyranny of abused science, which has played a crucial role in justifying their recently acquired totalitarian powers.

It would appear that the tyrannical leaders of the pandemic and their anointed “false prophets” regard the masses with disdain, believing that they do not possess intelligence or the ability to think critically. Much like “the eugenicists” that came before them, the current crop of unfit tyrannical rulers and “false prophets” have managed to “delude themselves in assuming that they themselves will be called to decide what qualities are to be conserved in the human stock. They are too dull to take into account the possibility that other people might make the choice according to their own value judgments.”9 They have not only concluded that people do not know what is best for themselves, their actions are destroying the progress made over the course of the entire history of Occidental civilization by eliminating various guarantees and protections of freedom, including the constitutions or charters of rights of individual countries, international laws and agreements like the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the labor protections established and defended by trade unions.

People should be weary of the “false prophets” and totalitarian governments of the pandemic, as the “return to the closed society which they advocate is the return to the cage, and to the beasts.”10 Instead of unquestioningly accepting the fictitious oracles of these “false prophets,” individuals should find ways to once again become the makers of their own fates, if they are to breathe and think freely. Prior to the normalization of the present environment of fear, hate, discrimination and division, it would have been unimaginable that the leader of any western country would attempt to suspend so many types of freedom and mandate medical procedures for the entire population, essentially transforming the country into a laboratory. Doing so would have run the risk of landing them in a prison or an insane asylum. The mere existence of this type authority proves that “the forces which generated” Fascism and Nazism are not “dead.”11 Moreover, everybody around the world needs to be cognizant of the fact that if such a ruling party ever managed to gain the full backing of the police and military forces, then “the glorification of violence,” or the violent oppression and liquidation of dissenters, which characterized “the policy of Russian Sovietism, of Italian Fascism and of German Nazism” will become inescapable.12 Accordingly, it might be fitting that any politician who advocates for the destructive, uncivilized, and inhuman policies associated with totalitarian regimes might be called a Bolshevist, Nazi or “fascist psychopath.”

*

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

This article was originally published on Mises Institute.

Birsen Filip holds a Ph.D. in philosophy and master’s degrees in economics and philosophy. She has published numerous articles and chapters on a range of topics, including political philosophy, geo-politics, and the history of economic thought, with a focus on the Austrian School of Economics and the German Historical School of Economics. She is also the author of The Rise of Neo-liberalism and the Decline of Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan, 2020).

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research

Notes

1. Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies. (1945: repr. London: Routledge, 2002).

2. Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1962), p. 539.

3. Joseph Schumpeter, ‘Gustav von Schmoller and the Problems of Today.’ (1926; repr. Journal of Contextual Economics 138: 261 – 304. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot), p. 263.

4. F.A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, ed. Ronald Hamowy, vol. 17 of The Complete Works of F.A. Hayek (1960; repr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011).

5. Karl Popper. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. (1935; repr. London: Routledge, 1992), p.278-279.

6. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, p.281.

7. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, p.278-279.

8. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, p.281.

9. Mises, Socialism, p. 582.

10. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies.

11. Mises, Socialism, p. 578.

12. Mises, Socialism, p. 480, 572.

Featured image is from NVIC

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.

***

 

 

 

Dr Sam White has shown the way to all other medical practitioners with a massive legal win over the corrupted General Medical Council. To achieve this he had to resign first. Let there be no mistake – what he did in the self-sacrifices he made, he did for everyone.

Dr White’s gift to the medical profession is akin to what Oskar Schindler did for German Jews during that holocaust. White is a hero. He will go down in history as a hero – providing those currently controlling everything you see on mainstream media don’t get to write that history.

Trials are coming. They are coming soon. Make sure you are on the right side of history – especially if you are a medical practitioner.

Dr Sam White’s trial

Dr. Sam White’s trial was about freedom of speech. Anyone with gumption knows speaking out about the fake pandemic can be costly in terms of career and social acceptability in an environment where peer-group pressure to go along with the narrative has become the norm. Gumption is used in both its meanings, that is, of commonsense and of courage. Dr. White has these gifts in abundance.

Sadly, many medical practices have chosen the “love of money” route, and prescribed potentially life-threatening and life-changing gene-therapies that are “all-evil” without providing the necessary information for patients to make informed consent choices. Under doctors’ “do no harm” pledge it makes them culpable. Medical practices have become tools of an administrative system which has bribed otherwise decent doctors and nurses in order to boost their incomes, give them more free time and release them from one-to-one patient-doctor consultations.

Most of them know this. No doubt many are happy with their newly-found freedoms and money. There will, however, be those whose conscience is pricking, who are aware that patient-care afforded before the fake pandemic, has all but gone. These are likely to be looking for a way out as the indoctrinated populace is starting to wake up to the scam.

To be effective these doctors need to group together. In force they can turn it around and get us all back to normal – and the sooner the better. They know they have not seen a pandemic. They know the hospitals are half-empty, apart from “vaccine-damaged” individuals labelled as Covid-19 victims. They must also know, because even I know, that people injected with the toxic jabs are being called “unvaccinated” should harmful events occur within a fortnight after the jab – and that’s the period during which most harmful events from injections take place.

What happened?

A summary of Dr. Sam White’s recent history shows that he chose not be a part of the fake medical advice instructing people to go around in masks. He considered this measure to be dangerous, as he did the programme to jab everyone.

“Because of the lies” he resigned as partner in a medical practice after being a practising doctor since 2004. He called the jabs “genetic manipulation” since they are not traditional vaccines but contain a code for the spike protein which appears to be making people “really sick”. He was also critical of use of the PCR test to diagnose Covid-19 which convinced him that it was all a fraud. All very rational.

He resigned in February 2021 and notice expired in June 2021. After that Dr White went public with a video about the danger of masks and the unsafe roll-out of “vaccines”. It very quickly amassed viewings of over a million prompting the NHS, instead of answering his claims, to question his mental health. Dr. Sam wrote an open letter critical of the criminal conduct of those heading the GMC. He was brought before a tribunal on 17 August, but despite a 124 paragraph rebuttal that all of his statements were valid, he was banned from commenting about clinical issues on social media.

In retrospect that was where the GMC made their biggest mistake. They breached his human right to freedom of expression. The chief executive and registrar of the GMC, Charlie Massey, had personally conducted this attack on Dr White’s liberty and should now be compelled to resign. While Sam White’s freedom of speech has, through this judgment, been restored – and cannot be challenged – his right to practice as a doctor can still be taken to a higher court.

Dr. White has done all doctors a huge favour with his victory over the GMC – which in my opinion – like the MRHA – is not fit for purpose. Although Dr. White went out on a limb he did not achieve this victory alone. He had a good legal team behind him, a team which believed in him. Surprisingly, they were not a medical law firm.

Philip Hyland is an employment law solicitor, while the barrister, Francis Hoar, specialises in election, public, commercial and employment law. This doughty team have now opened the door for other law-firms – who like the medics appear to be reluctant to put their jobs on the line.

Hyland is a laid-back and thoughtful man who measures his words very carefully. Of the victory over the GMC he says, that it:

“should enable doctors to speak up about what is happening in hospitals”

Sam White’s legal team are being inundated with “vaccine-damaged” and “vaccine-murder” cases, or potential cases. Sadly, it is not possible for one firm to take on every case – there being so many. Where are the other firms? Are they saluting and “heiling” the establishment while the Schindlers in this new war get on with the job in hand? Surely legal firms would like to return to normal too. Or would they?

Plaintiffs not provided with “informed consent” are advised to follow legal procedures themselves and take out a civil action if they cannot find a firm to do it for them. And it is important that individuals do take action if they, or those they care for, have been damaged by the gene therapies. General practitioners should have warned them of the hazards of untested and unlicensed injections beforehand. If they did not they too are liable under the law.

What Philip Hyland also suggests is that the doctor-patient role has been reversed of late. He spells out the patient’s right to decide on treatment, even when the medical evidence of efficacy seems overwhelming. The patient has the right to choose. That is why employers demanding vaccination of employees are also at risk of future actions against them.

Doctors today, says Mr Hyland, see themselves as having the upper-hand in the treatment of their patients. That is not true. The patient has that right. The patient has always had that right. Though it is a doctor’s duty to make sure the patient is informed of all risks.

MSM guttersniping

After resigning and gaining new-found popularity on social media Dr White embarked on a lonely journey of exposing the truth about what is happening. Mainstream media, owned by those who wish to control everything and everybody, were taking pot-shots at him. In a regional article the BBC went on a main thrust. Using evocative words in its heading the BBC made readers think of Dr. White as being a “misinformation” doctor. It further endorsed this with a sub-heading that his views “Echoed conspiracy theories”. The BBC bias was firmly in the GMC camp – and may even have verged on trying to influence the judgment.

Sally Beck in The Conservative Woman sprang to Dr White’s defence, here and here with a link to his letter to the chief executive of the NHS, Sir Simon Stevens, here. Otherwise Dr. Sam White was pretty much alone through his ordeal with the exception of his legal team, and supportive medics, some of high renown, and new media sites like Bitchute who have given him a platform and also spoken out about the big Covid lie.

After his victory the same BBC, in fairness, gave a balanced and factual report, but again only at regional level. This “fake pandemic”, bear in mind, is all over the world. Do you get the impression there are those who do not want the truth to be spread far and wide?

Yesterday Dr. White took part in broadcast about his victory. He was interviewed by Patrick Christys together with the butting-in bully of constant interruption, Jon Gaunt. Unsurprisingly, smug pro-vaxxer, Gaunt added this clip to his own Twitter account with the message: ‘Oh dear someone forgot to turn their WhatsApp off! This is very funny.’

No, Jon Gaunt, it is not funny at all, and the police have been informed.

As the bully was not butting-in at the time the message appeared, he’s my number one suspect. Did he know it was going to appear?

Anyway, had this fantasy fabrication not occurred the interview would never have been given coverage by MSM.

In a cavalcade of stenography, the sensationalist MSM: Daily Mail, Sun, Metro, Mirror, et al, picked up on this message added by an unknown individual, or individuals. The reason it appeared can only be guessed. Was it to cast doubt on Dr. White’s credentials rather than concentrate on the main points of his legal victory? Was it to stop people learning the truth about the hoax pandemic which threatens to bring the country, even the world, to its knees? Was it to throw Dr. White off track? Whatever the reason it says much more about the press than it does about a good man who has the health concerns of a nation at heart.

Dr. Sam White is now practising as a holistic practitioner, helping among others the “vaccine-damaged”.

*

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.

John Goss is a former toolmaker and technical author with a degree in international relations and a Master of Letters (MLitt).

Featured image is from https://www.drsamwhite.com/about

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.

***

 

A weapons industry trade group that represents companies including Lockheed Martin and Raytheon is thrilled about President Joe Biden’s nominee for the role of lead weapons buyer for the U.S. military. In a statement released November 30, Arnold Punaro, board chairman of the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA), which calls itself a trade association for the ​defense industrial base,” proclaimed that the president ​made the superb choice of nominating Dr. Bill LaPlante to be the undersecretary of Defense for acquisition and sustainment.”

LaPlante is being poached directly from the military industry that is praising him, which he entered after serving in an acquisitions role under the Obama administration, where he was known for shepherding through major (and controversial) programs, such as the acquisition of the F‑35 fighter jet.

By moving from government to industry, then back to government (should the Senate confirm him), all while the weapons industry cheers, LaPlante has spun through a well-trodden revolving door — a career trajectory that is entirely routine, but nonetheless scandalous.

In a November 30 White House statement, President Biden praised LaPlante as a ​seasoned national security leader with nearly four decades of experience in acquisition, technology, sustainment and the defense industrial base.” The president is nominating LaPlante for the role of Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment at the Department of Defense, which has been vacant since Ellen Lord stepped down from the position in January.

Image is from Draper

LaPlante is currently the president and chief executive officer of Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, a contractor for the U.S. military, where he has served since 2020. As recently as November 2, the company announced that it ​has been selected by the U.S. Air Force as one of 55 contractors on a digital engineering contract that aims to increase the service’s ability to work on digital designs of its future platforms.” The price tag is massive, potentially amounting to $46 billion over 11 years, according to the company.

This is just one of numerous contracts with the U.S. military held by Charles Stark Draper Laboratory. The most recent one was announced just 13 days before Biden announced the nomination of LaPlante.

Before Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, LaPlante served as senior vice president and general manager of the Center for National Security at the MITRE Corporation, which also contracts with the U.S. military.

But perhaps most telling is LaPlante’s role as Obama’s Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics from 2014 to 2017. During his tenure, LaPlante prioritized three weapons programs: Northrop Grumman’s B‑21 Long Range Strike-Bomber, Lockheed Martin’s F‑35 fighter jets, and Boeing’s KC-46 tankers, which are used to refuel B‑52 bombers and other aerial attack vessels (though they have a troubled history).

The NDIA, which represents all of the manufacturers of the previously mentioned weapons systems, released a statement gushing about Biden’s nomination of LaPlante, and urging his quick confirmation. Punaro, board chairman of the NDIA, said on November 30, ​LaPlante has a wealth of experience in government service and the responsibilities of this position. We urge his speedy confirmation.”

The relationship between LaPlante and Punaro is not new. In 2014, Punaro introduced LaPlante, then serving on the Obama administration, at an Atlantic Council event that was co-sponsored by NDIA. He praised LaPlante’s ​strong leadership,” calling him ​a doer, not a ditherer.” Punaro emphasized, ​He’s a true believer in the two-way street with industry.”

At the 2014 event, LaPlante identified the B‑21, F‑35 and KC-46 programs as the priorities of his tenure, saying they are ​critical to the future of the Air Force literally for decades to come.” He emphasized his partnerships and frequent communication with CEOs of weapons companies, addressing by name those gathered in the room.

Upon nominating him, Biden praised LaPlante’s role in advancing these weapons programs, singling out the fact that he ​forged a path forward” on the B‑21 bomber. The development, production and operation of this program is expected to cost $200 billion over the course of 30 years. (The program is still in the engineering stage.)

The U.S. acquisition of F‑35s, meanwhile, has been the subject of fierce protests over the fighter jets’ environmental harms, human toll and astronomical costs. In 2019, a spokesperson for Operation Inherent Resolve, the name of the U.S. military campaign against ISIS, boasted that F‑35s and F‑15s had been used to drop 80,000 pounds of bombs on Iraq’s Qanus Island, located in the Salah ad Din Province.

Punaro isn’t the only weapons industry representative happy about LaPlante’s nomination. Herbert ​Hawk” Carlisle, head of the NDIA, told Defense News, ​Bill would be an outstanding [acquisition and sustainment] leader. He has a great background and understanding of the industry, which also has a high and deep respect for him.”

LaPlante is in good company. In July, the president announced the nomination of Andrew Hunter, also an Obama administration Department of Defense alum, for the role of assistant Air Force secretary for acquisition, technology and logistics. Hunter is a senior fellow for the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a think tank that receives funding from weapons companies, including Lockheed Martin and Boeing. (Weapons companies often fund think tanks that advanceindustry policy objectives, through a more academic and seemingly ​above the fray” approach.) Biden has also nominated Gabe Carmarillo, senior vice president of the Army business unit for Science Applications International Corp., a weapons manufacturer, for the role of undersecretary of the Army.

NDIA is urging the swift confirmation of these nominees as well.

Direct military industry ties go all the way up the Biden administration’s cabinet: The Secretary of Defense, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, served on the board of directors for Raytheon. What makes LaPlante’s connections so noteworthy is just how unremarkable his nomination is — any controversy about his industry ties has been entirely absent from public discourse.

It’s dubious that there is such a thing as a ​good” buyer of weapons for the U.S. military, arguably the most violent institution on Earth. But the fact that the next prospective one is drowning in military industry largesse, reveals a great deal about what keeps this institution growing — and who benefits.

As Alex Y. Ding, co-director of organizing at Dissenters, a youth anti-militarism organization, puts it, ​Executives representing U.S. military contractors, including Draper Laboratories’ LaPlante, are often tapped to be in high level positions in the Pentagon, or in government departments that oversee security and defense. And our elected officials empower them by writing blank checks, and agreeing to let them operate with little to no accountability to us.”

*

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

Sarah Lazare is web editor and reporter for In These Times. She tweets at @sarahlazare.

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 Saudi-led coalition has recently tried to push back after the Houthis, as Ansar Allah is known, had gained significant territories in Yemen’s strategic Marib province. However, such Saudi attempts, as expected provoked a harsh response. Riyadh’s intense air raids on Houthi military targets, as well as civilian facilities, at the end of November, could not go unpunished.

On the night of December 7, Saudi citizens did not sleep well, as the country suffered an intence air attack of unprecedented scale from neighboring Yemen.

At least 25 kamikaze drones and a large number of ballistic missiles were fired on the kingdom’s strategic infrastructure facilities in Riyadh, Jeddah, Taif, Jizan, Najran and Asir regions.

According to the speaker of the Yemeni Armed Forces, six Sammad-3 drones and a number of Zulfikar ballistic missiles hit the Ministry of Defense, King Khalid Airport and other military targets in Riyadh.Six Sammad-2 and Sammad-3 drones targeted the King Fahd Air Base in Taif and Aramco in Jeddah, while five Sammad-1 and Sammad-2 drones targeted military sites in Abha, Jizan and Asir. Eight Qasef-2K drones and a large number of ballistic missiles targeted sensitive sites in Abha, Jizan and Najran.

The Saudi air defense systems managed to intercept most of them, while some fell without reaching their targets.

The Yemeni Armed Forces politely called to all Saudi citizens to stay away from military areas and sites. Thus, new air attacks should be expected in the near future.

In its turn, the Saudi-led coalition does not bother to warn Yemeni civilians about upcoming airstrikes. No matter, as they are carried out on a daily basis, violating the UN-backed agreement. The Liaison and Coordination Officers’ Operations Room that is loyal to Ansar Allah, reported 134 ceasefire violations in al-Hudaydah on December 7 alone.

Meanwhile, military and spy drones of the coalition were launched over Hays, Al-Jarrahi and Al-Jabalah. But not all of them came back. A US-made Scan Eagle spy drone was shot down by the Yemeni air defenses over the Juba region, south of Ma’rib province.

According to the United Nations the number of victims in the Yemen’s war may reach 377 thousand by the end of the year, making the conflict the bloodiest one in the XXI century. Such a big number of casualties are not due to the regular air attacks and drone wars, but to fierce clashes on the ground and deadly war consequences like famine.

While the drones and missiles are pounding facilities in both countries, bloody clashes between the houthis and Saudi-led forces continue in the Hays district and in the north of Jubah district with no significant advance by any side in the recent days.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

“Canada 1984” and the Nonsensical Covid Narrative

December 9th, 2021 by Mark Taliano

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.

***

George Orwell described in his foreboding novel “1984” how Newspeak created a dramatic decrease in the quantity and quality of words, coupled with a dramatic rejection of the meaning of words, with the intended goal of creating barriers to meaningful communication.

Newspeak variants are manifesting themselves in Canada now. Hence, when someone expresses a reasonable alternative to the nonsensical Establishment COVID narrative, he or she is de-platformed, or smeared, and the reasonable narrative is sent to the “memory hole” of non-existence.

Similarly, Big Pharma-captured regulatory bodies such as the WHO and the CDC have given false meanings to words such as “pandemic” and “vaccine” and “natural immunity” with a view to enabling their false narratives and their agenda of mass injections.

Just as Orwell’s “Ministry of Love” is a setting for ghastly torture and hatred, so too have Canadian Ministries and institutions devolved to the polar opposite of their intended purposes. The Ministry of Health, for example, as it coerces Canadians to accept dangerous experimental injections, even as it endorses therapeutic nihilism, would now be more accurately described as the Ministry of Ill-Health.

The Great Reset, as named by Klaus Schwab and his peers, would more aptly be described as the Great Poisoning (1) when the tally of jab “adverse events”, including deaths, is tallied.

Similarly, the “common good” as preached by Globalists and their marionettes would more accurately be described as the “destruction of the commons” as masses are indoctrinated to practice anti-social distancing, masking, and myriad other COVID measures that impose social segregation and apartheid.

The fabricated destruction of economies globally, supposedly a consequence of “COVID”, is more accurately described by Catherine Austin Fitts as “Economic Piratization” since vast flows of monies are being transferred at a dizzying speed, behind shrouds of chaos and confusion, from low and middle income classes to the billionaire classes. (2)

Finally, as for “democracy and freedom”, masked and jabbed Canadian politicians are doing their best to ensure that those two abstractions never bloom again.

The ultimate goal of Newspeak is to render practioners and audiences alike into a state of unconsciousness. Canadian Newspeak is the velvet glove concealing globalist-imposed totalitarianism. In far too many cases, Canadians remain unconscious to the real sickness enveloping them — and it isn’t COVID or any of its variants.

*

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.

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. Visit the author’s website at https://www.marktaliano.net where this article was originally published.

Notes

(1) “The Trueman Show #51 Catherine Austin Fitts on COVID and “Piratization”, www.marktaliano.net, The Trueman Show #51 Catherine Austin Fitts on COVID and “Piratization” – Mark Taliano(Accessed 08 December , 2021)

(2) Catherine Austin Fitts, “Catherine Austin Fitts: Plandemic As Part of An Asset-Stripping Project” brandnewtube, (Catherine Austin Fitts: Plandemic As Part of An Asset-Stripping Project (brandnewtube.com) Accessed 08 December, 2021.

Featured image is from Mark Taliano


Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes  the mainstream media narratives on Syria. 

Voices from Syria 

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-1-6

Author: Mark Taliano

Year: 2017

Pages: 128 (Expanded edition: 1 new chapter)

List Price: $17.95

Special Price: $9.95 

Click to order

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 de facto Russian-Indian hemispheric-wide “balancing” alliance that was agreed to during this week’s Putin-Modi Summit is one of the most significant diplomatic developments this century thus far. It’s truly a global geostrategic game-changer because of the irreplaceable role that it aims to play in the ongoing US-Chinese New Cold War.

The Globally Significant Summit

Russian President Putin’s visit to New Delhi to meet with Indian Prime Minister Modi was a geostrategically game-changing development in the context of the ongoing New Cold War. The “Partnership for Peace, Progress, and Prosperity” that both sides agreed to amounts to a de facto alliance in all but name and builds upon their 1971 “Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Cooperation” from exactly half a century ago. This 99-point document aims to align both Great Powers’ Eastern Hemispheric-wide “balancing” acts in order to maximally optimize their impact on shaping the dynamics of the emerging Multipolar World Order. It can be regarded as among the most important diplomatic developments of this century thus far and will likely remain relevant for decades.

Background Briefing

The author outlined the contours of their complementary grand strategies in the following pieces:

What comes next is an oversimplified summary of the insight shared above.

Complementary “Balancing” Acts

Basically, Russia and India both aspire to “balance” the consequences of the primarily US-Chinese New Cold War, though they’ve thus far been going about it in different ways: Russia aligned closer to China while India did the same to the US. The mutual suspicions of each other’s grand strategic intent that this prompted were finally resolved earlier this year. Russia and India realized that they can do more if they coordinate their policies. This explains clause 93 of their reaffirmed partnership pact which declares that “The sides agreed to explore mutually acceptable and beneficial areas of cooperation in third countries especially in the Central Asia, South East Asia and Africa.”

The ”Neo-NAM”

That policy informally amounts to an attempt to organize a hemispheric-wide network of “non-aligned” states that share Russia’s and India’s interest in “balancing” between the US and China. In other words, it’s the prototype of the “Neo-NAM” that the author wrote about in May 2020 for the official journal of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO, which is run by the Russian Foreign Ministry). As he explained in the Indian military publication Force two months ago, this is aimed at enabling both Great Powers to flexibly adapting to the constantly changing geostrategic circumstances of the New Cold War through what’s described as their “bi-multipolarity” vision.

Russia’s Indo-Sino “Balancing” Act

It’s crucial to clarify that Russia has no intentions of infringing on China’s interests even if some in India might secretly wish that it would or could at least be tricked into doing so. Rather, the Eurasian Great Power understands that it has the responsibility to play an irreplaceable role in pragmatically managing tensions between its fellow BRICS and SCO partners in order to counteract the US’ incessant attempts to divide and rule them. Moscow appears to have accepted that if this rivalry won’t go away for some time, then the Kremlin must seek to ensure that it doesn’t lead to another Galwan-like conflict which could escalate into an all-out conventional war in the worst-case scenario.

“Military Diplomacy”

With this in mind, Russia is practicing what can be described as “military diplomacy”, or the use of military means to achieve political ends. In this case, it’s exporting equally strategic and high-quality arms to rivals China and India in order to maintain the balance of power between them with a view towards subsequently encouraging them to settle their disputes through political means instead of military ones. This contrasts with the American practice of “military diplomacy”, which attempts to give its preferred partner in any pair of rivals the military edge in order to encourage aggressive attempts to resolve existing disputes in a unilateral way instead of via a series of political compromises.

RIC

The Kremlin’s calculation is that if India is going to arm itself to the teeth anyhow, then it’s better for it to do so with Russian arms than American ones. While China might understandably feel uncomfortable with India’s massive military buildup, it seems to quietly prefer for this to be aided by Russia than the US if it’s seemingly inevitable. That could in turn enable Moscow to more effectively manage Washington’s pernicious divide-and-rule influence over New Delhi and thus hopefully stabilize Eurasian affairs. Proof of this concept in practice was seen late last month during the Russia-India-China (RIC) Foreign Ministers meeting that went ahead despite existing Chinese-Indian tensions likely due to Russia’s mediating role.

New Cold War Dynamics

China doesn’t believe in posing zero-sum choices upon its partners like the US does, but it’ll increasingly be compelled by the New Cold War’s American-influenced hyper-competitive dynamics into accepting that third countries are being pressured to choose between Beijing and Washington. This could place those states in very challenging positions since their cooperation with China is mutually beneficial yet they also fear the US’ Hybrid War wrath if they don’t submit to America’s demands to distance themselves from the People’s Republic as evidenced by the high-profile example that Washington is trying to make out of Ethiopia after its principled refusal to do so.

The Geopolitical “Pressure Valve”

What’s urgently needed is a “pressure valve” for providing such countries with a so-called “third choice” whereby they can hopefully strike a balance between both superpowers without inadvertently offending one or the other. Therein lies the grand strategic significance of the Neo-NAM that the author proposed be jointly led by Russia and India. The first-mentioned is perceived as close to China while the second is seen as closer to the US, yet they’ve nevertheless proven their strategic autonomy through the latest Putin-Modi Summit. Russia continues to arm India to the teeth despite China’s concerns while India continues purchasing Russian arms despite the US’ sanctions threats for doing so.

Hemispheric Reach

Their declaration of intent to cooperate in third countries across Central Asia, Southeast Asia, and Africa significantly involves the greatest theaters of rivalry in the US-Chinese New Cold War and can thus enable these two Great Powers to maximally optimize their complementary hemispheric-wide “balancing” acts. There’s also the chance that they’ll expand their cooperation to include West Asia considering the close relations that they each enjoy with Iran, “Israel”, and the UAE. When one remembers that they also pledged to work closer together in the Russian Arctic and Far East regions, it can be seen that their de facto “balancing” alliance truly encompasses the entire Eastern Hemisphere.

The European Dimension

While it might not have much of a direct impact on Europe in Western Eurasia, it does indeed have a very influential one when it comes to its indirect consequences. The North-South Transport Corridor (NSTC) between them through Iran and Azerbaijan aims to facilitate EU-Indian trade via Russia while the possible expansion of the Vladivostok-Chennai Maritime Corridor (VCMC) to include the Northern Sea Route (NSR) through the Arctic for connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans could achieve this economic end through maritime means for complementing the NSTC’s mainland component.

Towards A Russian-American “Non-Aggression Pact”

Some skeptics might question the political viability of Russia facilitating EU-Indian trade (whether through mainland or maritime means) considering the heightened tensions between Moscow and the West, but it’s here where they should contemplate the intention behind the last two Putin-Biden Summits. They’re aimed at responsibly regulating their rivalry so that they can ultimately reach a so-called “non-aggression pact”. This outcome would be mutually beneficial since it would enable the US to redirect more of its military and other resources to the “Indo-Pacific” for more aggressively “containing” China while restoring EU-Russian relations for improving one another’s struggling economies.

The US’ Anti-Russian “Deep State” Faction

This scenario remains dependent on the Biden Administration’s ability to manage the anti-Russian faction of the US’ permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) that’s trying to sabotage those two’s hoped-for “non-aggression pact” by leveraging its network of influence in the Baltic States, Poland, and Ukraine in order to provoke another East-West crisis. Right now, its anti-Chinese rival is predominant with respect to formulating the US’ grand strategy as evidenced by the last two Putin-Biden Summits. This change in the US’ “deep state” dynamics was former US President Trump’s most enduring legacy and was inherited by Biden as was just argued.

Concluding Thoughts

Back to the topic of this analysis, the de facto Russian-Indian hemispheric-wide “balancing” alliance that was agreed to during this week’s Putin-Modi Summit is one of the most significant diplomatic developments this century thus far. It’s truly a global geostrategic game-changer because of the irreplaceable role that it aims to play in the ongoing US-Chinese New Cold War. It’s of the highest importance that observers acknowledge this emerging reality in order to formulate the most effective policies for their countries to adapt to it. The Russian-Indian axis is now one of the most important in the world and will likely remain so for decades, perhaps even for the rest of the 21st century.

*

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

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Malcolm X, also known as Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, was assassinated on February 21, 1965 at the Audubon Ballroom in the Washington Heights section of Manhattan in New York City.

There were three people arrested, tried and convicted in his murder yet two men have always maintained that they were not guilty in the crime.

During November 2021, the two defendants who served more than twenty years in prison were exonerated by the prosecutor’s office in New York. The third defendant in the case, Talmadge Hayer, also known as Thomas Hagan (now known as Mujahid Abdul Halim), confessed to the murder of Malcolm X although he refused in the 1966 murder trial to reveal the names of the others involved in the assassination squad.

Later during the early 1980s, Talmadge Hayer (Halim) gave up the names of at least four other people who were involved in the gunning down of Malcolm X in 1965. Halim, was released after serving more than 45 years and the other two, Norman Butler (now known as Muhammad Aziz, who is still alive, and Thomas Johnson (later known as Khalil Islam), who is deceased, were declared by New York prosecutors as not being involved in the actual shooting death of Malcolm X on that fateful day in the winter of 1965.

Although the prosecutors have now declared along with the courts that Butler and Johnson were not in the Audubon Ballroom when Malcolm was killed, the question remains as to why after 56 years the actual assassins were not brought to justice? Apparently, the names of the actual killers who accompanied Hayer were known to the New York police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the immediate aftermath of the assassination due to informant reports and eyewitness accounts.

The FBI and the New York Police Department through its Bureau of Security Services (BOSS) engaged in consistent surveillance of Malcolm X, the Nation of Islam, the Muslim Mosque, Inc. and the Organization of Afro-American Unity (OAAU), and any other grouping in which Malcolm was associated. At least one BOSS agent was present at the time of the assassination. Gene Roberts had infiltrated the OAAU and routinely reported back to the NYPD about the activities of the organization.

A recent report on the exoneration of Aziz and Islam indicated that several FBI informants were present in the venue where Malcolm X was slain. After the shooting on February 21, 1965, the emergency services did not appear at the scene, necessitating the followers of Malcolm X and the OAAU to go to the hospital located across the street from the Audubon to retrieve a stretcher to transport the revolutionary leader to the emergency room. He was admitted as “John Doe” and a medical spokesperson said they were not able to revive him after sustaining several gunshot wounds to the chest and other areas of his body.

Halim, who was captured at the scene by Malcolm X’s adherents, was released from detention in 2010. He has maintained a low profile since his parole while the actual assassins, which were reported to have been from the Newark Mosque, remained free until their deaths.

Role of the U.S. Government in the Assassination

The real question which was not answered through the exoneration of two of the defendants, is why did the NYPD and the FBI not follow-up on the information provided by their own informants present in the Audubon Ballroom and other witnesses? What is known is that these law-enforcement agencies had conducted widespread surveillance, wiretapping and other forms of spying on Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam both before and after the split between the two entities during late 1963 and early 1964. (See this)

After the establishment of the MMI and the OAAU during the spring and summer of 1964, the tracking of Malcolm X and the NOI continued. From April 1964 to the end of his life, Malcolm X had traveled extensively in Africa, the Middle East and Europe. He had visited over a dozen countries where he met with government leaders, religious figures and grassroots communities in all of the countries where he traveled.

Malcolm X believed during the time, as reflected in his writings and speeches, that he was followed by the intelligence services of the U.S. government. De-classified documents from the U.S. administration reveal that his activities were closely monitored by not only the FBI. The State Department, military intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) were involved in attempts to undermine the efforts of Malcolm X as he sought international support for the liberation struggle of African American in the U.S.

A recent article in the New York Times says of the surveillance:

“One F.B.I. report from Sept. 28, 1965, even contains a description of the man whom some experts on the assassination have concluded was probably the assassin who wielded a shotgun — William Bradley. That report gives a description of Mr. Bradley, who was 27 years old at the time, that matches the one given by a defense witness of the shooter who had a shotgun.”

This same report continues by noting that:

“’He had been a lieutenant in the Newark mosque and was known as a ‘strongman’ there,’ the F.B.I. report on Mr. Bradley said. ‘He was a machine gunner in the Marine Corps.’ At least one of the witnesses at the trial was an informant for the F.B.I., according to the documents cited in the motion. One document, dated Feb. 25, 1965, said the bureau had ordered its local offices not to disclose to the New York police the fact that any witnesses were federal informants. In addition, several F.B.I. reports indicated that, on the orders of the agency’s director, J. Edgar Hoover, informants were told not to disclose their relationship with the F.B.I. when talking to the New York police and prosecutors about the murder, according to a footnote in the motion. The Police Department documents include descriptions of undercover detectives having been present in the ballroom, at least one of whom was there at the time of the murder. The report may have been referring to Detective Gene Roberts, an undercover officer who, it later came out, was working as a member of Malcolm X’s security detail.”

These revelations since 1965 indicate clearly that a massive cover-up occurred in the aftermath of the assassination. Even Malcolm X said at his last speech at the Audubon on February 15, that the police were well aware of the criminal operations taking place inside the NOI because they had the organization thoroughly infiltrated. He revealed that several undercover police and informants out of guilt had come to him and confessed that they were working for the authorities.

Malcolm X’s Youngest Daughter Found Dead After the Recent Revelations

When Malcolm X was assassinated, his wife, Dr. Betty Shabazz, was expecting twins. They were born months after his death and grew up never knowing their father.

One of the twins, Malikah, was found dead in her Brooklyn apartment on November 22. Police have stated that the death did not appear to be the result of foul play. Malikah Shabazz was found unresponsive by her 24-year-old daughter, Bettih. There has not been any official cause of death announced since the time of her passing.

Malikah, 56, largely lived outside the limelight of the media and public appearances. Several of her other older sisters have become public figures in the theater and literary arenas through speaking engagements, performances and book publishing.

The death of Malikah Shabazz under unexplained circumstances just days after the exoneration of Aziz and Islam, continues the family tragedies which were spawned by the targeting and assassination of her father. Malcolm X sacrificed his life in order to advance the liberation struggles of African Americans and people throughout the globe. His legacy will continue to be a source of inspiration to working and oppressed people internationally.

*

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 Abayomi Azikiwe

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Assassination of Malcolm X: The “Actual Assassins” Known to the FBI were Never Brought to Justice
  • Tags:

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

President Biden, in full mood of marking “red lines” against Russia and Ukraine in a virtual meeting with Vladimir Putin, does not forget the importance of boycotting China’s Winter Olympic Games.

It’s a diplomatic boycott only, so says Madame Jen Psaki, White House press secretary. Nevertheless, she and Biden are wishing the US sport-participants best of luck and they will support them throughout. So, they say. US athletes are allowed to part take in the games. It’s the US diplomacy that is held back. It’s a hypocrisy that only Washington – and perhaps Brussels as EU and NATO headquarters – can muster. Now Australia has also joined the nefarious club. See this.

Do they seriously hope the rest of the world will follow suit, because they want to be “with” the US and not be perceived as “against” the Big Empire?

Perhaps some will, indeed, be copy-cats. Fear is the name of the game, be it for Covid or political sanctions. Western humanity is trembling from fear. So much fear, that the thought process has literally stopped functioning according to logic, even by the tyrants themselves.

Ms. Psaki explained the boycott as a response to “Beijing’s human rights violations”, adding what she calls “genocide and crimes against humanity”. She was of course referring to the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), a landlocked autonomous region of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), by surface the largest single territory of China, located in the northwest of the country, close to Central Asia.

It is well possible that the Press Secretary doesn’t know what she is talking about, but is just repeating the current narrative.

There is a set of standard accusations that are regularly being launched against China, with no substance at all. This is one of them. See this “Xinjiang in My Eyes”: Debunking the Lies and Anti-China Propaganda Focusing on China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.

Suffice it to say that the Xinjiang region is a pivotal point for the famous Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), connecting China with Europe via Central Asia, as well as with the Indian Ocean.

Washington sees China, and especially the BRI, as an economic threat on their perceived supremacy, therefore does everything to denigrate China, and especially the Xinjiang region, where about 12 million Uyghurs live, mostly Muslims, out of a total population of 26 million.

What is not said by Washington, is that the CIA and other US secret services recruit Uyghur Muslims, train them and send them to the Middle East to fight the Jihad, mostly in Syria, but also in Iraq. If and when they return, they were trained to create havoc and instability in Xinjiang. The Chinese Government is re-educating them for reintegration in the Uyghur society of the Xinjiang region.

The other area of China on which Washington and its western allies like to attack Beijing, is Taiwan, a Chinese territory. When the Kuomintang, the Chinese Nationalist Party, lost the civil war against Chairman Mao’s Communist Party in 1949, they fled to the island of Taiwan which they occupied ever since. However, Taiwan is part of China. In October 1971, the UN General Assembly passed a Resolution that stopped recognizing Taiwan as China and, instead, decided the PRC would represent China, implying that Taiwan was part of the Peoples Republic of China. It looks like the US have stayed back in history, still looking at Taiwan as an independent country and their ally.

As President Xi has mentioned on several occasions, Taiwan will be integrated into the PRC in a peaceful way. Outside interferences, like by the United States and some of their European allies, have no place in these negotiations.  It is a Chinese internal affair. Just imagine, China getting involved and taking sides in US internal affairs. Unimaginable!

What also seems to escape most western powers, still fond of the “freedom seeking” US of A, is the Unites States abysmal human rights record. It is so unabashed and shameful, the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, as well as Guantanamo in Cuba, are well known as America’s torture chambers, where human rights do not exist.

And these are just two out of some 100 plus US prison camps where human rights are not only trampled by military boots, but where in most cases they are openly abolished. Torture is the name of the game. Only an extreme hypocrite could accuse any other country of human rights abuse.

Earlier this week, Beijing announced stern countermeasures in case the US will indeed implement their “diplomatic” boycott of the Chinese Olympic Winter Games.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Zhao Lijian, said that China would see such a move as outright political provocation. However, he did not offer any details as to how China might respond to the “diplomatic boycott”. He also said that after the virtual summit last month between Presidents Xi and Biden, no American diplomats, nor the President were invited to the Olympic Games. This means, without saying so, the “boycott” is a mere US public relations farce.

Western supporters of the move hope to draw falsely negative attention to China’s human rights record. Even American athletes may be “trained” to openly accuse the Chinese human rights record, reproaching them of Uyghur tortures, although they have no clue what they are talking about, because they would simply parrot messages, without knowing what they are actually saying.

In fact, most countries expected to toe the line given by Biden, don’t know the truth, or they do know the truth but are keen to stick to their hypocrite master’s lies.

So, Beijing has a number of avenues to “boycott” the US back – as in “Build Back Better”. For example, by trade sanctions. Mainland China and Taiwan are the largest producers of semi-conductors used in modern cars. If China holds back on producing and / or supplying semi-conductors, the entire western car industry comes to a halt. Supply shortages, due to Covid-caused delivery-chain interruptions, are already affecting the Japanese and South Korean car industry. Currently, the Toyota car production is basically at a standstill.

The west also depends 70% to 90% on medical equipment (70%) and medication (up to 90%) on China. With a ferocious pandemic being sold to the people in the west, a pandemic that by reducing the human immune system, will create all kinds of diseases that require regular medication, shortages of medication may be problematic. A supply chain interruption may trigger not only consternation, but outright disaster.

Is it possible that Biden and his top advisors do not understand what China’s countermeasures could mean to a US car industry that is already largely outsourced? Let alone to the health sector, plagued by a western manufactured disease that is currently “ravaging the west”, and is depending badly on Chinese made medication.

*

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 (CRG). He is also is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

What Putin Really Told Biden

December 9th, 2021 by Pepe Escobar

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

So Russian President Vladimir Putin, by himself, and United States President Joe Biden, surrounded by aides, finally had their secret video link conference for two hours and two minutes – with translators placed in different rooms. 

That was their first serious exchange since they met in person in Geneva last June – the first Russia-US summit since 2018. For global public opinion, led to believe a “war” in Ukraine was all but imminent, what’s left is essentially a torrent of spin.

So let’s start with a simple exercise focusing on the key issue of the video link – Ukraine – contrasting the White House and Kremlin versions of what transpired.

The White House: Biden made it “clear” to Putin that the US and allies will respond with “decisive economic and other measures” to a military escalation in Ukraine. At the same time, Biden called on Putin to de-escalate around Ukraine and “return to diplomacy.”

Kremlin: Putin offered Biden to nullify all restrictions on the functioning of diplomatic missions. He remarked that cooperation between Russia and the US is still in an “unsatisfactory” state.

He urged the US not to shift “responsibility on the shoulders of Russia” for the escalation of the situation around Ukraine.

The White House: The US will expand military aid to Ukraine if Russia takes steps against it.

Kremlin: Putin told Biden that Russia is interested in obtaining legally fixed guarantees excluding NATO’s eastward expansion and the deployment of offensive strike systems in Russia’s neighboring countries.

The White House: Biden did not give Putin any commitments that Ukraine will remain outside NATO.

Minsk or bust 

Now for what really matters: the red line.

What Putin diplomatically told Team Biden, sitting at their table, is that Russia’s red line – no Ukraine in NATO – is unmovable. The same applies to Ukraine turned into a hub of the Pentagon’s empire of bases and hosting NATO weaponry.

Washington may deny it ad infinitum, but Ukraine is part of Russia’s sphere of influence. If nothing is done to force Kiev to abide by the Minsk Agreement, Russia will “neutralize” the threat on its own terms.

The root cause of all this drama, absent from any NATO narrative, is straightforward: Kiev simply refuses to respect the February 2015 Minsk Agreement.

According to the deal, Kiev should grant autonomy to Donbass via a constitutional amendment, referred to as “special status”; issue a general amnesty; and start a dialogue with the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.

Over the years, Kiev fulfilled less than zero of these commitments – while the NATO media machine kept spinning that Russia was violating Minsk. Russia is not even mentioned (italics mine) in the agreement.

Moscow always respected the Minsk Agreement, which establishes Donbass as an integral, autonomous part of Ukraine. Russia has made it very clear, over and over again, it has no interest whatsoever in promoting regime change in Kiev.

Before the video link, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov remarked: “Putin will listen to Biden’s proposals on Ukraine ‘with great interest.’” Even the White House did not propose for Kiev to obey the Minsk Agreement. So regardless of what Biden may have said, Putin, pragmatically, will adopt a “wait and see” approach, and then act accordingly.

In the run-up to the video link, maximum hype revolved on Washington seeking to stop Nord Stream 2 if Russia “invades” Ukraine.

What never transpires out of the “invasion” narrative, repeated ad nauseam across NATO, is that hawks overseeing an immensely polarized US, corroded from the inside, desperately need a war in what military analyst Andrei Martyanov calls “country 404,” a play on the error message when an online page or link doesn’t exist.

The crux of the matter is that European vassals must not have access to Russian energy: only American LNG.

And that’s what led the most extreme Russophobes in Washington to start threatening sanctions on Putin’s inner circle, Russian energy producers and even disconnecting Russia from SWIFT. All that was supposed to prevent Russia from “invading” Country 404.

US Secretary of State Tony Blinken – present at the video link – said a few days ago in Riga, Latvia, that “if Russia invades Ukraine,” NATO will respond “with a range of high impact economic measures.” As for NATO, it’s far from aggressive: just a “defensive” organization.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, in early December at the OCSE Ministerial Council meeting in Stockholm, was already warning that “strategic stability” in Europe was “rapidly eroding.”

Lavrov said:

“NATO refuses to consider our proposals on de-escalation of tensions and prevention of dangerous incidents … On the contrary, the alliance’s military infrastructure is moving closer to Russia’s borders … The nightmarish scenario of military confrontation is returning.”

So no wonder the heart of the matter for Moscow is NATO encroachment. The “invasion” narrative is crass fake news sold as fact. Even the CIA’s William Burns admitted that US intel had no intel to “conclude” that Russia will dutifully answer the War Inc prayers and finally “invade” Ukraine.

Still, that did not prevent a German sensationalist rag from presenting the full contours of the Russian blitzkrieg, when the actual story is the US and NATO attempting to push “country 404” to commit suicide by attacking the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.

That legally binding guarantee

It’s idle to expect the video link to produce practical results. As NATO remains mired in concentric crises, the current level of high tension between NATO and Russia is a gift from heaven in terms of maintaining the convenient narrative of an external Slavic evil. It’s also an extra bonus for the military-industrial-intelligence-media think tank complex.

The tension will continue to simmer without becoming incandescent only if NATO does not expand in any shape or form inside Ukraine. Diplomats in Brussels routinely comment that Kiev will never be accepted as a NATO member. But if things can get worse, they will: Kiev will become one of those NATO special partners, a desperately poor, hungry for territory, rogue actor.

Putin demanding from the US – which runs NATO – a written, legally binding guarantee that the alliance will not advance further eastward towards Russian borders is the game-changer here.

Team Biden cannot possibly deliver: they would be eaten alive by the “War Incestablishment”. Putin studied his history and knows that Daddy Bush’s “promise” to Gorbachev on NATO expansion was just a lie. He knows those who run NATO will never commit themselves in writing.

So that allows Putin a full range of options to defend Russian national security. “Invasion” is a joke; Ukraine, rotting from the inside, consumed by fear, loathing and poverty, will remain in limbo, while Donetsk and Lugansk will be progressively interconnected with the Russian Federation.

There will be no NATO war on Russia – as Martyanov himself has extensively demonstrated NATO wouldn’t last five minutes against Russian hypersonic weapons. And Moscow will be focused on what really matters geoeconomically and geopolitically: solidifying the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and the Greater Eurasia Partnership.

*

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

This article was originally published on Asia Times.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Russian President Vladimir Putin (ID1974/Shutterstock) and President Joe Biden (Stratos Brilakis/shutterstock)

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

Our thanks to Rio Rozoff for bringing this statement by Nuland to our attention. Is America preparing to wage war on Russia? The use of nuclear weapons are on the drawing board of the Pentagon and NATO.

***

No commentary required. Why Nuland added a second “y” to Alexei Navalny’s last name – after the Ukrainian fashion – is, in the words of Thomas Browne, although a puzzling question not beyond all conjecture.

Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland
Opening Statement on “Update on U.S.- Russia Policy”
U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Washington, D.C.
December 7, 2021

Chairman Menendez, Ranking Member Risch, Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss our shared concern about the build-up of Russian forces on Ukraine’s borders and in occupied Crimea.

***

Russia has stepped up planning for potential further military action in Ukraine, positioning close to 100 thousand troops around Ukraine’s Eastern, and Northern borders as well as from the South via the Crimean Peninsula.

Russia’s plans and positioning of assets also include the means to destabilize Ukraine from within, and aggressive information operations in an attempt to undermine Ukrainian stability and social cohesion, and to pin blame for any potential escalation on Kyiv and NATO nations.

We don’t know whether Russian President Putin has made a decision to attack Ukraine or overthrow its government but we do know he is building the capacity to do so. Much of this comes right out of Putin’s 2014 playbook but this time, it is on a much larger and more lethal scale….

First, we are engaging Russia at all levels to urge Moscow to pull back, and settle any concerns with Ukraine or with the Trans-Atlantic community through diplomacy. The President sent CIA Director Burns to Moscow with that message in early November; Secretary Blinken engaged FM Lavrov last Thursday…

We are also warning of severe costs and consequences, including deploying far harsher economic measures than we have used before, if Russia chooses the path of confrontation and military action.

Second, we are engaging intensively with President Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian government to strengthen their defenses, support their preparedness….The United States’ commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence is unwavering.

Third, during Secretary Blinken’s meetings at NATO and the OSCE last week and in countless bilateral meetings at all levels, we are working with Allies and partners to send a united message: Russia must deescalate….

But if Russia attacks Ukraine, we will be united in imposing severe consequences on Moscow for its actions, including high-impact economic measures we have refrained from using in the past.

At NATO, SACEUR and national military authorities are also preparing advice on necessary steps to improve resilience and harden defenses in Allied territory.

We will continue to have deep disagreements with the Kremlin on human rights, Mr. Navalnyy’s treatment, press and NGO freedom, Belarus, cyber threats, election interference, detaining American citizens, embassy staffing and many other things….

emphasis added

*

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.

Rick Rozoff, renowned author and geopolitical analyst, actively involved in opposing war, militarism and interventionism for over fifty years. He manages the Anti-Bellum and For peace, against war website

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

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.

***

‘If immune erosion occurs after two doses and just a few months, how can we exclude the possibility that effects of an untested “booster” will not erode more rapidly and to a greater extent?’

A Lancet study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated people in Sweden was conducted among 1.6 million individuals over nine months. It showed that protection against symptomatic COVID-19 declined with time, such that by six months, some of the more vulnerable vaccinated groups were at greater risk than their unvaccinated peers.

Doctors are calling this phenomena in the repeatedly vaccinated “immune erosion” or “acquired immune deficiency”, accounting for elevated incidence of myocarditis and other post-vaccine illnesses that either affect them more rapidly, resulting in death, or more slowly, resulting in chronic illness.

COVID vaccines are not traditional vaccines. Rather, they cause cells to reproduce one portion of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the spike protein. The vaccines thus induce the body to create spike proteins. A person only creates antibodies against this one limited portion (the spike protein) of the virus. This has several downstream deleterious effects.

First, these vaccines “mis-train” the immune system to recognize only a small part of the virus (the spike protein). Variants that differ, even slightly, in this protein are able to escape the narrow spectrum of antibodies created by the vaccines.

Second, the vaccines create “vaccine addicts,” meaning persons become dependent upon regular booster shots, because they have been “vaccinated” only against a tiny portion of a mutating virus. Australian Health Minister Dr. Kerry Chant has stated that COVID will be with us forever and people will “have to get used to” taking endless vaccines. “This will be a regular cycle of vaccination and revaccination.”

Third, the vaccines do not prevent infection in the nose and upper airways, and vaccinated individuals have been shown to have much higher viral loads in these regions. This leads to the vaccinated becoming “super-spreaders” as they carry extremely high viral loads.

In addition, the vaccinated become more clinically ill than the unvaccinated. Scotland reported that the infection fatality rate in the vaccinated is 3.3 times the unvaccinated, and the risk of death if hospitalized is 2.15 times the unvaccinated.

A June report on Israel’s Channel 12 News revealed that in the months since the vaccines were rolled out, 6,765 people who received both shots had contracted coronavirus, while epidemiological tracing revealed an additional 3,133 people contracted COVID-19 from those vaccinated individuals.

Meanwhile, New England Journal of Medicine researchers have found that autoimmune response to the coronavirus spike protein may last indefinitely: “Ab2 antibodies binding to the original receptor on normal cells therefore have the potential to mediate profound effects on the cell that could result in pathologic changes, particularly in the long term — long after the original antigen itself has disappeared.” These antibodies produced against the coronavirus spike protein could be responsible for the current unprecedented wave of myocarditis and neurological illnesses, and even more problems in the future.

Indefinite uncontrolled autoimmune response to the coronavirus spike protein may produce a wave of antibodies called anti-idiotype antibodies or Ab2s that continue to damage human bodies long after clearing either Sars-Cov-2 itself or those spike proteins that the shots cause the body’s cells to produce, explained former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson.

Spike protein antibodies may themselves produce a second wave of antibodies, called anti-idiotype antibodies or Ab2s. Those Ab2s may modulate the immune system’s initial response by binding with and destroying the first wave of antibodies.

“Our immune systems produce these antibodies in response to both vaccination and natural infection with COVID,” wrote Berenson. “However – though the researchers do not say so explicitly, possibly because doing so would be politically untenable – spike protein antibody levels are MUCH higher following vaccination than infection. Thus the downstream response to vaccination may be more severe.”

America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Chief Science Officer former Pfizer Vice President Michael Yeadon responded to the research: “This is unprecedented. What is happening is not understood.

“Commentators on Israeli TV have reported that contacts in the Health Ministry have termed this ‘immune erosion’:

“While some are concerned that blood IgG antibodies fall with time, I am not convinced that this is a relevant measure,” Yeadon continued. “Respiratory virus infection begins in the lungs and nasopharynx. Neither are protected by blood antibodies, which are molecules too large to diffuse into airways tissue. What protects against infection and initial viral replication is secretory IgA antibodies and T-cells in airways, neither of which have been studied in any efficacy trial.

“The empirical data are very worrying. In most countries now, high fractions of the population have been vaccinated. If the Swedish study is a guide, we should anticipate seeing this immune erosion more widely. The most concerning aspect of that study is that those most in need of protection are those in whom immune erosion is most marked: the elderly, males, and those with comorbidities.

“Some have used the results of this study to support the widespread use of so-called ‘booster’ shots. It has to be said: No one has any safety data about such a plan. If immune erosion occurs after two doses and just a few months, how can we exclude the possibility that effects of an untested ‘booster’ will not erode more rapidly and to a greater extent? And what then would be the response? A fourth injection. Madness.

“It’s long past time when known safe and effective drug treatments be used as the leading response to symptomatic infection (antivirals, corticosteroids, anti-inflammatories).

“In this way, we don’t expose entire populations to experimental medical interventions when only a very small fraction of the population are at notable risk from this virus, which, all hype aside, is by no means exceptional in its lethality compared with numerous others such as seasonal influenza.”

Yeadon concluded:

“Europe is all but gone. The lights are going out. Austria and Germany now subject their unvaccinated to house arrest. In Greece, the unvaccinated are subject to escalating fines, non-payment of which is converted into prison time. In Lithuania, the unvaccinated are excluded from society. The booster campaigns are running full-pelt everywhere.

“Someone, somewhere knows what’s going to happen. Will immunity-erosion worsen more speedily and to a greater extent after this untested ‘booster’? The U.K. government has already said that the fourth injection is to take place a mere three months after the third. It’s utter madness. Yet such is the hermetic control of media that nothing much emerges into the public consciousness.”

*

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 AFLDS

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.

***

Russian President Vladimir Putin welcomed Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis to the Black Sea city of Sochi on Wednesday to not only enjoy a pleasant and sunny December day, but to also discuss the Cyprus issue, Greek-Turkish tensions in the Eastern Mediterranean and the prospects for cooperation in energy, tourism, trade, cultural exchanges and a host of other sectors.

The meeting comes as both countries are facing different pressures but are in a position to assist each other. The meeting between the two leaders comes at a time when propaganda is being disseminated that Russia is preparing to invade Ukraine. Moscow wants to strengthen relations with individual NATO members like Greece to ensure a consensus is not achieved within the bloc to support Ukraine’s aggression. On the other hand, Greece is still reeling from a decade long economic crisis and faces renewed pressures from the COVID-19 pandemic and high energy prices. Therefore, in this time of mutual crisis, the two leaders sought to meet.

Greek-Russian relations suffered in 2018 following the expulsion of Russian diplomats on unproven claims of meddling in Greece’s domestic affairs and attempting to undermine the Prespa Agreement that Athens reached with Skopje to conclude the Macedonia name issue. However, the course of Greek-Russian relations was quickly put on the correct path following the 2019 Greek legislative election victory of the New Democracy Party and the ousting of SYRIZA from power.

Since then, the New Democracy Party has consolidated Greece’s military relations with the US, but for now not at the expense of its relations with Moscow. In fact, under the current government, Greece entered a military alliance with the United Arab Emirates, its first official non-NATO military ally with the exception of Cyprus. Greece has also consolidated strong military and strategic ties with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and India, whilst also not joining the Western demonization campaign against China. In this way, Greek foreign policy has been guided towards so-called “strategic autonomy” which allows Athens to not only strengthen ties with its western allies, but also maintain cordial ties with Moscow and establish new ties with eastern countries.

None-the-less, huge misconceptions exist on both sides. Greeks for example increasingly believe that Russia is allied with Turkey against Greece. Although undoubtedly Russia’s supply of the S-400 missile defense system and the construction of nuclear power plants in Turkey is a major cause of frustration and concern for Athens, believing that Moscow and Ankara are in an alliance misses the nuances of their relationship – one of tactical convenience and not of strategic alliance.

Russia and Turkey cannot become true strategic allies as little trust exists and Ankara is adamant on its neo-Ottoman/pan-Turanist project that also aims to challenge Russia’s traditional sphere of influence in the Caucasus and Central Asia. In this way, Russia keeps a balance with Greece as it understands that Turkey wants to control half of the Black Sea, the Bosporus and Dardanelle Straits, and half of the Aegean Sea that is controlled by Greece. Such a hypothetical eventuality would be a huge geopolitical disaster for Russia.

Moscow’s expanding relations with Ankara, even in the face of the latter openly declaring its support for Kiev diplomatically and militarily, does not point to an emerging alliance with Turkey, but rather an opportunity for Russian businesses to gain economic advantages whilst simultaneously causing divisions within NATO. Athens understands it cannot complain about Russia’s relations with Turkey when itself is an EU member with sanctions against the country.

Despite this though, misconceptions also exist in the Kremlin about Greece, often to the frustration of many Greeks. Take for example Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, who on the eve of the Putin-Mistotakis meeting spoke with Greek broadcaster ANT1 to not only say that this is a “historic” event, but give his personal assessment that Greek-Russian relations are 6 on a scale of 10, while ranking Russian-Turkish relations at a 7.

Although it is well-established that Peskov is part of the pro-Turkish faction of the Kremlin, having previously worked at the Soviet Embassy in Turkey, consistently shows disinterest in Russia-hostile pan-Turkic projects and was demonstratively indifferent to the conversion of Hagia Sophia into a mosque, Greeks were irked that he ranked Moscow’s relations with Turkey more positively despite Greece having never killed Russian soldiers in Syria, having never killed a Russian Ambassador (like the 2016 Andrei Karlov case), sold weapons to Ukraine that target Donbass civilians or encroached on Russia’s traditional sphere of influence. This of course is Peskov’s own assessment, but it does point to competing ideologies in the Kremlin, as well as misconceptions, especially the one that Greece is fully compliant to Washington, as Peskov in the past has alluded to.

Rather, Putin and Mitsotakis made important steps towards the improvement of Greek-Russian relations during their Wednesday meeting. The two leaders discussed future prospects of bilateral relations and stressed the close and historical ties between the two countries and peoples. In addition, the Joint Action Plan for 2022-2024 was adopted, which will identify key axes of bilateral cooperation for the coming years.

“Our relations are a continuous path and have a future,” Mitsotakis pointed out from Sochi, while Greek diplomatic sources said that the impact of the talks will be seen in the near future.

For his part, Putin described the meeting as “comprehensive and effective,” noting that Greek-Russian relations are strengthening significantly and highlighted that in the first nine months of 2021, bilateral trade increased by 56%.

For Putin, he hopes to strengthen relations with Greece in all sectors in the hope that the Mediterranean country will remain in the EU-NATO faction that seeks normalization with Russia and non-interference in Ukraine. At the same time, Mitsotakis hopes to secure cheap gas and to attract more Russian companies to invest in Greece as the country finally recovers from a brutal economic depression. Although in the short to medium term the geopolitical convergence of Greece and Russia will not match, the Putin-Mitsotakis meeting demonstrates two mature leaders that can navigate through complex differences and challenges to strengthen relations in sectors where their interest does converge. More importantly perhaps, Russian and Greek misconceptions of each other were clarified, and with such clarification, progress in relationship building can be steered in a positive direction.

*

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

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin-Mitsotakis Meeting in Sochi Clarified Misconceptions in Russian-Greek Relations
  • Tags: ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

As my readers know, I’ve been proving for well over a year that the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist.

Therefore, any test for it would be absurd.

However, I frequently put on my hazmat suit and enter the crazy world where all “the experts” claim the virus is real. I make these forays to show that, even within their fantasy bubble, and by their own standards, the pros are fatally contradicting themselves and lying constantly.

That’s what I’m doing in this article. I’ve got my hazmat suit on and I’m exploring the crazy landscape. I’ve published this piece several times, but I want to make sure people understand how the test has been used to manufacture the false appearance of a pandemic.

OK, here we go. Smoking gun. Jackpot.

Right from the horse’s mouth. Right from the man we’re told is the number-one COVID expert in the nation. What Fauci says is golden truth.

Well, how about THIS?

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology”: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at the 4m01s mark through to the 5m45s mark (Fauci begins his first answer to the first question at the 4m20s mark and begins his second answer to the second question at the 5m26s mark)):

“…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Each “cycle” of the test is a quantum leap in amplification and magnification of the test specimen taken from the patient.

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

Therefore, all labs in the US following the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…

Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…

The total number of COVID cases in America—which is based on the test—is a gross falsity.

The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. This is the crime in a nutshell.

“Hello, America, you’ve been tricked, lied to, conned, and taken for a devastating ride. On the basis of fake science, the country was locked down.”

If anyone in the Congress has a few brain cells operating, pull Fauci into a televised hearing and, in ten minutes, make mincemeat out of the fake science that has driven this whole foul, stench-ridden assault on the global economy and its 8 billion citizens.

All right, here are two chunks of evidence for what I’ve written above. First, we have a CDC quote on the FDA website, in a document titled: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” This document is marked, “Effective: 07/13/20.” That means, even though the virus is being referred to by its older name, the document is still relevant as of July 2020. “For Emergency Use Only” refers to the fact that the FDA has certified the PCR test under a traditional category called “Emergency Use Authorization.”

FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles ([less than] 40.00 Ct).”

Naturally, testing labs reading this guideline would conclude, “Well, to see if the virus is there in a patient, we should run the test all the way to 40 cycles. That’s the official advice.”

Then we have a New York Times article (August 29/updated September 17, 2020) headlined: “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.”Here are money quotes:

“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.”

“Set-the-limit” would mean, We’re going to look all the way to 40 cycles, to see if the virus is there.

The Times: “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients.”

Boom. That’s the capper, the grand finale. Labs don’t or won’t reveal their collusion in this crime.

Get the picture?

I hope so.

If a lawyer won’t go to court with all this, or if a judge won’t pay attention and see the light, they should be stripped of their jobs and sent to the Arctic to sell snow.

2021 CODA: Recently, Florida, a state which has remained far more open and free from COVID restrictions and mandates than most other states, is reporting very low COVID case numbers. Why?

Because as of December 3, 2020, the state of Florida started doing something unheard of. It demanded that labs report the number of cycles (“cycle threshold”) for every test they run.

Here is the relevant wording in a release from the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, and the state Department of Health:

“Cycle threshold (CT) values and their reference ranges, as applicable, must be reported by laboratories to FDOH via electronic laboratory reporting or by fax immediately.”

“If your laboratory is not currently reporting CT values and their reference ranges, the lab should begin reporting this information to FDOH within seven days of the date of this memorandum.”

We can assume there is only one reason for this order. The Florida governor and the Department of Health are aware that tests run at 35 cycles or higher are useless and misleading, creating a mountain of false-positives, and they want to stop this crime.

And with the Governor’s recent appointment of a new state Surgeon General, who is well aware of certain aspects of the COVID fraud, the requirement for labs to start telling the truth is taking hold.

Hence, lower case numbers.

*

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.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Sources

youtu.be/a_Vy6fgaBPE?t=241

blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/pcr/

https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download (document page 35 (pdf page 36), “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV), Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, For Emergency Use Only, Instructions for Use, Catalog # 2019-nCoVEUA-01, 1000 reactions, For In-vitro Diagnostic (IVD) Use, Rx Only”; CDC-006-00019, Revision: 07 CDC/DDID/NCIRD/ Division of Viral Diseases, Effective: 07/21/2021)

nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/08/24/gov-ron-desantis-this-is-how-you-win-against-the-wolves/

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Smoking Gun: Fauci States COVID PCR Test Has Fatal Flaw; Confession from the “Beloved” Expert of Experts
  • Tags: , ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Experts in the UK say that an explosion in new heart illnesses in younger patients can be explained by a new condition called “post-pandemic stress disorder.”

Yes, really.

A London Evening Standard report quotes senior vascular surgeon Tahir Hussain, who works at an NHS hospital in London.

“I’ve seen a big increase in thrombotic-related vascular conditions in my practice,” said Hussain. “Far younger patients are being admitted and requiring surgical and medical intervention than prior to the pandemic.”

Hussain said that the cases are “a direct result of the increased stress and anxiety levels caused from the effects of PPSD (post-pandemic stress disorder).”

He also said that people dying at home “from conditions such as pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction” was down to them self-isolating and not seeking the medical care they need.

Hussain’s explanation was echoed by former senior NHS psychological therapist Mark Rayner, who said as many as 300,000 heart ailments could be due to “post-pandemic stress disorder.”

“Everyone has heard of PTSD but we really urgently need to get our heads around PPSD,” said Rayner, adding that “The pandemic and the resulting lockdowns it’s brought have had a massive effect on the mental health of the whole nation.”

Some people expressed skepticism that the sudden increase in heart problems amongst young people is solely due to lockdown stress (the UK hasn’t been under any form of lockdown for almost 6 months).

“Never mind my last tweet!” commented Candace Owens.

“I’ve just learned that the sudden increase in heart-related illnesses is likely due to **checks Big Pharma notes** Post-Pandemic Stress Disorder. Nothing to see here!”

In her previous tweet, she had asked, “Is it me— or are a lot of young healthy athletes suddenly dropping dead this year?”

*

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 Giosia Perretta / EyeEm

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Explosion in New Heart Conditions Explained as “Post Pandemic Stress Disorder”
  • Tags: ,

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Illinois Representative Jonathan Carroll wants to push through a change to the state’s insurance law that would mean health insurers no longer have to cover unvaccinated people who get Covid, forcing people to pay their medical bills out of pocket.

The Democrat lawmaker told the Chicago Sun-Times:

I think it’s time that we say ‘You choose not to get vaccinated, then you’re also going to assume the risk that if you do catch COVID, and you get sick, the responsibility is on you,’”

The potential corruption and abuse of such a rule should be obvious to anyone familiar with just how mendacious insurance companies can be.

In all likelihood insurance companies will simply demand a negative Covid test before paying anything, and if you test positive, no matter what you were treated for, you will be called a “covid case” and forced to pay out of pocket.

The bill could, essentially, wipe all health insurance off the books for unvaccinated people.

The vaccinated should take no comfort from this, because their vaccinated status is entirely temporary, and subject to rules that could change on a whim.

Any “double jabbed” who misses a booster, or got a brand of vaccine that was subsequently unapproved or discontinued, or wasn’t updated for the latest variant, could suddenly find themselves one of the “unvaccinated” underclass.

Of course, once it applies to vaccination status it can apply to other things. You travelled to the wrong place, or you didn’t wear a mask, you “associated with known anti-vaxxers”.

And, even more concerning, is the potentially slippery slope this starts us down. Unvaccinated don’t get health insurance. Neither do smokers who get lung cancer. Or overweight people who get diabetes. And so on and so on.

The potential good news is that putting this law on the books would require a lot of legal workarounds, including violating or changing the Affordable Care Act, which outlaws removing insurance coverage from someone based on a new medical diagnosis or test result.

The editorial board of the Chicago Sun-Times already came out against the move, calling it unfair, warning of the same slippery slope I mentioned above, whilst at the same time arguing “the willfully unvaccinated should pay a price”, and be charged more for their insurance.

Given that response, it’s possible Mr Carroll’s role here is to set out an unacceptably extreme position, so the intended plan of higher insurance premiums for unvaccinated people seems more reasonable by comparison.

But, whether genuine or not, and whether it comes to fruition or not, the very fact the suggestion was made is a damning condemnation of the times. It would be a truly terrible precedent to set.

Once you start putting stipulations on healthcare, you don’t stop.

*

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 OffGuardian

NATO Spreading Anti-Russian Misinformation Among Ukrainian Officials

December 9th, 2021 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Once again, NATO is endorsing anti-Russian paranoia and building defense plans for Ukraine based on a possible “imminent threat” from Moscow. According to a report by an important official of the Western Military Alliance, there is concrete information in the organization’s intelligence data pointing to the possibility of a Russian invasion of Ukrainian territory in the first days of next year. As a result, it is expected that Ukraine will not only adopt the speech as a true premise, but also accept that NATO build an entire defense plan in order to deal with the situation.

Image on the right is licensed under CC BY 2.5 dk

Former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen at the Nordic Council Session in Helsinki 2008-10-28.jpg

Former Danish Prime Minister and ex-NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, in a recent press conference to the Denmark’s TV2, stated that there is a three-phase plan by Russia to operate a military invasion of Ukrainian territory. Despite constant accusations in this regard by NATO – and statements in response by Moscow denying them -, this time, Rasmussen presented more concrete details about the possible plan, which was a clear attempt to express credibility about a visibly doubtful content.

According to Rasmussen, Moscow plans to act as follows: in the first phase, the Russian armed forces will be allocated at the coast and block Ukraine’s access to the Black Sea, completely impeding naval flow and supplying basic goods; then Moscow will launch a major bombing operation, mobilizing its heavy artillery to neutralize the main Ukrainian military bases; and finally, in the third phase, there will be the definitive invasion, with a long march of Russian troops through Ukrainian territory towards the capital Kiev.

Interestingly, Fogh Rasmussen provides even more detailed “information” about the case, stating, for example, that around 175,000 Russian soldiers would be mobilized for this mega-operation and that the date of the possible invasion would be early next year. Despite supposedly possessing so much information, he has not been able to report the data collection methods used by Western intelligence agencies to obtain such precise details, which undoubtably undermines the credibility of his entire speech. Obviously, there is confidentiality among intelligence agents about the techniques used for data collection, but this does not prevent partial information from being provided, without major details, just in order to prove that in fact a serious research work was carried out and that the exposed data are not mere speculation and narrative.

However, apparently, Rasmussen himself doubts that such an operation will take place, as we can read in some of his words:

“So there are completely concrete plans, but we do not know if Putin will realize them (…) Now the Americans and the EU fully agree that there will be very strong sanctions against Russia if Putin enters Ukraine. So, the price could be too high for Putin, both internally and externally”.

The former head of NATO did not at any point question the credibility of the NATO information, only stating that he is not sure that an operation to invade Ukraine will be viable for the current situation of the Putin government, considering that it would generate many consequences both internally and externally. However, this type of speech sounds like a way to escape a possible error: NATO denounces that there is a plan but disclaims responsibility for a wrong prediction if this supposed plan does not materialize, stating in advance that it is not sure that Moscow will lead to idea ahead. This is simply a way to avoid a frustrated prediction: if such an invasion does not happen, Rasmussen will say that he had already predicted that Moscow would cancel the plans.

To any prudent geopolitical expert, however, this kind of situation sounds like a real joke. The possibility of NATO getting so much detail about Russian military plans is almost null. Only an amateur government would allow its greatest enemy to gain access to information such as the phases of a war plan and even the number of soldiers to be called up for the mission. This is not the kind of information that can be obtained by conventional intelligence methods. If this type of work were so simple to operate, NATO would also have obtained information in advance in 2014, when there was the Russian intervention in Crimea, for example. During the interview, Rasmussen said that the Russian operation in Crimea at that time was a big surprise for NATO, whereas an invasion next year would not be surprising. But this is once again a weak speech: how would obtaining information about the plan of a simple intervention be more difficult than obtaining data about a mega-operation of war? All these points make Rasmussen’s speech extremely inconsistent and doubtful.

What matters, however, is how much this type of situation will impact the Ukrainian government. Given that Kiev currently adopts as a true premise any anti-Russian misinformation spread by NATO, Rasmussen’s “report” is likely to boost joint “countermeasures” between Ukrainian forces and the Western military alliance, which means that further military exercises and provocative operations on Russia’s western border may be on the geopolitical horizon of the coming months.

*

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.

Ineffectual Boycotts: The Beijing Winter Olympics

December 9th, 2021 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

 

 

Making moral statements in the blood and gristle of international relations can often come across as feeble.  In doing so, the maker serves the worst of all worlds: to reveal a false sense of assurance that something was done while serving no actual purpose other than to provoke.  Anger, and impotence, follow.

The Biden administration is proving to be particularly good on that score.  Since taking office US President Joe Biden has nipped at the heels of China’s Xi Jinping with moral urgency.  National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has lectured Beijing on human rights abuses with mistaken clarity.  The Pentagon has been firming up plans for militarising the Indo-Pacific and expanding its military footprint, notably in Australia.

Now comes a sporting boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics.  On December 6, the White announced that US officials would not be attending the games.  In the words of White House press secretary Jen Psaki, the administration would “not send any diplomatic or official representation to the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics and Paralympic Games given the PRC’s ongoing genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang and other human rights abuses.”

During the briefing, Psaki told the press about Biden’s remarks to President Xi: that “standing up for human rights is in the DNA of Americans.”  Sporting personnel, however, would still be competing, suggesting that the spirals of such DNA might be wonky.

Washington’s additional aircraft carriers – the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada – proved to be three appendages in chiming imitation.  UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, while stating to MPs that he did not generally support such measures, thought this exceptional.  “I do not think that sporting boycotts are sensible and that remains the policy of the government.”

Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, claimed that Beijing could hardly be surprised by his country’s stance.  “We have been very clear over the past many years of our deep concerns around human rights violations.”  Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, in justifying not sending diplomats and politicians, suggested that it was “in Australia’s national interest” and “the right thing to do.”

Such moves strike a farcical note.  For one, boycotts of the Olympics in the name of human rights abuses have generally been ineffectual.  The International Olympic Committee has been a consistent and firm opponent of the formula, insisting that sporting endeavours are politically neutral matters.  They have been aided by the fact that such boycotts are rarely uniform or evenly applied.

In 1956, Spain and Switzerland refused to send contingents to the Olympic Summer Games in Melbourne in protest against the Soviet invasion of Hungary.  (Neither country could hardly claim to have squeaky clean human rights records, least of all Spain’s bloodstained fascist General Francisco Franco.)  The Netherlands recalled their sporting team after they arrived in Melbourne for the same reason, though Egypt, Iraq and Lebanon did so for a rather different grievance: the Suez Crisis.  “The little-noted absence of these athletes from competition,” writes Heather Dichter, “had no effect on global politics.”

The hollowness of these recent gestures against China is also evident by the fact that the ones who matter at such fixtures – the athletes – will be free to participate.  Superficially, they have been treated as politically childish, even insentient.  The competing athlete should have little time to ruminate over the plight of oppressed minorities or the conduct of a brutal regime.

This is the attractive, if fashionable nonsense of the IOC and, it should be said, many sporting bodies.  It denies the reality that athletes are very much walking and participating statements of their country, whatever their personal beliefs.  They often receive State funding and are implicated in their programs.  Along with participation comes patriotism.

Sporting contingents have also expressed frustration at being used as examples of political furniture.  The effects of US President Jimmy Carter’s decision to boycott the 22nd Olympiad in Moscow in protest against the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union did not go down well on the performers’ circuit.  Swimmer Brian Goodell, who won the 400m and 1500m freestyle events in world-record time as a stripling of 17 at the Montreal Olympics, was crushed by Carter’s decision.  “In Moscow, I would have been 21 and in the prime of my career.  And zippo. (Carter) screwed with everybody’s lives.  I could have made some pretty good coin.”  Hardly an enlightened view, but then again, athletes are rarely selected for their capacious intellects and firm moral compasses.

When whole blocs of states have pursued sporting boycotts, some measure of difference has been achieved.  The New Zealand Rugby tour of apartheid South Africa in 1976 saw a number of African states demand that the IOC expel New Zealand.  Officials were cool to the suggestion, arguing that rugby had last featured as an Olympic game in 1924.

The ensuing boycott by some 20 African and Arab states of the Montreal games, which also featured the withdrawal of athletes, caused quite a stir.  It troubled the UN Secretary General at the time, Kurt Waldheim, who wished “to point out that the Olympic Games have become an occasion of special significance in mankind’s search for brotherhood and understanding.”

Fancifully, the Commonwealth Secretary General Shridath Ramphal went so far as to argue that participating in the games, not withdrawing from them, would aid the “propitious resolution of wider questions”.

By not participating, the countries in question helped spur one particularly propitious resolution: the signing of the 1977 Gleneagles Agreement between Commonwealth States.  In reaching the agreement, the signatory members agreed to “combat the evil of apartheid by withholding any form of support for, and by taking every practical step to discourage contact or competition by their nationals with sporting organisations, teams or sportsmen from South Africa or any other country where sports are organised on the basis of race, colour or ethnic origin.”  Isolated, apartheid South Africa began facing searching domestic questions about the future of that political system.

An event free of wine guzzling and canapé gobbling dignitaries is something to cheer but leaving the sporting figures out of a “sporting boycott” is a proposition that remains pointless and absurd.  The point was not missed by the authoritarian IOC president Thomas Bach.  “The presence of government officials is a political decision for each government so the principle of IOC neutrality applies.”

At Beijing, sporting participants will be able to avoid the Carter experiment of 1980 and the babble about human rights and the liberty of the subject.  Expect a few, however, to take the knee, though not for the Uighurs.  In the meantime, the policies of the PRC will remain unchanged.

*

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 is from olympics.com

America Must Stop Enabling the Saudi War in Yemen

December 9th, 2021 by Sen. Rand Paul

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.

***

Saudi Arabia’s air and naval blockade of Yemen is an abomination. For years now, ships that would otherwise carry food, fuel, and medicine to the country have been turned away by the Saudi-led coalition, depriving the Yemeni people of the necessities to sustain civilization. Saudi Arabia’s intervention in the Yemeni civil war is a chilling example of the cruelty of warfare by starvation. According to the United Nations, five million people are one step away from succumbing to famine and disease, and ten million more are right behind them.

But, this week, the Senate can start the process of ending this crisis by passing my legislation to cancel an American arms sale to Saudi Arabia that aids and abets the subjugation of the Yemeni people.

The children of Yemen who survive Saudi Arabia’s barbaric blockade will inevitably tell their sons and daughters of the horrors of their youth. And those sons and daughters will tell their sons and daughters. Through oral tradition, a thousand generations of Yemenis will know of the crown prince’s ruthlessness. And they will also know that it was the Americans that sold him the weapons to wage his murderous campaign.

The reports from Yemen describe a nightmare. The Washington Post reported of a three-year-old boy who could not walk or speak; the Post described his face as “skeletal” and arms and legs as “thin as twigs.” He weighed ten pounds, and his father said that he sometimes goes two days without eating because Saudi import restrictions have made food prohibitively expensive, as if mere sustenance was a luxury. The New York Times told the story of a mother who, after three days of failing to find a ride, carried her 8-month-old son while walking two hours to reach medics to treat acute malnutrition. Even after a week of treatment with enriched formula, the boy still lay motionless on his hospital bed.

Tens of thousands of children have already died from disease, malnutrition, or starvation. International aid agencies, who also have to fight the Saudi blockade to provide humanitarian assistance, put it succinctly: “the people of Yemen are not starving. They are being starved.”

The Saudi siege of Yemen is made possible because of American weaponry. The arsenal provided by the United States includes billions of dollars’ worth of military aircraft and thousands of air-to-ground munitions. Only weeks ago, the Biden administration approved a new $650 million sale of 280 advanced medium range air-to-air missiles and 596 missile launchers to the Saudis. As painful as it is to admit, the United States is an accessory to Saudi savagery.

President Biden says the latest sale is merely to help defend Saudi territorial integrity, but the commander-in-chief’s words do not match Saudi actions. According to William Hartung, the director of the Arms and Security Program at the Center for International Policy, “the air blockade is enforced by a threat to shoot down any aircraft, military or civilian, that enters Yemeni air space with the goal of landing at Sana’a airport. The provision of air-to-air missiles gives further credibility to this threat, dissuading any government or aid group from bringing in crucial medicines or flying patients in and out of Yemen.” In other words, no weapon is exclusively defensive and continued American arm sales means continued death and starvation in Yemen.

I am leading a bipartisan effort to end America’s complicity in Saudi Arabia’s war on the Yemeni people. This week, I will force a vote on a bipartisan disapproval resolution that proposes to cancel the arms sale. To overcome an almost certain veto, this effort will require the support of two thirds of both chambers of Congress. If members of Congress believe in humanitarianism, if they believe America is a force for good that serves as a model for other nations to emulate, if they believe that the crushing of the Yemeni people must be stopped, then they must vote for the resolution of disapproval.

We have a chance to tell the crown prince that American arms sales will end until he gives up his starvation campaign. We can end the Saudi blockade and bring relief to the long-suffering Yemeni people. Should we fail to seize this opportunity, history will never let us forget that America, the last best hope for humanity, failed to protect defenseless civilians from the cruelty of a criminal regime.

*

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.

Rand Paul serves as the junior United States senator from Kentucky. 

Featured image is from akramalrasny/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.

***

Dr. Robert W. Malone, a developer of mRNA vaccine technology, recounts his experience earlier this week at the Louisiana statehouse where CHD team members, including Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., testified against adding Pfizer’s COVID vaccine to the state’s childhood vaccine schedule.

Earlier this week I was in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) team where some of us, including CHD Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., testified at the statehouse against Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards’ proposal to add Pfizer’s COVID vaccine to Louisiana’s childhood vaccine schedule.

Unelected Louisiana Department of Health leadership proposed COVID vaccine mandates for students 16 and older but leadership could expand the mandate for children as young as 5.

The proposal would make the vaccine mandatory for all school children in order to attend in-person classes.

I was there to assist Health Freedom Louisiana — the physician and nurses’ advocacy group Louisiana for Medical Freedom — Rep. Kathy Edmonston and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry.

The belief in Louisiana is that Edwards’ support of the vaccine mandate is an attempt on his part to curry favor with the Biden administration as he seeks a federal appointment as an exit strategy from the Louisiana government.

Louisiana’s push to mandate COVID vaccines for children is as radical as the plan advanced in California by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said he will require all California children to get the Pfizer vaccine as soon as it is licensed or forfeit the right to in-person schooling.

The Unity Project, for which I serve as chief medical and regulatory officer, is leading the charge in opposing California’s mandate.

Televised hearing draws crowd to statehouse

The Louisiana House Health and Welfare Committee on Monday held a televised hearing before the entire Louisiana House Health and Welfare Committee in a room packed with Louisiana residents who oppose the mandate.

Elected officials, medical care providers (including physicians and nurses) and parents — including many mothers seeking to protect their children — presented testimony opposing the proposed mandate.

From what I saw, there are a lot of angry Louisiana mothers, physicians and nurses who are absolutely not OK with a government mandate requiring their children to get an experimental vaccine that is mismatched to currently circulating viral variants, does not prevent infection and spread of the virus and is associated with significant safety risks to their children including myocarditis and even death.

The governor’s attempts to interject state government bureaucrats and D.C. politics into decisions that should reside within the family are not going down well with these groups.

The CHD team delivered a carefully researched and focused presentation to Louisiana lawmakers based on both peer-reviewed data and primary data provided by Pfizer to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Kennedy testified at Landry’s request, presenting studies and data, including Pfizer’s own data from its clinical trials.

Watch Kennedy’s testimony here:

Watch the video here.

Following the testimony, Louisiana House Health Committee members voted, 13 – 2, to reject the proposed mandate!

Three Democrats and one Independent joined all nine Republicans in voting against the recommendation. Democratic Reps. Robby Carter of Amite and Dustin Miller of Opelousas cast the only votes in favor of the mandate.

Despite the vote, Gov. Edwards said he intends to overrule the veto and add the shot to the immunization schedule starting next school year.

Media parrots public health official’s false facts, ignores Kennedy’s factual presentation

Predictably, the legacy media covered the rout of the governor’s attempted vaccine mandate by misrepresenting the testimony provided, gaslighting and attempting to delegitimize those providing testimony.

Media outlets regurgitated the vaccine mis- and disinformation provided by Louisiana Public Health Officer Dr. Joe Kanter, who believes COVID represents a significant health threat to children, denies the vaccines are experimental and rejects the idea that an unlicensed vaccine shouldn’t be added to the immunization schedule just because it doesn’t keep someone from getting infected or spreading the virus to others.

None of these opinions are consistent with an assessment or with past precedents for adding vaccines to the childhood schedule.

Kanter asserted no vaccine-associated deaths have been reported to his office via an [unpublicized] telephone number set up by his office to report such events — an assertion the governor posted on social media.

Kanter is wrong. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, between Dec. 14, 2020 and Nov. 26, there were 63 reports of Louisiana residents who died after they took the vaccine.

Inaccurate public health reporting of vaccine adverse events may support the governor’s political agenda, but it does not enable sound public health decision-making and is no substitute for solid data.

Rather than addressing the data and meticulously referenced information provided by Kennedy and the CHD team, the Associated Press reported Landry “appeared with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who has promoted debunked claims about the vaccine.”

The Lafayette Daily Advertiser’s reporter Greg Hilburn, who covers Louisiana politics for USA TODAY, referred to Kennedy as “an adamant COVID-19 vaccine critic who has been banned from social media sites because of spreading what the platforms deemed as immunization misinformation” — an assertion which allowed him to avoid reporting on the substance of the information Kennedy presented.

Readers will recognize a typical pattern: derisive legacy media coverage of data and opinion that questions the approved narrative, that the Pfizer COVID vaccine is perfectly safe and effective in children.

Perhaps mindful of the famous Battle of New Orleans, the intrepid health freedom warriors fighting the current Battle of Baton Rouge seem to be metaphorically keeping their powder dry and waiting until they can see the whites of their opponents’ eyes.

But Louisiana’s legal sharpshooters are ready to respond to the governor and may put a crimp in his designs on a Washington DC sinecure.

Meanwhile, we await the next skirmish.

*

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.

Robert W. Malone, M.D., is an internationally recognized scientist/physician and the original inventor of mRNA vaccination as a technology, DNA vaccination and multiple non-viral DNA and RNA/mRNA platform delivery technologies.

Featured image is from CHD

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Roads, trucks, fences, cow barns, cattle herds, and vast pasturelands. Overflight images from advocacy groups have revealed all this inside what’s supposed to be the protected territory of the Piripkura people, one of the world’s most vulnerable uncontacted Indigenous peoples, in the Brazilian Amazon. The images, captured in October, show the scale of the threats looming over the Piripkura Indigenous Territory, and the risks to the last two known Piripkura individuals living there, Pakyî and Tamandua.

“The movement of trucks, the occupation of houses, the good condition of the pasture and the presence of cattle herds during the flyover show that the ranches installed in the Indigenous territory are not at a standstill, but rather they are exploiting the natural resources and carrying out commercial activities,” says a dossier released at the end of November, at the same time the photos went public. The dossier is signed by the Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB) and the Observatory for the Human Rights of Isolated and Recently Contacted Indigenous Peoples (OPI), which lead the campaign Uncontacted or Destroyed.”

Located in the northwest of Mato Grosso state, the Piripkura territory spans 243,000 hectares (600,500 acres) and is the most deforested of all the reserves occupied by isolated or recently contacted Indigenous people in Brazil in recent years, according to Instituto Socioambiental (ISA), a nonprofit that advocates for the rights of Indigenous and traditional peoples. From August 2020 to July 2021, more than 2,150 hectares (5,310 acres) of forest were cleared inside the territory, a nearly hundredfold increase from the same period a year earlier.

The Piripkura Indigenous Territory is the most deforested of the reserves occupied by isolated and recently contacted Indigenous people in Brazil. Most of this destruction occurred during the administration of President Jair Bolsonaro, who took office at the start of 2019. From August 2020 to July 2021, more than 2,150 hectares (5,310 acres) of forest were cleared inside the territory, a nearly hundredfold increase from the same period a year earlier. Image courtesy of Rogério Assis/Instituto Socioambiental (ISA).

Indigenous rights activists say driving this surge is the anticipation among would-be invaders that a restriction ordinance banning outsiders won’t be renewed as it has every two years since 2008. Under President Jair Bolsonaro, who promised not to demarcate any Indigenous reserves, the odds of the restriction being allowed to lapse are high, prompting a rush of land grabbers into the Piripkura territory, activists say.

Following pressure from civil society and NGOs, the restriction ordinance was renewed this past September, but only for six months. But as the images captured in the overflight show, it hasn’t dissuaded invaders.

“These people keep on deforesting, planting pasture, and raising cattle while waiting for a decision that will end with the Indigenous reserve and regularize the invasions,” Antonio Oviedo told Mongabay in a phone interview. Oviedo coordinates ISA’s protected areas monitoring program; the nonprofit also supports the “Uncontacted or Destroyed” campaign.

In September 2020, the federal environmental protection agency, IBAMA, counted 3,185 head of cattle on four ranches inside the Piripkura territory. According to Operation Native Amazon (OPAN), there are 15 ranches operating inside the territory, with 54% of its land registered as private properties in state and federal electronic land registries. Image courtesy of Rogério Assis/Instituto Socioambiental (ISA).

In September 2020, the federal environmental protection agency, IBAMA, reported the presence of 3,185 head of cattle on four ranches inside the Piripkura territory. The information is cited in a lawsuit filed by federal prosecutors in May, requesting the expulsion of at least 10 invaders; the case remains open . IBAMA did not respond to Mongabay’s request for information about the presence of ranchers inside the territory.

A report from Operation Native Amazon (OPAN) published in April identified a total of 131,870 hectares (325,857 acres) registered as private properties in federal electronic land registries, which represents 54% of the territory’s total area. Through fieldwork, OPAN has also identified 15 ranches operating inside the Piripkura territory.

Besides ranchers and land grabbers, miners have shown increased interest in the prospect of the Piripkura Indigenous Territory losing its protection. In September, Brazilian website Infoamazônia showed that a newly created mining cooperative had applied for the right to mine an area twice the size of the territory, on the border with the Piripkura land.

“They will die”

“They will die,” Rita Piripkura said when she saw the satellite images of deforestation advancing inside her homeland, according to Leonardo Lenin, an Indigenous rights activist with OPI. Lenin, who showed the images to Rita, told Mongabay that she quickly realized the invaders were approaching the igarapés (streams) where her brother and nephew, Pakyî and Tamandua, respectively, have been hiding recently. Lenin said Rita was the first Piripkura contacted by non-Indigenous people, back in the 1980s. Today, she lives in the Karipuna reserve, in northern Rondônia state, but often goes back to visit her homeland in Mato Grosso, he added.

“Rita is very worried. She is watching her territory being destroyed and the invaders getting closer and closer to her family members,” Lenin said in a phone call. “At the same time, she doesn’t feel safe on the Karipuna reserve, which is also suffering from invasions.”

Rita Piripkura, one of only three known Piripkura individuals, says she’s worried because the invaders are closing in on the areas occupied by her relatives. The first Piripkura contacted by non-Indigenous people, she now lives in the Karipuna reserve, in Rondônia state. The Piripkura people have survived at least two massacres since the 1980s. Image courtesy of Bruno Jorge.

Lenin was from 2007 to 2011 the coordinator of the Madeirinha-Juruena ethnoenvironmental protection front, an outpost of Funai, the federal agency for Indigenous affairs, responsible for protecting the Piripkura. Pakyî, Tamandua and Rita are the only known Piripkura alive, but they mention the existence of at least 13 other people living in the area, according to Lenin.

The Piripkura have reportedly suffered at least two massacres since they were first contacted, as the result of loggers and ranchers encroaching into their territory. That’s probably why Pakyî and Tamandua have never wanted to live in non-Indigenous society, Lenin said. “They don’t want to leave their land and they don’t want to establish a relationship with the outside world.” Proof of this, he added, is that they seldom look for Funai staff from the protection front; one of the rare occasions that they did, when the fire of their torch went out, was recorded in the award-winning documentary Piripkura.

To evade the invaders on their land, Pakyî and Tamandua have had to change their way of life, activists say. They gave up agriculture, for example, for hunting and gathering, to increase their mobility through the territory. “Isolation for them is a survival strategy, just like escaping,” said Sarah Shenker from Survival International, a global nonprofit movement for the rights of Indigenous peoples, which also backs the “Uncontacted or Destroyed” campaign. “I suppose they are running away right now, because they know that otherwise they will be killed,” Shenker told Mongabay in a phone call.

Demarcation on demand for land grabbers

The restriction ordinance renewed by Bolsonaro should work as an emergency protection tool until the demarcation of the Piripkura territory is concluded — a process that has been dragging on since the 1980s, when the Piripkura were first contacted.

In June, Funai created a work group to conduct the demarcation studies. In early November, however, a federal court in Mato Grosso ordered  the replacement of three members of the group, arguing they were not qualified for the job and had relations with agribusiness interest groups. According to court documents, one of them had worked for Mato Grosso’s Agriculture and Livestock Federation and two of them had participated in the formulation of a normative ruling that facilitates land grabbing inside non-demarcated Indigenous lands, like the Piripkura territory.

An overflight promoted by Indigenous advocacy groups in October revealed structures put in place by outsiders invading the Piripkura Indigenous Territory in the Amazonian state of Mato Grosso. Trucks, cow barns and electricity lines show that cattle ranching is in full swing. Image courtesy of Rogério Assis/Instituto Socioambiental (ISA).

Since Bolsonaro came into power at the start of 2019, Funai has repeatedly gone against Brazil’s country’s official policy of not seeking to engage with isolated and recently contacted groups. In July 2020, the government passed a federal law allowing religious missionaries to remain inside Indigenous lands, but this was annulled by Brazil’s highest court in October. Bolsonaro, who is hugely popular with Brazil’s evangelicals, had also appointed Ricardo Lopes Dias, a former missionary from the New Tribes Mission to head the Funai department responsible for protecting isolated and recently contacted communities. The mission, which has since changed its name to Ethnos360, is a fundamentalist Christian organization notorious for past attempts to contact and convert isolated tribes in the Amazon. Lopes left his Funai post in November 2020.

In a statement, Funai said the court decision that dissolved the group in charge of demarcations made it impossible to start the demarcation process of the Piripkura territory. Funai also claimed that it will present a definitive solution for the issue, but without providing any details.

Lenin said he fears the Bolsonaro administration will reduce the Piripkura territory once the protective ordinance expires, at the end of March, to legitimize the invaders’ presence there. “We fear that Funai will reduce the Indigenous territory to leave out the farms,” he said, “which then can be legalized.”

*

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: Pakyî and Tamandua are the only two Piripkura known to live in the Piripkura territory, but they and Rita Piripkura, who lives in the Karipuna reserve, have reportedly alluded to at least 13 other Piripkura living inside their ancestral land. To escape the invaders, they have had to change their way of life, abandoning agriculture in favor of hunting and gathering. Image courtesy of Survival International.

Houthis Close to Victory in Yemen

December 9th, 2021 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The war appears to be moving to an end in one of Yemen’s major cities. After more than ten months of incessant fighting, the battle for the control of Ma’rib may be near to a positive conclusion for the rebels’ side. The city, whose historical, cultural, humanitarian, and economic importance is immense, could be the strategic key to a much greater conquest, so that the group that dominates Ma’rib will be about to winning the civil war in the entire country.

In recent statements, spokesmen for the Houthi movement have announced that the rebels’ conquest of the last territorial portions of the city of Ma’rib is only a matter of time. The region is still partially controlled by forces loyal to the government of Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, but the latest offensives launched by Houthis have completely changed the scenario in the region, allowing the rebels to advance towards near-complete dominance after conquering the Jabal al-Balaq al- Awsat mountain range – which allowed them a to establish privileged strategic position in order to view and access the southeastern portion of Ma’rib, generating successive victories.

However, as expected, the possibility of a Houthi victory has not been welcomed by Saudi coalition’s forces. After the rebels took control of the mountain range, Riyadh launched a series of brutal aerial bombardment attacks, aimed at hitting targets in all regions around Jabal al-Balaq al-Awsat. The attacks went beyond Ma’rib and encompassed the cities of Al Jawf and Sana’a, resulting in a yet uncertain number of deaths and injured people. There is, however, no information about any significant change in the Houthi control over the mountain range as a result of the attacks.

Indeed, the strategic defeat in Ma’rib will certainly have practically irreversible impacts for the Saudi coalition. In order to regain complete control of the region it would be required much more violent and frequent attacks, which would undoubtedly result in an immeasurable massacre, considering that Ma’rib is currently home to more than three million civil inhabitants, most of them displaced people born in other parts of Yemen and displaced by war. Furthermore, Ma’rib was the last fortress of Saudi power in northeast Yemen, so the current defeat means the surrender of an entire region to rebel control. In this sense, Muhammad Bukhaiti, spokesman of the Houthis, stated that “The defeat of the forces of aggression in Ma’rib means their defeat on the rest of the fronts (…) [so] decisive hours are close”.

To make the situation even more difficult for the Saudis, there is still the diplomatic crisis with the US, which prevents the Kingdom from quickly resupplying with weapons. The recent Saudi offensives in Ma’rib, Al Jawf and Sana’a appear to have exhausted much of Riyadh’s war arsenal, which is now weakened and in the midst of a severe supply crisis. Washington is the biggest arms supplier to the Saudis and the current diplomatic crisis really prevents this alliance from developing further.

It is true that Joe Biden failed to carry out his ideological plans to completely break the military alliance with the Saudis, as he had promised in February. The US continued to supply arms to the Kingdom, with, however, a pre-established condition for the Saudis to use such weapons only for exclusively defensive purposes – which has certainly not been fulfilled. However, the pressure on the American government is only increasing. Human rights defenders demand that Biden tighten measures against Riyadh, considering unacceptable the American involvement in a war with numerous humanitarian abuses being reported every day. On the other hand, there is a more pragmatic wing of the US Congress that supports the resumption of the normal arms trade as a way to counter the growing Iranian geopolitical influence in Yemen, considering that the Houthis are an ethnic group of Shia faith and with strong links with Tehran. In practice, the situation is tense and complicated for Biden, who has to choose between securing the support of his pro-human rights electorate or fighting Iran’s growing role in the Middle East.

For the future it is expected that Biden will adopt quiet stance and resolve the situation by maintaining the current figures of the arms trade with the Saudis, without significantly increasing or decreasing it, which obviously will not be enough for Riyadh to maintain its offensives in Yemen. On its part, the Kingdom will not give up on the war and will seek to diversify its sources of arms supply, mainly taking advantage of the partnership with South Africa in the drone trade. Indeed, the war in Yemen is likely to go on for a long time, but it may be near the end of its bloodiest days and certainly the Yemeni government has never been so weak and discredited.

*

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 https://see.news/

Pfizer Smoking-gun “Secret Document”: Their Deadly COVID Vaccine

By Jon Rappoport, December 08, 2021

After publishing this article, I discovered that the gigantic Pfizer list of medical conditions was apparently not a report on logged cases of adverse events, but instead a complete list of conditions that Pfizer would be monitoring, in order to see whether they popped up on their radar as reactions to the COVID vaccine.

FDA & CDC Ignore Damning Report 90+% of Hospital’s Admissions Were Vaccinated for COVID-19

By Covert Geopolitics, December 08, 2021

A concerned Physician Assistant, Deborah Conrad, convinced her hospital to carefully track the Covid-19 vaccination status of every patient admitted to her hospital.  The result is shocking.

“Collective Narcissism” and the “Dark Triad”: Those Who Protest against the “Official” Covid-19 Narrative are Categorized as “Psychopaths”. Is It A Witch Hunt?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 08, 2021

A diabolical process is underway which consists in “identifying” all those who are opposed to the governments’ management of the coronavirus pandemic. According to ongoing psychological studies, these opponents are categorized as anti-social psychopaths.

The World Gone Mad: The COVID Vaccine Derangement Syndrome. ” Fourth Covid-19 Shot. Many More to Come”

By Vasko Kohlmayer, December 08, 2021

Last Friday the government of the United Kingdom began administering a fourth Covid shot to its citizens. That makes it four Covid injections in barely 11 months. As a result, now you can encounter the quadruply jabbed walking around England. The fourth shot, however, is not the last one. Apparently, there are many more to come.

“We Citizens are being Psychologically Attacked with the Aim that we Obediently March towards the Abyss”

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, December 08, 2021

The saying “Wehret den Anfängen!” [Resist the Beginnings] does not come from the time of German fascism, but today it is associated with National Socialism and is meant to warn against pernicious developments.

Video: The Covid-19 Crisis Triggers Economic and Social Chaos Worldwide

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Michael Welch, December 08, 2021

“V the Virus” is said to be responsible for the wave of bankruptcies and unemployment. That’s a lie. There is no causal relationship between the (microscopic) SARS-2 virus and economic variables.

Robert Francis Kennedy, Jr.’s Heroic Resistance to the CIA’s Continuing COVID Coup d’état

By Edward Curtin, December 08, 2021

With his extraordinary new book, The Real Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, RFK, Jr. has made it very clear that he will not allow Orwell’s 1984 totalitarian boot to stamp on his face.

How the Covid Crisis Affects Academia: Universities Become Compliant Institutions with No Room for Critical and Independent Thought

By Prof. Anthony J. Hall, December 08, 2021

Many universities have a lot to answer for in the genesis of the manufactured COVID crisis. This genesis runs deeper than the fact that many faculty members and their faculty associations have welcomed the atrocious regimes of mandatory vaccines.

You’d Better Watch Out: The Surveillance State Has a Naughty List, and You’re On It

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, December 08, 2021

Thanks to the government’s almost limitless powers made possible by a domestic army of techno-tyrants, fusion centers and Peeping Toms, Santa can get real-time reports on who’s been good or bad this year. This creepy new era of government/corporate spying—in which we’re being listened to, watched, tracked, followed, mapped, bought, sold and targeted—makes the NSA’s rudimentary phone and metadata surveillance appear almost antiquated in comparison.

Xi Jinping’s Challenges: China’s Deep-seated Economic and Social Crisis

By Tom Clifford, December 08, 2021

China’s economic engines are spluttering as they seek thrust to emerge from a stall.  The property sector is mired in debt. Empty apartment blocks, about 65 million units, dot the landscape. They represent just over 20 percent of homes in urban China.

Biden-Putin Talk Tuesday with Xi in the Wings

By Ray McGovern, December 08, 2021

On May 25, 2021, when the date of June 16 was announced for the summit between Presidents Biden and Putin, it seemed a good idea to waste no time in warning Biden and his neophyte advisers that a major shift in the “world correlation of forces” (to borrow an old Soviet term) was bound to heavily influence the June talks. China, of course, would not be taking part in the bilateral talks, but it would be very much present.

Eighty Years of Lies: President Franklin Roosevelt Told Public Pearl Harbor Was a Surprise Attack—However There Is Considerable Evidence Demonstrating Government Foreknowledge

By Jeremy Kuzmarov, December 08, 2021

Eighty years ago today—what President Franklin Roosevelt termed a “date which will live in infamy”—Japanese forces attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor off the coast of Hawaii, triggering U.S. intervention in World War II.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Pfizer Smoking-gun “Secret Document”: Their Deadly COVID Vaccine

Are You Ready for Nuclear War over Ukraine?

December 9th, 2021 by Selwyn Duke

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.

***

“Do you know we don’t rule out first-use nuclear action?” So said Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) while outlining what measures the U.S. could take against Russia over Ukraine, at whose border Moscow has been massing troops. The senator’s office later clarified that this comment related to American policy in general and not specifically to Russia. While this is actually believable (Wicker made a loose comment), what’s unbelievable is that we’re even considering a military confrontation with Moscow over something that does not at all involve a U.S. national interest.

Moreover, what else Wicker said, during a recent interview with Fox News host Neil Cavuto, is not reassuring. To wit: “Well, military action could mean that we stand off with our ships in the Black Sea and we rain destruction … on Russia military capability,” the Independent related him as stating. “It could mean that we participate, and I would not rule that out, I would not rule out American troops on the ground.”

Making it worse is that the Biden Administration and the Establishment, in general, are all-in on this Dr. Strangelove foreign policy. As Secretary of State Tony Blinken’s spokesman, Ned Price, has put it, “If Russia chooses to fail to deescalate…we and our allies would be prepared to act. We would be prepared to act resolutely.”

Equally troubling is that geniuses in both parties are pushing to have Ukraine become part of NATO, with its “an attack on one is an attack on all” policy. This means that if Russia then invaded Ukraine, the U.S. and Western Europe would be obligated to intervene militarily. WWIII, anyone?

For his part, Russian president Vladimir Putin has said that NATO troop and weapons deployment to Ukraine is a “red line” for him. Of course, it is. Just as we couldn’t back down during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, Russia wouldn’t back down on Ukraine. The same is true of China vis-à-vis Taiwan.

Like it or not, you must tread softly in another great power’s backyard. Enter it and refuse to back down, and war will almost assuredly result because that power can’t realistically back down. Doing so would mean losing face and sending the ultimate message of weakness. For if you can be pushed around at your own doorstep, in what way can’t you be dominated?

Despite this, our chicken hawks insist on playing chicken with a nuclear power over…what? Few ask what the national interest is, and no one explains. We do hear bloviating about Ukraine’s “sovereignty” and border integrity from the same people who’ve made our border a sieve-like conduit for a southern invasion, as Fox News commentator Tucker Carlson pointed out last night. These people also talk about defending “democracy” while having stolen an election here and undermining our republic with unconstitutional policy and two-tiered justice.

Then, last year, sociopathic congressman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) actually said that we aid “Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there, and we don’t have to fight Russia here.” Perhaps Schiffty has been watching the flick Red Dawn too much. (He should note that in the film’s remake, in 2012, the Chinese troops invading American soil were digitally altered post-production to appear North Korean in deference to Beijing, our maingeopolitical rival.)

In other words, if you thought there couldn’t be anything as irrational as our coronavirus policy — where authorities insist on reordering civilization over a pathogen that more than 99.9 percent of the infected will survive — welcome to our Russia policy. We’re acting as if a nation with an economy one-eighth the size of China’s is today’s Roman Empire and we’re Gaul; our “cure” of military intervention in its backyard would definitely be worse than the disease, too. Russia is now the COVID-19 of geopolitics.

To be clear, none of this concerns whether you love, hate, or are indifferent about Putin. It’s not about whether Russia is right or wrong on Ukraine. It’s about applying Just War Doctrine and, again, recognizing that you can only do so much at a great power’s doorstep.

An aside: Note that both our world wars, along with the Korean and Vietnam conflicts, began under Democrat administrations. And having in power detached-from-reality leftists who can’t judge human nature, as we do today, is always dangerous.

In fact, if they stay at the helm long enough, their folly may provide for their voters a harsh object lesson in how there really are things worse than white privilege, microaggressions, and sexual constraints.

Below is an excellent Tuesday Tucker Carlson Tonight segment on the Russia-Ukraine folly.

*

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.


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   

WWIII Scenario

Video: The Covid-19 Crisis Triggers Economic and Social Chaos Worldwide

December 8th, 2021 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

V the Virus” is said to be responsible for the wave of bankruptcies and unemployment. That’s a lie. There is no causal relationship between the (microscopic) SARS-2 virus and economic variables.

It’s the powerful financiers and billionaires who are behind this project which has contributed to the destabilization (Worldwide) of the real economy. And there is ample evidence that the decision to close down a national economy (resulting in poverty and unemployment) will inevitably have an impact on patterns of morbidity and mortality. 

Since early February 2020, the Super Rich have cashed in on billions of dollars.

Amply documented it’s the largest redistribution of global wealth in World history, accompanied by a process of Worldwide impoverishment. 

Video  Michael Welch Interviews Professor Michel Chossudovsky on the Devastating Economic and Social Impacts of the Covid-19 Crisis

link to Bitchute