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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This interview was originally published in February 2021.

America’s four-star Admiral Charles Richard issued a public warning that the US is on the brink of a nuclear war with Russia and China, stressing that US forces must shift their principal assumption from ‘nuclear employment is not possible’ to ‘nuclear employment is a very real possibility.’

Military expert Scott Ritter tells RT that the warning in question itself poses a danger.

 

*

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

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It’s the 22nd November 2021 and this is the moment when the jabbing has to stop.

A couple of hours ago Darren Smith, the editor of the excellent The Light Paper, sent me a paper from the medical journal Circulation which proves that the covid-19 jabbing experiment has to stop today.

I believe that any doctor or nurse who gives one of the mRNA covid jabs after today will in due course be struck off the appropriate register and arrested. 

The journal Circulation is a well-respected publication. It’s 71-years-old, its articles are peer reviewed and in one survey it was rated the world’s no 1 journal in the cardiac and cardiovascular system category.

I’m going to quote the final sentence of the abstract which appears at the beginning of the article. This is all I, you – or anyone else – needs to know.

“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.”

That’s it. That’s the death bell for the covid-19 mRNA jabs.

The endothelium is a layer of cells lining blood vessels and lymphatic vessels. T cells are a type of white cell.

We always knew these jabs were experimental. My video in December 2020, just under a year ago, warned about these specific risks. I read out a list of possible adverse events published officially by the American Government.

But now we have the proof of the link.

The mRNA jab is, remember, known not to stop people catching covid. And it is known not to stop people spreading it. I don’t believe anyone disputes these facts.

And yet vast numbers of deaths and serious injuries have occurred among people who have been jabbed. Look at the item entitled ‘Updated: how many are the vaccines killing?’ on my websites.

Now we have the evidence to stop the jabbing programmes.

In the study quoted in Circulation, a total of 566 patients aged 28 to 97 were tested. They were equally divided among men and women.

‘At the time of this report,’ says the author, ‘these changes persist for at least 2.5 months post second dose of vaccine.’

At the very least, the use of these jabs must stop now. Immediately, until more long-term tests are done.

If there were any journalists left in the mainstream media, this news would be lead item on all TV and radio programmes and be on the front pages of all newspapers.

Thank heavens for free speech platforms such as BNT which enables me to bring you this news.

I’ve said for a year that this jab was an experiment – certain to kill and injure.

We’ve always known that to experiment on people without their full consent and understanding – after disclosing all the risks and potential side effects – is a crime.

Now the evidence exists that must stop this experiment.

If the covid jab experiment continues after today then we know for absolute sure that this is not a medical treatment, it is a cull.

Please share this video immediately with everyone you know.

Thank you.

*

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 NaturalNews.com

mRNA Vaccines Put You at Risk for Acute Coronary Syndrome

November 30th, 2021 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Using the PULS cardiac test, researchers have found Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID shots dramatically increase biomarkers associated with thrombosis, cardiomyopathy and other vascular events following vaccination

Pre- and post-injection PULS tests for 566 patients were compared. On average, their PULS scores went from an 11% five-year risk for acute coronary syndrome, to a more than double, 25%, five-year risk

Those who got the injection for fear that COVID-19 might adversely affect their heart now face the grim reality that they’ve exchanged a potential risk for a more certain one

Another paper details how the mRNA shot can cause thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) through a mechanism that involves the activation of platelets by antibodies against the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies)

A mystery that remains to be solved is why only certain people with antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) go on to develop symptoms of platelet activation and thrombocytopenia. One hypothesis is that only a subset of the anti-spike antibodies formed after vaccination can activate platelets and cause thrombocytopenia

*

Click here to watch the video.

In a November 21, 2021, tweet, cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra writes:1

“Extraordinary, disturbing, upsetting. We now have evidence of a plausible biological mechanism of how mRNA vaccine may be contributing to increased cardiac events. The abstract is published in the highest impact cardiology journal so we must take these findings very seriously.”

The abstract he’s talking about is “mRNA COVID Vaccines Dramatically Increase Endothelial Inflammatory Markers and ACS Risk as Measured by the PULS Cardiac Test: A Warning,” published in the November 16, 2021, issue of the journal Circulation.2 (ACS is Acute Coronary Syndrome).

Cardiac Risk Warning

The PULS (Protein Unstable Lesion Signature) cardiac test3 is a simple blood test that detects unstable cardiac lesion rupture, one of the leading causes of heart attacks. As noted by the authors of that paper, this is “a clinically validated measurement of multiple protein biomarkers,” which include:

  • IL-16, a proinflammatory cytokine
  • Soluble Fas, an inducer of apoptosis
  • Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), a marker for chemotaxis of T-cells into epithelium and cardiac tissue

These and several other proteins are indicative of your immune system’s response to arterial injuries that can result in cardiac lesions. These lesions can become unstable, and if they rupture, they can lead to a heart attack.

So, based on the levels of these biomarkers, the test gives you a score that predicts your 5-year risk, as a percentage chance, of developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Elevated levels raise your PULS score while levels below the norm lower it.

COVID-Jabbed Patients More Than Double Their ACS Risk

According to the authors of the Circulation report:4

“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 [patients], 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-year ACS risk to 25% 5-year 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.”

As noted by Malhotra, this is indeed extraordinarily disturbing. Patients who received a two-dose regimen of mRNA more than doubled their five-year ACS risk, driving it from an average of 11% to 25%. Just imagine the shape our medical system and society at large will be in if 1 of every 4 people who got the two-dose regimen ends up with acute heart failure.

Signs and Symptoms to Watch For

ACS is an umbrella term that doesn’t just include heart attacks, but also a range of other conditions involving abruptly reduced blood flow to your heart. Signs and symptoms of ACS typically begin very suddenly, and include:5

If you suspect ACS, do not drive yourself to the hospital. Call for an ambulance, as it is a true medical emergency that may need prompt medical attention. Risk factors for ACS have historically included older age, high blood pressure, cigarette smoking, lack of exercise, unhealthy diet, excess body weight and diabetes.

SARS-CoV-2 infection was recently added to that list, but it seems we must also add the COVID jab as well. Those who got the injection for fear that COVID-19 might adversely affect their heart now face the grim reality that they’ve exchanged a potential risk for a more certain one.

Vaccine-Induced Thrombocytopenia

In related news, a paper published in the journal Blood Advances reviews “SARS-CoV-2 Spike-Dependent Platelet Activation in COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Thrombocytopenia.”6Thrombocytopenia is the medical term for low platelet count.

The authors point out that following the rollout of the mRNA and DNA-based COVID shots, more than 150 cases of thrombocytopenia have been reported. The reference for that statistic is a March 9, 2021, paper in the American Journal of Hematology,7 and injuries are stacking up at breakneck speed.

As of November 12, 2021, there were 4,387 cases of thrombocytopenia reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS),8 so it’s far more frequent than what they’re stating. (There are also 9,332 reports of heart attacks, which we just discussed, and 13,237 reports of myopericarditis, i.e., inflammation of the heart and/or heart sack.9)

According to the authors, identifying the mechanism by which the shots cause thrombocytopenia would facilitate the development of a diagnostic test. Historically, heparin-induced thrombocytopenia has been diagnosed using a serotonin release assay (SRA).

Using SRA, a subset of critically ill COVID-19 patients have tested positive for platelet-activating immune complexes that can cause thrombosis. Other researchers have also showed IgG antibodies from critically ill COVID-19 patients can activate platelets, resulting in a thrombotic event.

Here, using a modified SRA, they discovered spike-dependent, platelet-activating immune complexes in a patient with vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia, suggesting the spike protein is the causative factor. They explain:10

“Our patient was a 25-year-old woman who presented to hospital 10 days after receiving the Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with fatigue, petechiae and wet purpura. The initial platelet count was 1,000 per cubic millimeter without evidence of schistocytes on blood smear.

Coagulation studies were within the normal range … This also likely excludes the presence of a lupus anticoagulant, given the use of a lupus-sensitive reagent for PTT testing. Anti-platelet factor 4 (PF4)/heparin antibodies were not detected … and the classic SRA test, with or without heparin or exogenous PF4, was negative.

Assays for drug-induced immune thrombocytopenia with washed donor platelets were also negative for platelet binding with vaccine, PEG2000, or SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein … The patient was treated with dexamethasone and intravenous immune globulin (IVIg) for a presumed immune thrombocytopenic purpura. The platelet count normalized by day seven of treatment.

Additional serum testing identified SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein antibodies of the IgG … IgA … and IgM … classes. Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein were absent, confirming vaccine-induced antibodies without prior infection.

To further investigate the mechanism of thrombocytopenia, we tested the patient’s serum using a modified SRA with addition of recombinant SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein (Spike-SRA). We observed dose-dependent platelet activation with increasing SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein …

The reaction was inhibited by an FcγRIIa blocker … and IVIg … confirming FcγRIIa-dependent platelet activation. Platelet activation was also demonstrated to a lesser degree with increasing amounts of Moderna vaccine … and the excipient PEG2000 …

Furthermore, platelet activation was not detected in a control sample from a patient who had received the Moderna vaccine and had not developed thrombocytopenia …

Circulating Spike protein was detected in our patient’s serum using enzyme immunoassay testing … Together, these results suggest that the thrombocytopenia in this patient was secondary to FcγRIIa-mediated platelet activation by SARS-CoV-2 Spike immune complexes.”

Potential Mechanism Identified

If you found the section quoted above to be too complex, here’s the take-home message: The mRNA shot may be causing an exceptionally low level of platelets through a mechanism that involves antibodies against the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) resulting in depletion of platelets by activating them.

Platelets are specialized cells that stop bleeding, and they have ACE2 receptors, which is what the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to. When the spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on the platelets, it activates them.

This platelet activation can lead to disseminated intravascular coagulation, i.e., a pathological overstimulation of your coagulation system that can result in abnormal, and life threatening, blood clotting, as well as thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) and hemorrhaging.

Doctors for COVID Ethics described this mechanism in a February 28, 2021, letter11 to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). In that letter, they warned that, based on this mechanism, spike protein-based COVID shots are likely to cause blood clots, cerebral vein thrombosis and sudden death, which is precisely what we’ve been seeing ever since.

In essence, you basically end up with so many blood clots throughout your vascular system that your coagulation system is exhausted, hence the low platelet count. The low platelet count, in turn, is what allows for hemorrhaging (abnormal bleeding).

Questions Remain

A mystery that remains to be solved is why only certain people with antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) go on to develop symptoms of platelet activation and thrombocytopenia. Why not all of them? “One hypothesis is that platelet activation is dependent on unique spike protein epitopes, which are only recognized by a minority of identified antibodies,” the authors suggest.12 In closing, they state:

“Our case … highlights the applicability of the SRA to detect platelet activation disorders aside from HIT [heparin-induced thrombocytopenia]. Although classically done in the presence of heparin, it can be modified to include various antigens to elicit immune complex formation and identify platelet activation …

Ultimately, the role of SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein requires further clarification in regards to platelet activation, as well as the role of vaccine- and PEG-dependent platelet activation. We postulate that a small subset of antibodies against the Spike protein, formed after vaccination, can activate platelets and cause thrombocytopenia.

The prevalence of this phenomenon remains to be clinically determined. Regardless, the modified SRA presented here may be a useful diagnostic test as more cases of vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia are recognized.”

COVID Jab Risks Clearly Outweigh Any Potential Benefit

Since well before the rollout of these COVID shots, scientists and doctors have sounded the alarm, pointing out a host of potential mechanisms by which they may cause harm. Now, nearly a year into it, many of our fears are turning out to have been warranted. They’re causing very serious cardiovascular damage, blood disorders, and reproductive dysfunction.

Worst of all, our health authorities have abandoned the mandate to protect public health and are covering up the wreckage on behalf of the profit makers. On top of that, doctors and nurses who speak out about the collateral damage they’re seeing are being silenced and persecuted by medical boards and government officials alike.

Now, we’re injecting these kill shots into children as young as 5. I see no way for this to end on a pleasant note. As a society, as the deaths and injuries, especially in children, continue to escalate, we’re going to face some excruciatingly difficult times.

To remind you of where this article started, people who have received two mRNA shots have more than doubled their five-year risk of acute coronary events, on average. If you’ve not yet taken the jab, I reckon you probably won’t at this point. But if you’ve already taken one or two, I strongly urge you to review the mechanisms of harm, and evaluate whether it’s worth it to continue with a third.

The adverse changes caused by the shots persist for at least 2.5 months. That’s the low end. We still do not know what the upper time limit is. It could be a year or more, and the risks certainly do not diminish with subsequent additional doses. In the November 12, 2021, OpenVAERS report,13they added a graph showing vaccination rates and VAERS reports by state.

As you can see, there’s a clear correlation between the rate of “fully vaccinated” in a given state and the number of COVID injuries reported from that state. (Indiana, for some reason, sticks out as a lone exception with a disproportionately high number of reports to the number of fully “vaccinated.”)

The gray zones are population; blue bars are the number of fully vaccinated; the red bars are the number of reported injuries. (All numbers have been divided by 1,000.) This is yet another piece of evidence that we have a serious problem on our hands.

post covid 19 vaccine injury reports

What Can You Do if You Have Jab Remorse?

If you now believe that getting the COVID jab was a mistake and wish to lessen your doubled risk of cardiac complications, there a few basic strategies I would advise.

1. Make certain you measure your blood vitamin D level and take enough vitamin D orally (typically about 8,000 units/day for most adults) to make sure your level is 60 to 80 ng/ml (100 to 150 nmol/l).

2. Eliminate all vegetable (seed) oils in your diet, which involves eliminating nearly all processed foods and most meals in restaurants unless you convince the chef to only cook with butter. Avoid any sauces or salad dressings in restaurants as they are loaded with seed oils. Also avoid chicken and pork as they are very high in linoleic acid, the omega-6 fat that is far too high in nearly everyone and contributes to oxidative stress that causes heart disease.

3. Consider taking around 500 mg/day of NAC, as it helps prevent blood clots and is a precursor for your body to produce the important antioxidant glutathione.

4. Consider fibrinolytic enzymes that digest the fibrin that leads to blood clots, strokes and pulmonary embolisms. The dose is typically two, twice a day, but must be taken on an empty stomach, either an hour before or two hours after a meal. Otherwise, the enzymes will digest your food and not the fibrin in the blood clot.

*

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 Twitter Aseem Malhotra November 21, 2021

2, 4 Circulation November 16, 2021; 144(Suppl_1)

3 PULS Cardiac Test

5 Mayo Clinic ACS

6, 10, 12 Blood Advances November 1, 2021 DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021005050

7 American Journal of Hematology March 9, 2021: 10.1002/ajh.26132

8, 9, 13 OpenVAERS Report as of November 12, 2021

11 Letter to EMA by Professor Sucharit Bhakdi and Colleagues February 28, 2021

Featured image is from FiercePharma

Video: Ready for Nuclear Holocaust with Russia Over Ukraine?

November 30th, 2021 by Rep Tulsi Gabbard

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.

***

Are we prepared to see our loved ones burn alive in a nuclear holocaust in a war with Russia over Ukraine?

If not, cut out the macho saber rattling and de-escalate before it’s too late.

*

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.

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 Quirinale Treaty promoted by President of the Republic Mattarella, signed on November 26 by Prime Minister Draghi and President of the Republic Macron, is a 360-degree political treaty by which Italy and France “undertake to develop their coordination and foster synergy between their respective actions at the international level,” implementing “industrial partnerships in specific military sectors” and other programs involving financial burdens for the state.

In order to be ratified by the President of the Republic, the Treaty should have been first authorized by the Parliament according to Art. 80 of the Constitution, according to which “the Chambers authorize by law the ratification of international treaties that are of a political nature, or provide for financial burdens”. Instead, the text of the Treaty remained secret, outside of an inner circle of government, until it was published after signing.

The purpose of the Treaty, which came to light at the end of secret negotiations, is clear from its timing: it is being concluded at a time when, with the departure of German Chancellor Merkel, a new balance of power in the European Union is being established. France, which in 2022 will assume the six-month presidency of the EU, replaces the Paris-Berlin axis with the Paris-Rome one.

Central to the bilateral agreement is Art. 2 on “Security and Defense”, consisting of 7 paragraphs. Italy and France undertake to “strengthen European defense capabilities, thus also working for the consolidation of the European pillar of NATO”. As Draghi stressed in tune with Washington, one must build “a true European defense, which of course is complementary to NATO, not a substitute: a stronger Europe makes a stronger NATO.” In order to pay for both NATO and Europe’s defense, a colossal increase in Italian military spending, which already exceeds 70 million euros per day, will be necessary.

As part of “structural alliances” between their respective military industries, Italy will help France upgrade its strategic nuclear forces and related military space systems. Macron has launched a “modernization” program that includes the development of third-generation nuclear attack submarines, armed with new ballistic missiles, and a sixth-generation fighter jet (Fcas) armed with new hypersonic nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. Italy, however, already participates in the project of another sixth generation nuclear attack fighter, the Tempest, promoted by Great Britain, so it will probably collaborate on both unless they are unified.

Functional to the “modernization” of the French nuclear forces is the program, announced by Macron in October, to build a system of small modular nuclear reactors at a cost of 30 billion euros. Probably the Treaty also provides for the collaboration of Italy in this field, as part of the plan aimed at the reintroduction of nuclear power in our energy system.

Also in Art. 2, Italy and France undertake to “facilitate the transit and stationing of the armed forces of the other party on their territory”, without specifying for what purpose, and to coordinate their participation in “international crisis management missions”, particularly in the Mediterranean, Sahel and Gulf of Guinea. A strong increase in the participation of Italian special forces – with armored vehicles, aircrafts and attack helicopters – in the Task Force Takuba, which under French command operates in Mali and neighboring countries, is being prepared. Officially deployed in this region for the “fight against terrorism”, in reality it is deployed to control one of the richest areas in strategic raw materials exploited by US and European multinationals, whose oligopoly is threatened by political changes in Africa and the economic presence of China.

In this way, according to the Treaty of the Quirinale, Italy and France together “contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, as well as the protection and promotion of human rights”.

*

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

This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Where is the Rome-Paris Axis Taking Us? “Crisis Management” and “The Modernization of Nuclear War”
  • Tags: ,

Rising Up Against COVID Inoculations and the Health Pass

November 30th, 2021 by Stewart Brennan

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.

***

Over the past few months, people around the world have been rising up and pouring onto the streets of their nations to protest their governments enforcement of a health passport that only allows the vaccinated to participate in society. (1,2,3,4)

People are waking up as their freedoms disappear under a wash of government dictatorship. The threat is very real as nation after nation invokes a mandatory health pass and inoculations that violate ones’ personal sovereignty.

Governments around the world are either coercing or forcing their citizens to take dangerous inoculations which take away the peoples rights and freedoms while also punishing those who do not comply. (5,6,7) Human rights, which western countries claim to champion, have all been destroyed.

Disturbing but not surprising is that the mainstream news continues to back the totalitarian government narratives while refusing to carry out real investigative journalism; and as such, both the government and mainstream media continue to lose public trust as governments continue to bear down on the public with totalitarian and sometimes violent force (8).

Two of the major reasons why there is a rise in public awareness about the dangers of these COVID inoculations are, the rise in state brutality on protesters and the large numbers of vaccine injuries and the sudden death of people around the world after receiving these dangerous COVID inoculations.

Reports have been flooding social networks of sudden heart attacks after being inoculated, as the “COVID Vaccine Sudden Death Syndrome” continues to unfold on the public around the world. We are also seeing a huge uptick in heart attacks in very fit athletes (9a) (many of whom are soccer players (9b)) and game officials who are all in public view. The one thing these athletes and officials all have in common is that to work and travel in their sport they had to take the unnecessary COVID inoculations. And so, it becomes increasingly difficult for governments to trivialize or declare these sudden deaths as coincidence, especially with the deaths of so many athletes, who are in the best physical shape of their lives. They certainly shouldn’t be dying of heart attacks.

The news of athletes having heart problems is becoming a daily occurrence. Soccer players have been going through intensive cardio workouts for years without problems, with the exception of a rare case like an undetected birth defect, so why are we seeing so many heart problems now? (10) There is no way all these heart problems are a coincidence as some would have you believe. A full transparent investigation and dialog is required, but that will not happen will it judging by our government’s insane position.

Alarm bells are also ringing in pregnant mothers as we are now seeing a rise in stillbirths, (11,12) which of course is also supposed to be a rare occurrence in this day and age. Could this huge uptick in stillbirths have something to do with pregnant mothers receiving the COVID shot?! Yes, it seems very, very likely.

These deaths are only the beginning because the dangerous inoculations they are calling vaccines, not only change your DNA but they compromise your immune system (13) and there’s nothing that can change that fact with the exception of never taking these dangerous COVID inoculations (14) in the first place.

All this is happening right in front of everyone’s eyes while governments continue to censor and suppress information by doctors and scientists who are warning the world of the harmful effects from these dangerous COVID inoculations! Wouldn’t you want to at least listen to what these doctors and scientists have to say instead of them being censored, before you blindly play the establishments rigged roulette game? A game where the shot makes every player’s immune system a loser?!

Around the world, governments are continuing to ramp up a war on their own populations under the guise of a health emergency, and wouldn’t you know it, just as people are standing up against their governments health pass and mandatory inoculations, a new variant called “Omicron” (15,16) has popped up in Botswana and then South Africa, to close down society and potentially lock us all down, ending protests, while covering up the massive deaths attributed to the COVID shots.

An interesting twist to this story is that a Majority of South Africans refuse the COVID inoculations and so the S.A. govt has delayed / cancelled shipments of these mRNA inoculations (17). So, why do the South African people refuse COVID inoculations? Well because they have had very bad experiences with inoculations and sociopathic governments in the past (18) that’s why, and so they don’t trust those connected to the Global economic cartel, and nor should you.

The immediate response by the global economic cartel to South Africa’s request for a delay in delivering US pharma jabs on November 24th, 2021, was to declare a new covid variant from South Africa 48 hours later and then isolate the country from the rest of the world. This has a significant economic consequence on the people of South Africa and other African nations (19) of course…it’s a punishment, or retaliation for not towing the economic cartels big pharma line it would seem.

Will this new so called COVID variant, “Omicron” be used as the reason and excuse to lockdown the World in December, cancel family Christmas celebrations and then use their new variant as a reason to force their mRNA & DNA poisoned shots on the entire global population? They are certainly moving in that direction.

In Austria, Hungary and other European countries, they are already declaring mandatory COVID inoculations on the public with severe punishments to those who resist, and that was before “Omicron”.

The one shining light in this episode of the twilight zone is that the tyrannical push by our governments is also waking up more people to the insane sociopathic narrative that politicians, tied to the W.H.O. (World Health Organization) are pushing on the world.

The Next Battle in the War on Information

Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter resigned today (20).

Although it’s true that Facebook, YouTube and Twitter have been using censorship to suppress information on the Internet, Twitter was the only one of the three major networks that did not completely stomp out information on COVID and alternative voices even with a shadow ban in place. However, as Jack Dorsey steps down as Twitter’s CEO, to make way for…someone else, (21) there are no guarantee’s that we will have any freedom of speech left on Twitter. The timing of Dorsey’s departure is very suspect as we all know instinctively what’s coming, “More Censorship”, especially now that the establishment has unveiled their new fear monster “Omicron”.

Will the new order that arises at Twitter be corporate puppets with a pro-censorship attitude? Or will they be free speech inclined? Count on more censorship…

Last Word

People around the world need to continue standing up and uniting against the mandatory inoculations, the health pass and societal segregation. The future is in our hands yet we are now at a crossroads that will define the future governance of the human race. We either stand against fascist totalitarianism now and emerge with our rights and freedoms in tact or we perish under the boots of tyranny. The direction we go depends upon you, be brave, be determined and Rise up!

*

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

This article was originally published on World United News.

Stewart Brennan is a Geo-political and economic analyst, activist, blogger and author. He’s worked in the Aviation, Packaging, Transportation and Logistics Industries and is the author of “The Activist Poet”, two books of political activism and poetry, and several blogs including World United News and World United Music.

Notes

1. Australia – Thousand’s flood streets to decry vaccine mandate

https://www.rt.com/news/541490-australia-massive-protests-mandates/

2. Zagreb, Croatia Rises Against COVID Mandates

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1462207055780106278

3. Vienna Austria Rises Against COVID Mandates

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1462226039199911936

4. Rome Italy Rises Against COVID Mandates

https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1462226275091849218

5. Austria Imposes Lockdowns for Everyone

https://www.rt.com/news/540714-austria-lockdown-for-everyone/

6. Greece Bans Unvacinated Indoors

https://www.rt.com/news/540690-greece-bans-unvaccinated-indoor/

7. France continues to force health pass

https://www.rt.com/news/540698-france-covid19-lockdown-health/

8. Police fire rubber bullets at anti-vax protesters in Melbourne as demonstrators storm war memorial

https://www.rt.com/news/535516-australia-covid19-melbourne-vaccines-protest/

9a. Compilation of News reports of Athletes Having Heart Attacks

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ssevYsmvuRSr/

9b. What’s Going On! Compilation video of Athletes suffering heart attacks

https://www.bitchute.com/video/j6G8qZidSCAK/

10. British Dr John Campbell warns of a huge increase of heart attacks

https://twitter.com/1BJDJ/status/1465243051987714054

11. Canada – Stillbirths Exploding Across Canada in Fully Vaccinated Mothers

https://brightlightnews.com/stillbirths-exploding-across-canada-in-fully-vaccinated-mothers/

12. Scotland – Investigation Launched into Abnormal Spike in Newborn Baby Deaths

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19726487.investigation-launched-abnormal-spike-newborn-baby-deaths-scotland/

13. Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi’s Explains the Immune System (Video)

https://www.bitchute.com/video/3HiBqKeXmu4C/

14. Dr. Ryan Cole on Dangerous Vaccine Effects

https://www.bitchute.com/video/jm2euik7MlCV/

15. Omicron

https://www.rt.com/news/541483-omicron-variant-fears-world/

16. Omicron Over Reaction

https://www.rt.com/russia/541649-agranovsky-omicron-danger-overreaction/

17. Nov 24th, 2021 – South Africa wants Delivery of COVID Inoculations Delayed

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/s-africa-wants-j-j-pfizer-vaccine-delivery-delay-news24-says

18. This is why Africans are not taking the Gates led vaccines

https://t.me/GeopoliticsAndEmpire/18855

19. Growing list of countries with curbs over ‘super mutant’ strain

https://www.rt.com/news/541399-eu-africa-travel-coronavirus/

20. Jack Dorsey Resignation Letter

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1465347002426867720

21. Jack Dorsey Leaves Twitter Board

https://www.rt.com/usa/541661-jack-dorsey-leaves-twitter-board/

Featured image is from World United News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Rising Up Against COVID Inoculations and the Health Pass
  • Tags:
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Australia Served US Interests as Anti-China Riots Gripped the Solomon Islands

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.

***

Northern Syria is as volatile as ever, despite Turkey holding back to wait for a better possibility to begin its one, or two military operations.

Center stage is now taken by the US-led coalition’s movements and their attempt to presumably counter Iran’s spreading influence and activities.

On November 28, a large convoy moving supplies for the US-led coalition entered northeastern Syria from the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.

The convoy headed to the town of Rmelan in the northeastern countryside of al-Hasakah. The US-led coalition has several bases in the area which are tightly controlled by its main proxy in northeastern Syria, the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

The US-led coalition apparently wants to reinforce its bases in the northeastern al-Hasakah countryside. Days earlier, a rocket attack targeted a large airfield of the US-led coalition located near the town of Khrab al-Jeer. The attack didn’t result in any casualties. US-led coalition fighter jets and helicopters were spotted flying over the airfield and nearby areas after the attack.

Meanwhile, in Greater Idlib, while Ankara’s troops are keeping it low, the so-called moderate opposition, led by the al-Qaeda affiliated Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) continue to commit numerous daily ceasefire violations targeting the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), as well as civilian settlements.

On November 28, Turkey’s main proxy in the northwestern Syrian region of Greater Idlib, the National Front for Liberation (NFL), shared a video showing one of its recent attacks on SAA troops.

During the attack, which took place on November 25, NFL militants targeted a gathering of SAA soldiers near the town of Hantoteen. No fatalities resulted from the attack.

On November 28, the SAA shelled militants’ positions in the southern Idlib countryside as well as in the western countryside of Aleppo in response to a number of recent violations.

Following that, clashes broke out between the SAA and militants in the southern part of the Greater Idlib, north of the government-held town of Saraqib. The town is located right on the strategic M5 highway, which links Hama with Aleppo. Traffic at the highway slowed down a day earlier as a result of similar clashes.

The SAA and its allies managed to reopen the M5 highway last year following a fierce battle with HTS and its Turkish-backed allies. The militants failed to hold onto the highway despite receiving direct support from the Turkish military.

The escalation near the M5 and the recently released footage of shelling attacks on the SAA are rare but significant escalations that contribute to the region spinning out of control.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Northern Syria is Volatile As Ever. Militants in Greater Idlib Ramp Up Their Provocations
  • Tags: , ,

Dangerous Crossroads: Goading China to Go to War

November 30th, 2021 by Dr. Chandra Muzaffar

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 number of defence analysts are convinced that the United States of America, supported by Britain and Australia, is goading China to go to war over Taiwan. They point to constant statements by officials from the three countries pledging to come to Taiwan’s defence if it is attacked by China and the actual presence of US warships in the vicinity of the region as evidence of “an aggressive stance”. The game-plan of the US and its allies according to these observers is to create an atmosphere that will compel China to retaliate to these provocations and fire the first shot. The Western media which is already on their side will quickly brand China as the aggressor and mobilise global public opinion on behalf of the “victims of Chinese aggression”.

There are certain underlying motives that may tempt the US to pursue this game-plan. There are hawks in Washington and elsewhere who believe that a short, quick war against China at this stage will benefit the hegemon and its global agenda. One, since the US is militarily stronger than China , a humiliating defeat for the latter will be a huge setback. At a time when the peaceful rise of China has made such an impact upon nations everywhere, a defeat will prove to all and sundry that the US is still the master of the planet. Two, a US victory over China will undoubtedly strengthen the Taiwan independence movement and encourage the separatists to expand their activities and intensify their demand. This will impact adversely upon Chinese sovereignty and undermine its national resilience. Three, a war over Taiwan will force China to divert its resources from much needed economic and social development to an unnecessary war on its doorstep. This diversion of resources will impede its progress. This is what the US and some of its allies would want to see.

China will not allow this to happen. The Chinese leadership has always been aware of the dire consequences of war and violence for the nation and the people. Yet it is deeply cognisant of the imperative necessity to defend its sovereignty and integrity as a nation and the dignity of its people. It will therefore respond to provocations by resorting to measures — various measures — which do not lead to violence and war. These could be political moves or diplomatic manoeuvres or even trade sanctions. But China will not yield to provocations. It will not succumb to threats or arrogant bullying.

The US leadership does not seem to understand this. For many decades now, US leaders and indeed, leaders of many other Western countries including Australia, do not seem to appreciate the importance of respect as a value in inter-state relations. Coercing or compelling a state to follow blindly one’s dictates is an example of a lack of respect for the other in international relations.

The controversy over Taiwan illustrates the point about respect in international relations. Taiwan is part of China. This is an indisputable historical fact. 180 countries in the world recognise this reality. Since 1979, the US government has acknowledged that there is only one China represented by Beijing. This is contained in documents such as the famous three joint communiques.  Beijing has always objected to US officials sometimes treating Taiwan as if it were an independent, sovereign state. This is apparent not just in US-Taiwan military ties but also on occasions in politics and economics.

The time has come for the United States’ friends in Asia to remind the US in a firm but courteous tone that living up to the One China policy is fundamental for the rest of the world in its relations to China. It is the deepest red line in our relations with China and will remain so for centuries to come. We must respect this line with a sincere heart. There must not be the slightest hint that the US or Britain or Australia or anyone else is trying to encourage separatist, anti-unification with China movements in Taiwan.

By advocating strict adherence to the ‘One China’ policy, we are not suggesting that we kow-tow to Beijing in a servile manner. If we have to disagree with Beijing on a matter of principle we should. For instance, many countries within ASEAN, are at odds with Beijing on Beijing’s claim that it has suzerainty over almost 85% of the area perceived as the South China Sea. ASEAN governments and indeed, ASEAN civil society groups as a whole should  continue to reiterate our sovereign maritime rights over the South China Sea in accordance with our historical claims and international law. We should never cease to persuade the authorities in China to accept our legitimate demands.

In other words, we should ask China to respect our rights vis-à-vis the South China Sea just as we want the US to respect China’s position on Taiwan.

*

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. Chandra Muzaffar is the president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Kuala Lumpur.

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.

***

There are no variants.

Because there is no virus. SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t exist. I’ve spent the past year and a half proving that. [0]

But fantasies do exist. So do covert ops with intentions to deceive.

Thus, the “scientific world” is agog over the new South African variant, named B11529 (aka Omicron, Botswana). Woo. The ghost is coming out of the closet. Beware. COVID cases are rising…

“We don’t know whether the vaccine will be effective in the face of the new variant. New lockdowns may be necessary. Travel restrictions are coming. Batten down the hatches.”

I mean, really.

As you know, for the past few months stories in the press have been claiming the vaccine-conferred immunity is sinking like a stone. This story is absurd because, again, there is no virus. So there was no conferred immunity to begin with. But anyway, that’s the story that’s been circulating. So NOW…

“It turns out one major reason for the diminished effectiveness of the vaccine is…

“The NEW VARIANT. The South African B11529.”

Uh-huh. “The vaccine is having a tough time preventing infection caused by the new variant. We may need to enforce boosters every three months…”

Keep the fear going. Push harder for the vaccine. Explain away its failures. Fabricate rising case numbers, blaming them on the new variant. Institute heavy new lockdowns.

“The South African variant is deadlier than the Delta, which is deadlier than the original.”

And none of the three exists.

What does exist is fantasy, piled higher and deeper and thicker.

The variant is Fauci. The variant is Bill Gates. The variant is CDC/WHO. The variant is the World Economic Forum. And the Chinese regime. And presidents and governors. And the mainstream press.

And don’t forget this. Vaccine injuries and deaths have been escalating all over the world. In the US alone, reported injuries have broken above 600,000 [1]. As I’ve mentioned, the well-known Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare study [2] concluded that, to obtain a true number of injuries, multiply the reported figure by 100.

Something is needed to explain all these injuries and deaths. That is, to lie about them.

And right on time, here comes the new variant.

“These people who seem to be injured by the vaccine are really keeling over from the original virus, the Delta, and woo, the South African B11529.”

Also: Recently, we’ve seen a spate of press stories with the theme—“scientists are mystified by the low COVID case numbers in Africa, where the vaccination rates are very low.” [3] Boom. That story is now gone. Wiped out. Now it’s THE WORLD IS BEING ATTACKED BY THE SOUTH AFRICAN B111529 VARIANT.

Here is one of my articles covering the non-existence of SARS-CoV-2:

Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists

The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”

But what if the virus doesn’t exist?

People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.

“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”

I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman [4], and he provided his analysis in detail.

I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 — June 2020)” [5].

First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.

The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.

They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.

There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.

Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus.”

Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:

STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”

KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”

STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”

KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”

STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”

KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”

STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”

KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”

KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [6]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”

STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…”

STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”

KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”

STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”

KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”

(End of study quotes and Kaufman analysis)

My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.

Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.

And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists?

Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 300 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [7]) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?

The answer is no.

(End of Kaufman article)

*

And while I’m at it, here is another piece I wrote last year about how virus-propaganda (fairy tales) must be managed, in order to make the masses stand up and salute:

The “hot zone” theory of new frightening diseases

Remember? There was a 1994 book by that name— and then “experts” began piling on—it went something like this:

“Out of the deep dark rainforests of Earth (cue sounds of native drumming), as a result of modern plane travel, viruses we’ve never encountered before will spread epidemics across the globe. Our immune systems, ill-equipped to recognize or deal with these strange killer germs, will fold up under the pressure, and all of civilization will be threatened with extinction.”

Let’s see. Since planes fly back and forth, and since all sorts of Westerners travel TO the rainforests, why haven’t we seen whole native tribes wiped out by viruses from the deep dark streets of Brooklyn?

It would even seem that viruses, common in, say, Norway, would cause trouble in Oregon.

Why does it have to be “viruses from jungles?” Or other faraway places like China? Why can’t we have the Second City Virus, emanating from a slaughterhouse in Chicago and infecting people in Nigeria? Why can’t we have a Big Easy virus from New Orleans traveling to Beijing?

Is it possible that jungles and Africa and China and Mexico are typically chosen for virus fairy tales because, in the minds of many Westerners, they satisfy a requirement of “strange,” “different,” “primitive,” and so on? We’re talking theater here—and when you stage a propaganda play (fiction), you want to tap into the reflex instincts of the audience. The Hartford Virus, the Des Moines Virus, the Vancouver Virus just don’t fit the bill.

Because they can’t drive up the fear that jungles or Africa or China can.

Unless you’ve been living in an ice cave in the Arctic, you know selling fear of THE VIRUS is big business. To do that, you have to strike the right notes.

I personally would be interested in a Beverly Hills or a Scarsdale or a Park Avenue epidemic virus story. I’d like to see the media try to sell that one.

What about a Bill Gates Seattle virus that some Patient Zero unknowingly carries on a plane flight to Mexico City?

Think it through. We NEVER hear killer virus stories about germs traveling from Europe and America to Asia and Africa. Why not? Because such a story won’t sell. It won’t bite.

This is called a clue.

It tells you that virus-stories are shaped and managed and written and managed and broadcast according to a plan that has nothing to do with actual disease.

If a monkey in Africa can bite a man and thus transmit a virus to the West, then a salesman in Duluth can sneeze on a man at a local airport and thus send a virus to Ethiopia.

But amazingly, through secret communication among viruses, it never happens that way. The germs have decided what the traffic pattern is, and the CDC and the World Health Organization are just discovering What Is.

Sure they are. And if you buy that, I have condos for sale on the far side of the moon.

*

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.

Notes

[0] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/virus/

[1] https://rickjaffeesq.com/2021/02/19/what-the-heck-is-the-harvard-pilgrim-study-and-did-it-really-say-that-about-the-underreporting-of-vaccine-adverse-events/

[2] https://openvaers.com/covid-data

[3] https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-science-health-pandemics-united-nations-fcf28a83c9352a67e50aa2172eb01a2f

[4] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/

[5] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

[6] https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html

[7] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/

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.

***

A Trump-appointed judge on Monday blocked Joe Biden’s vaccine mandate for healthcare workers in 10 states.

US District Judge Matthew Schelp in the Eastern District of Missouri blocked the federal government from mandating Covid jabs for healthcare workers in Missouri, Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Wyoming, Alaska, South Dakota, North Dakota and New Hampshire.

Republican Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt led the way and sued the Biden Regime alongside 9 other states.

Judge Schelp said the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has no right to hand down rules because they never got approval from Congress.

“Truly, the impact of this mandate reaches far beyond COVID,” Schelp wrote. “CMS seeks to overtake an area of traditional state authority by imposing an unprecedented demand to federally dictate the private medical decisions of millions of Americans. Such action challenges traditional notions of federalism.”

Schelp also said argued CMS did not produce evidence that shows vaccination status has “a direct impact on spreading Covid.”

“No one questions that protecting patients and health care workers from contracting COVID is a laudable objective,” he wrote. “But the court cannot, in good faith, allow CMS to enact an unprecedented mandate that lacks a ‘rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.’”

Attorney General Schmitt celebrated after Judge Schelp issued a preliminary injunction in response to his lawsuit.

*

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.

Cristina Laila began writing for The Gateway Pundit in 2016 and she is currently the Associate Editor.

Featured image is from Gateway Pundit

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 a small world we live in. The “Nu variant” scare you keep hearing about is coming from the same people and institutions that spawned the last COVID scare, and the one before that, and the one before that one, dating back all the way to the onset of COVID Mania.

[Update: the World Health Organization has now labeled this strain the “Omicron variant,” in noticeably skipping over “Xi” in the greek alphabet]

The corporate press and world governments have produced an incredible amount of noise about a claimed new COVID variant, the “Nu” variant, which has been detected in South Africa and Botswana.

Just as with previous ruling class-fomented bouts of Hysteria-19, there is no statistical cause for alarm over this new strain, which is one of over 100,000 mutations of the coronavirus.

The “new strain” has hardly produced any lab confirmed cases, but a panicked narrative has already been seeded in the public. The U.K. in particular has driven the fear to new levels. The country has already added several African nations to its travel ban list, citing the new strain.

Similar to every other government-prescribed policy to fight a war on a virus, travel bans do not actually work to stop a virus, but they do successfully agitate the markets and masses into bouts of madness.

And it is not a coincidence that the U.K. is again the first mover on the “Nu strain” front.

The new variant hysteria originated at Imperial College UK, the home of a disgraced, corrupted academic modeling institution that proselytized lockdowns to the Western world. Throughout COVID Mania, Imperial has been the source of countless versions of “new strain” propaganda. The institution does not only participate in shoddy modeling. It both foments the insanity and demands a series of totalitarian measures to deal with their faulty narrative creations.

The new variant scare campaign originated earlier this week with a Twitter thread from Tom Peacock, a postdoc in his early 30s who is employed at Imperial College London. He set the gears in motion through his alarmist interpretation of the variant, describing the new strain as having a “really awful Spike mutation profile.”

The corporate media, world governments, and other institutions have regurgitated Peacock’s pandemic proclamations, setting off a new series of authoritarian demands from the ruling class.

The current new strain panic comes at a time in Europe when COVID-19 cases are surging in the continent, despite the universal embrace of mRNA injections that were promised to resolve the COVID-19 problem.

This “new strain” has reportedly been found in Europe, driving the media’s narrative even further into the totalitarian abyss.

With claims disseminated to the masses by Big Tech and world governments, the Gates Inc and China-influenced World Health Organization is sowing maximum panic and terror.

Outside of the Chinese Communist Party, no other institution has been as influential in driving destructive COVID-19 policies than Imperial College London.

Imperial College UK is the home of the infamous “doomsday models” for COVID-19, which promised that millions of people would imminently be wiped off the earth if the Western world did not lock down in March of 2020 for COVID-19. The idea that the world needed to “flatten the curve” through pseudoscientific lockdowns was spawned by a faulty academic model from Neil Ferguson, an epidemiologist at Imperial College. When pressed to open source his models, Ferguson outright refused. He later resigned in disgrace from the U.K. government scientific advisory board. Yet “Professor Lockdown” somehow remains a very influential figure in driving Britain’s totalitarian pandemic response policies.

On the topic of new strains, it seems everything old is new again. Imperial was the primary source of the new variant scare models of 2020. It was around this time last year when U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, citing Imperial speculation on a different strain, initiated a Winter lockdown.

Read my piece in the Dossier about that “new strain” of 2020 and you will see the incredible parallels. The South Africa/Botswana “Nu strain” propaganda relies on the same fear campaign, but a rebranded version. It’s the exact same playbook.

Last year, it commenced with Erik Volz, an epidemiologist at Imperial College London, who claimed the new strain was 70% more transmissible. His exact language was later repeated by PM Johnson in justifying his lockdown.

Before Nu, the latest scariant, best known as the “Delta variant,” had a similar viral marketing campaign behind its emergence.

Notably, Imperial’s virology and epidemiology departments have received incredible amounts of funding from the Gates Foundation, the world’s most influential driver of global “public health” policy. According to a review of their public records, Gates Inc has delivered close to $300 million dollars to the Imperial College London.

*

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 Alt-Market.us

Biden’s First Year

November 30th, 2021 by James J. Zogby

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

It has been 300 days since Joseph Biden was inaugurated president. There’s no question that he’s had a rough go of it. He’s had to contend with a united Republican Party committed to blocking his every move and a handful of Democratic senators and members of Congress wanting to chip away at key components of his signature domestic legislation. Biden has also had to deal with the chaos left behind by his predecessor. Despite these obstacles, he has had some successes.  

Between now and his first anniversary in office, interest groups of all sorts will evaluate the extent to which the Biden administration has been able to fulfill the commitments he made during his campaign. During the next few months, I will, on occasion, take a look at a number of the pledges candidate Biden made to the Arab American community in 2020. Because developments in Israel/Palestine are on my mind, this is where I will begin.

During the 2020 campaign season, I was involved in the negotiations with the Biden team over the language that would shape its platform on Middle East-related issues. When it came to Israel/Palestine, I was pleased that they were willing to insert some language we had failed to have included in earlier years. This platform does, for example, speak about the equal worth and value of Israelis and Palestinians. It also condemns Israeli settlements, language we were unable to have inserted into the Obama or Clinton platforms.

Where we focused our pressure in 2020 was on our insistence that the Biden campaign accept the principle of conditionality, tying US political and economic assistance to Israel on their policies in the occupied territories. We failed to have any language of this sort inserted in the platform, and it is the absence of conditionality that, as we shall see, is the reason why the Biden administration has been unable to deliver on its other campaign pledges in this area.

In both the 2020 Biden platform and his campaign’s “Plan for Partnership” with the Arab American community, Biden addressed the Palestinian-Israeli conflict thusly.

“Joe Biden believes in the worth and value of every Palestinian and every Israeli. He will work to ensure that Palestinians and Israelis enjoy equal measures of freedom, security, prosperity, and democracy.”

“His policies will be grounded in a commitment to a two-state solution, where Israel and the future viable state of Palestine will live together in peace, security, and mutual recognition.”

“Biden opposes any unilateral steps by either side that undermine a two-state solution. He opposes annexation and settlement expansion and will continue to oppose both as President.”

“As President, Biden will take immediate steps to restore economic and humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people, consistent with US law, including assistance to refugees, work to address the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza…”

“… reopen the US consulate in East Jerusalem…”

“… and work to reopen the PLO mission in Washington”.

Even a cursory glance at the list makes it clear that with the exception of item #4, the Biden administration has failed to deliver on, or even make progress towards, any of the other pledges they made in addressing Israel/Palestine.

The lives and worth of Palestinians have repeatedly been subordinated to those of Israelis. Israel has continued to take unilateral measures that make a two-state solution impossible to even imagine. And it appears that the Biden administration has surrendered to Israel and pro-Israel “hawks” in Congress on reopening both the Jerusalem Consulate (which is actually in West, not East, Jerusalem) and the PLO office in Washington.

During the past ten months, the situation confronting Palestinians in the occupied territories has appreciably worsened. The Gaza war, which was precipitated by provocative Israeli actions that threaten to change the status quo at the Haram Al Sharif and efforts to evict Palestinians from their homes in Jerusalem and by Hamas’ foolish and costly use of rockets, resulted in the deaths of more than 200 Palestinians and a dozen Israelis, devastation to Gaza’s infrastructure, and the destruction of the homes of tens of thousands. Dozens of Palestinian demonstrators in the West Bank also lost their lives to Israeli fire.

The Biden administration had only a timid response to both Israel’s actions in Jerusalem and its disproportionate use of force in Gaza and the West Bank. And the aid the US has offered Palestinians, while welcomed, was $360 million, a paltry sum when compared to Israel’s $3.8 billion annual aid supplemented by an additional $1 billion to replenish its “Iron Dome” defence system.

Israel’s new government has announced plans to significantly increase the number of settlement housing units in the occupied lands and has “legalised” a number of previously “unauthorised” settlements, this growth is strategically planned to further consolidate Israeli control over the territories and make impossible the establishment of an independent viable Palestinian state. At the same time, Israel has continued to demolish Palestinian homes and do nothing to curb the spike in organised settler violence and harassment directed at Palestinians living near illegal Israeli settlements. To make matters worse, the Israelis have declared leading Palestinian human rights monitoring and advocacy groups to be terrorist-affiliated.

In the face of these Israeli actions, the Biden administration has done little more than express “deep concern”, which the Israelis dismiss out of hand. Doing nothing more concrete to cause Israel to change their policies of settlement growth, creeping annexation, and increasing the pressure on captive Palestinians contradicts all of the goals set by the Biden team.

In an effort to defend the administration’s inaction, some apologists express concern that a more combative stance against the new Israeli government would threaten its stability and risk bringing Netanyahu back into office. They also suggest that challenges to Israel will cause blowback from both Republicans and some Democrats in Congress. While this may be true, subordinating Palestinian rights to concerns for Israeli or domestic politics certainly calls into question the Biden administration’s stated commitment to the “equal worth and value of both Israelis and Palestinians”. It renders their pledges to Palestinians hollow and more performative than real. President Biden still has time to course correct and demonstrate desperately needed leadership in making good on his platform promises. It’s what he should do.

*

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.

James J. Zogby is president of the Washington-based Arab American Institute.

Featured image is from OffGuardian

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 world faces more lockdowns, travel restrictions, and coerced vaccinations as the WHO announces (and thousands of media stories) the sudden appearance of a new, potentially deadly strain.

What’s going on?

Hear from one of the world’s leading experts on the topic, and dive deep into an uncensored discussion on the BeSovereign free speech platform!

Click here to watch the video.

*

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

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.

***

South Africa has been at the center of the struggle against the COVID-19 pandemic since its beginning during the first quarter of 2020.

At the time of this writing, nearly 90,000 people have died as a result of the infection while 2.9 million infections have been documented.

The country, the most industrialized on the African continent, has confirmed more cases than any other government within the 55 member-states African Union (AU). Some have attributed the high number of cases in South Africa to its testing capacity which has been rigorous since the advent of the pandemic.

With the detection of a new COVID-19 variant labelled Omicron, the western imperialist countries have responded with the imposition of travel bans specifically targeting the Southern Africa region. Political officials and other sectors of society have roundly condemned these measures noting that the restrictions unfairly designated the sub-continent as the source of the variant and its transmissibility.

Although the Southern African region has been the focus of Omicron, the variant has been detected in at least 11 other countries, including Israel, Australia and several European states such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Britain, Switzerland, Italy and Germany. There is no concrete evidence that the variant originated in Botswana or any other country in the sub-continent.

Following the lead of the United States, the UK and EU, other countries even within the AU region, have imposed the same bans related to travel. South Africa has been a leading country in the efforts to vaccinate people domestically and throughout the sub-continent.

Plans are underway for the establishment of manufacturing facilities in South Africa to produce COVID-19 vaccines for continental-wide distribution. The advanced nature of genome sequence monitoring inside the country has been an asset to the overall effort to curtail and eliminate the existing threat.

President Cyril Ramaphosa addressed the nation over television on November 28 to discuss the detection of the Omicron variant of the coronavirus, praising the scientific community for the discovery and encouraging those who had not been vaccinated to do so immediately. At the same the president expressed his profound disagreement with the travel bans noting that it is unjustly punishing those who made the discovery while further damaging the economies of South Africa and the seven other neighboring states.

The ban covers South Africa, Eswatini, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Mozambique, Malawi, Lesotho and Botswana. It was in Botswana where the initial presence of the variant was detected.

South Africa and other members of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have suffered immensely since the lockdowns and restrictions enacted in the aftermath of the pandemic. Many of these states rely heavily on tourism and such a ban on travel for people from the region or those who have visited Southern Africa, will only serve to hamper any semblance of an economic recovery.

Moreover, the ban stigmatizes the region as a principal source of the pandemic when the initial cases of the coronavirus were detected in Asia and Europe during early 2020. Even today, the U.S. remains the epicenter of the pandemic having reported more cases than any other country internationally. Several states, led by Michigan, are experiencing a fourth wave of infections despite widespread efforts to encourage vaccinations by the U.S. government and its agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease.

Yet within the U.S., the pandemic has been highly politicized by right-wing elements so prevalent in the country. Conservative forces tend to oppose not only vaccinations, they also have utilized the public health protocols to disrupt local, legislative, state administrative and federal structures to claim that the enactment of restrictions to curb the spread of the virus infringes upon their personal freedom.

With specific reference to South Africa, Eyewitness News reported on November 29 that:

“An outraged President Cyril Ramaphosa on Sunday (Nov. 28) said the curbs were scientifically unjustified and called for them to be ‘immediately and urgently’ reversed. Health Minister Joe Phaahla on Monday said many South Africans had felt the country had hastened to go public with the discovery of the new Omicron variant and that had it ‘kept quiet, travel bans would not have happened. But that would have been detrimental, because our approach is for our citizens to not live in false security and false safety,’ said Phaahla. South African scientists won applause from Namibian President Hage Geingob, who said they had ‘unwittingly drawn fire and condemnation’ for their country.”

Southern Africa and the Global Pandemic

Ramaphosa felt compelled to speak to the South African people over the national media in real time on November 28 emphasizing the work which has been done over the last 20 months. He has maintained the country at a Level 1 public health status which imposes restrictions related to curfews, the number of people who can gather indoors and outdoors, and the need to wear masks along with vaccinations.

The president emphasized:

“The G20 Rome Declaration noted the plight of the tourism sector in developing countries, and made a commitment to support a ‘rapid, resilient, inclusive and sustainable recovery of the tourism sector’. Countries that have imposed travel restrictions on our country and some of our Southern African sister countries include the United Kingdom, United States, European Union members, Canada, Turkey, Sri Lanka, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Japan, Thailand, Seychelles, Brazil and Guatemala, among others. These restrictions are unjustified and unfairly discriminate against our country and our Southern African sister countries. The prohibition of travel is not informed by science, nor will it be effective in preventing the spread of this variant. The only thing the prohibition on travel will do is to further damage the economies of the affected countries and undermine their ability to respond to, and recover from, the pandemic. We call upon all those countries that have imposed travel bans on our country and our Southern African sister countries to urgently reverse their decisions and lift the ban they have imposed before any further damage is done to our economies and to the livelihoods of our people. There is no scientific justification for keeping these restrictions in place.”

Others have pointed out the ongoing vaccination access inequality where on the African continent it is reported that only 6% of the population throughout the AU region have been fully inoculated against the virus. It is inevitable under such circumstances that new variants will continue to emerge globally.

On the European continent there has been a surge in coronavirus infections in several countries over the last few months. According to statista.com:

“As of November 21, 2021, there were 81,523,935 confirmed cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) across the whole of Europe since the first confirmed case on January 25, 2020. Montenegro has the highest incidence of coronavirus cases among its population in Europe at 24,914 per 100,000 people, followed by a rate of 20,408 in Georgia. Slovenia has recorded the third highest rate of cases in Europe at 19,322 cases per 100,000. With over 9.8 million confirmed cases, the UK has been the worst affected country in Europe, which translates into a rate of 14,773 cases per 100,000 population.”

Nonetheless, during early November, Washington lifted restrictions on travel into the U.S. for a host of countries including EU member-states, Canada, Mexico, Morocco, among others. Those who have proof of being fully immunized with World Health Organization (WHO) approved vaccines were allowed to travel into the country. See this.

However, in regard to Southern Africa, the travel bans have blanketed all citizens and residents of the region. South Africa, which has fully vaccinated approximately 25% of its population of nearly 60 million people, apparently are excluded from these Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines.

United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres spoke out against the travel bans on people from Southern Africa. The UN chief said of the situation:

“The people of Africa cannot be blamed for the immorally low level of vaccinations available in Africa – and they should not be penalized for identifying and sharing crucial science and health information with the world. I am now deeply concerned about the isolation of Southern African countries due to new COVID-19 travel restrictions.”

WHO has also rejected the travel bans targeting the people of Southern Africa. The UN-affiliated agency’s regional director for Africa, Dr. Matshidiso Moeti, demanded that the international community utilize science and international health protocols while refraining from travel bans.

Moeti said in a statement about the bans, noting:

“Travel restrictions may play a role in slightly reducing the spread of COVID-19 but place a heavy burden on lives and livelihoods. If restrictions are implemented, they should not be unnecessarily invasive or intrusive, and should be scientifically based, according to the International Health Regulations, which is a legally binding instrument of international law recognized by over 190 nations.”

The existence of new variants of concern further emphasizes the necessity of a global approach to resolving the pandemic. Vaccinations and other medicines to treat COVID-19 must be made available to all the peoples of the world.

*

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

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 No Concrete Evidence that Omicron Variant originated in Africa: Travel Ban Led by Western Countries Draws Condemnation
  • Tags: , ,

Forced to Get Vaccine to Remain on Lung Transplant List, 49-Year-Old Who Survived COVID Dies after Second Moderna Shot

By Megan Redshaw, November 30, 2021

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Amy Bolin said in order to be approved for a double-lung transplant, her husband had to be fully vaccinated for COVID even though he’d had the virus and recovered. After his second Moderna shot, he developed a pulmonary embolism and heart condition and died before he could get new lungs.

The Ministry of Propaganda Then and Now: Youtube Censorship. “Covid-19 Medical Misinformation Policy”

By Stephen Karganovic, November 30, 2021

Every morning after arriving in his office at the Propaganda Ministry, Dr. Goebbels would devote himself to the important task of disseminating a directive to all German media outlets, outlining what position on principal issues they were expected to take on that particular day.

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

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 30, 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.

Video: 13 Year-old Canadian Girl Took the Covid-19 Vaccine. “Try Not to Cry, Her Heart Stopped and Now She is in Critical Condition”

By Global Research News, November 29, 2021

Powerful voice by a Canadian mother. Her daughter’s 13-year-old friend who did not want to take the COVID-19 vaccine. Watch her video.

Germany: Chief Medical Doctor of a Major Hospital Thomas Jendges “Falls” from the Roof of the Hospital. Suicide or Murder?

By Peter Koenig, November 29, 2021

The chief medical doctor in Chemnitz’s main hospital – Chemnitz is the third largest city of Saxony – “talked” (see the 2-min video below) then “fell” from the roof of the hospital to his death. Suicide of murder?

Revelation 2021? High-profile Soccer Figures, Players (“Footballers”) Forcing Conversation after Three More Soccer Players Collapse in Three Days

By TheCOVIDBlog.com, November 29, 2021

Just two weeks ago, we highlighted the deaths or cardiac episodes of five young athletes in an eight day stretch. Two of them were American high school football players. One was a European international hockey player.

Fauci Floats the Idea of Injecting Eligible Americans with COVID Booster Shots Every Six Months

By Ramon Tomey, November 29, 2021

Top U.S. infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci is proposing to inject every eligible American with Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine boosters every six months. He shared this idea during a recent interview with the ABC program “This Week.”

New Nuclear Deal With Iran?

By Dr. Hadi Issa Dalloul and Steven Sahiounie, November 29, 2021

On Monday, November 29, the parties involved in negotiations considering a new nuclear deal with Iran, the so-called ‘5 plus 1’, will meet in Vienna. Will Iran’s demands be met, and will the US be willing to compromise to avoid a regional military conflict, which all sides want to avoid?

The Science Is Clear: Higher COVID “Vaccine” Coverage Equals Higher Excess Mortality

By Ethan Huff, November 29, 2021

An English translation of the study’s findings explains that the less vaccinated the area, the higher the chances of survival. Conversely, the more vaccinated the area, the greater the rate of excess mortality.

Slovenia: Drivers Must Present COVID Certificate in Order to Refuel Cars

By East Valley Post, November 29, 2021

There were no incidents in Slovenia on the first day of tighter epidemiological restrictions, with some dissatisfaction among unvaccinated citizens, mostly drivers who were unable to refuel their cars without a COVID-19 certificate.

 

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: 13 Year-old Canadian Girl Took the COVID-19 Vaccine. “Try Not to Cry, Her Heart Stopped and Now She Is in Critical Condition”

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Amy Bolin said in order to be approved for a double-lung transplant, her husband had to be fully vaccinated for COVID even though he’d had the virus and recovered. After his second Moderna shot, he developed a pulmonary embolism and heart condition and died before he could get new lungs.

A 49-year-old Texas man who recovered from COVID — but was required to be fully vaccinated against the virus before being approved for a life-saving lung transplant — died when he developed a pulmonary embolism and heart issues after his second Moderna vaccine.

In an exclusive Interview with The Defender, the man’s wife, Amy Bolin, said there was no reason her husband, Bobby Bolin, should have been forced to get the vaccine.

“In the medical field, your goal is supposed to be to improve and save people’s lives, and instead you’re giving them one option — you either do this or you can’t get a life-saving transplant,” Amy said.

Amy said her husband had no choice. “He knew that without lungs he was not going to live because his lungs were failing him. But look at what happened by making that choice.”

After his second Moderna shot, received on April 17, Bolin developed a pulmonary embolism and atrial fibrillation — a heart condition characterized by an irregular heartbeat, shortness of breath, chest pain and extreme fatigue. His health rapidly deteriorated and he passed away Aug. 20, before receiving new lungs.

Bolin had COPA syndrome, a rare genetic autoimmune disorder.

“The side effect from the disease was an attack on his lungs, and he was at 15% lung capacity when he was being evaluated for a double-lung transplant,” Amy said.

Bolin started the evaluation process for new lungs in September 2020.

“During that process, they discovered he had a blockage in his main artery and a couple of other arteries so he had to have a stent procedure done in September,” Amy said.

The evaluation process was halted because Bolin was required to take blood thinners after the procedure.

Once Bolin was finally approved for new lungs, he was told he would have to get vaccinated against COVID in order to be an eligible candidate for the transplant, even though he had already recovered from the virus.

“Our entire family actually came down with COVID in December 2020,” Amy said. “When that happened for Bobby, he was immediately given the antibody transfusion. His transplant team was certain that because of his minimal lung capacity this would be certain death for him, but he didn’t really have any side effects from it. A loss of smell was all that really lingered for him.”

When Amy learned her husband would be required to get the COVID vaccine, she “pushed back pretty hard with the transplant team.” She said she didn’t understand why the team would force a COVID vaccine on her husband without first testing his antibodies.

“It didn’t make sense to me,” Amy said. “He was extremely immunocompromised. He even struggled to take the flu shot, and we even fought the team about that because he would end up in the ICU every time it was given to him.”

Amy said:

“Unfortunately, he was desperate. He was very sick. He was not feeling well. The thought of taking this vaccine or not having the opportunity to have a chance at living was not something that he was willing to gamble with, so he agreed to take it.”

Bolin got his first dose of Moderna on March 20. He didn’t experience any effects outside of “typical achiness and feeling a little run-down,” Amy said, though he generally didn’t feel well due to his symptoms, so it was hard to tell if he was experiencing an adverse event or if it was part of his condition.

Shortly after he got the second dose, Amy and her husband took a three-day trip to Jamaica.

“It was going to kind of be our last hurrah knowing we were about to face a very big life change,” Amy said. “When you’re on the transplant list you can’t be more than an hour away from home. We felt like we needed to get away to reconnect and have some ‘us’ time before life got really crazy.”

On the way back from Jamaica, Bolin experienced a pulmonary embolism while in flight. According to Mayo Clinic, a pulmonary embolism is a life-threatening condition where a blockage caused by blood clots occurs in the pulmonary arteries of the lungs.

“All of a sudden his sats [oxygen saturation] started dropping,” Amy said. “He had a pulse oximeter on his finger, and I’m watching his oxygen levels go from 92 to 85, to 80, to 60. He dropped all the way down to the 40s, which is brain-damage level.”

Amy said they were lucky because an ICU nurse on the flight and a doctor sitting right behind them sprang into action. “They were our heroes on this flight,” Amy said.

The plane received permission to cruise at a lower altitude and made an emergency landing in Houston. The crew used oxygen tanks onboard to give Bolin pure oxygen.

Once the plane landed, Bolin was evaluated by EMTs. His sats were back to normal, so he decided not to go to the hospital because nearby hospitals were not familiar with his condition.

“A few days later we ended up in the hospital because I noticed his cognitive awareness had been impacted and he just wasn’t himself,” Amy said. During the evaluation process, they determined he had a pulmonary embolism while on the flight despite having no previous history of blood clots. They also diagnosed him with atrial fibrillation.

Amy said:

“This is a man who multiple times a year was in the hospital being observed for his lung condition and never, never ever, had they ever identified any rhythmic issues with his heart until this occurrence happens.

“And when I questioned it [the vaccine] of course it was ‘Oh no, that has nothing to do with it.’ And I said I can’t ignore the fact that the second injection just happened and now he has developed heart issues and blood clot issues that had never been present before, so why are we ruling that out so quickly rather than looking into that being a possibility, but it fell on deaf ears.”

His doctors never provided an explanation for why Bolin suddenly developed either condition. Amy said the risk of myocarditis following an mRNA vaccine was never discussed with them, despite her husband having had previous heart surgery.

Amy said her husband was in the hospital for 22 days.

“They put him on blood thinners and medication for his heart condition. When he passed away he was on 31 prescription medications, so we were just throwing medicine at him trying to figure it out and it just never got resolved,” Amy said.

Bolin had “several visits to the hospital between May and August, twice by ambulance because he got into a place where the AFib felt out of control,” Amy said. “When you have limited lung capacity and you feel like you can’t catch your breath and breathe, it just becomes a vicious circle of stress and anxiety, and again they could not figure out how to get this AFib under control.”

Amy said she doesn’t know what timeline her husband had with his organs, but she saw a complete change in him over four months’ time. “It was unfair, it was unjust and it was inhumane that he was going to sleep at night thinking — ‘what do I do here?’”

“People have the right to take the shot if that is what they think is best for them,” Amy said. “I never felt like this was best for him … ever ever ever. And to be told again that you can either do this or not be eligible for transplant left him in a space of complete desperation — and he did it out of complete desperation.”

Amy told The Defender:

“For anyone who has an immunocompromised person in their lives, our lives did not change when COVID came about. We already lived a COVID lifestyle. We didn’t touch door handles, we didn’t go out with people who were ill, we already as a family … take those necessary steps to protect ourselves.

“So the idea and the guilt that is being driven by all of this that we have to protect everyone else. These are people who already know how to protect themselves as best they can from things. My husband’s illness was his lungs and you can’t not breathe.”

Amy said she requested her own autopsy because she needed answers.

“It just sickens me, it really does,” Amy said. “His legacy is really important to me and I don’t want to see another wife and family face the same things we’ve faced these last few months.”

COVID vaccines are ineffective in immunocompromised people 

As The Defender reported Oct. 29, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidance recommending immunocompromised adults receive a fourth booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID vaccine six months after receiving their third dose — as research shows people with compromised immune systems don’t mount an adequate immune response following vaccination.

The purpose of the third dose was to raise their immunity levels to what’s seen in people with normal immune systems after two doses.

The goal of the fourth dose is to “combat waning immunity.” It would serve the same purpose as a booster dose given to people without immune deficiencies six months after they were initially vaccinated.

Some experts are concerned about the effects of giving a fourth vaccine dose to the immunocompromised population — a practice that has not been studied for safety or efficacy, or signed off on by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or CDC’s vaccine safety advisors.

“Dosing of COVID-19 vaccines is worrisome for accumulation of spike protein in the human body,” said Dr. Peter McCullough, a consultant and cardiologist.

“With each injection, there is an uncontrolled production of the SARS-CoV-2 pathogenic spike protein which goes on for weeks or months,” McCullough said. “Recent evidence in the SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infection has found that the S1 segment of the spike protein is recoverable in human monocytes over a year after the illness.”

McCullough said the spike protein will progressively accumulate in the brain, heart and other vital organs — exceeding the rate of clearance with each dose — and is well known to cause diseases, such as myocarditis, neurologic damage and blood clotting.

*

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.

***

Gleichschaltung is a German word with a rich history. It stands for the coerced harmonisation of all forms of public expression with the official line. That concept is currently undergoing a renaissance, but not in the “captive nations” of the East.

Every morning after arriving in his office at the Propaganda Ministry, Dr. Goebbels would devote himself to the important task of disseminating a directive to all German media outlets, outlining what position on principal issues they were expected to take on that particular day. The media were instructed not only on what to say but – of equal importance – what not to mention. The system Goebbels set up worked like a charm. Under his meticulous supervision, in public discourse an imposing harmony of opinion reigned from one end of Germany to another, undisrupted by discordant voices.

One wishes that this mechanically imposed harmony, admired as it may have been by some, had come to an end in 1945. But a YouTube bulletin disseminated a few days ago reminds us that it did not.

YouTube users were curtly informed of the prevailing “Community Guidelines” on a topic which currently is at the top of the list of public concerns: The Covid-19 crisis. Here are the highlights of that guidance:

“COVID-19 medical misinformation policy

“YouTube doesn’t allow content about COVID-19 that poses a serious risk of egregious harm.

“YouTube doesn’t allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts local health authorities’ (LHA) or the World Health Organization’s (WHO) medical information about COVID-19. This is limited to content that contradicts WHO [about the utter corruption of WHO, see here] or local health authorities’ guidance on:

  • “Treatment,
  • “Prevention
  • “Diagnosis
  • “Transmission
  • “Social distancing and self-isolation guidelines, and
  • “The existence of COVID-19.”

Sceptics are encouraged to go directly to the source if they have doubts about the authenticity of these appalling prohibitions: see this.

YouTube then goes on to specify:

“What this policy means for you if you’re posting content:

“Don’t post content on YouTube if it includes any of the following:

“Treatment misinformation:

“Content that encourages the use of home remedies, prayer, or rituals in place of medical treatment such as consulting a doctor or going to the hospital.”

Notably, no definition of “egregious harm” or “home remedies” is given, nor is any rationale provided for prohibiting such remedies being recommended by persons who may have had a positive experience after using them. Nor is it explained to millions of religious people throughout the world why prayer and procedures condescendingly termed “rituals” are also on the prohibited list. Will members of the Christian Science religious denomination, who since long before the appearance of Covid have relied exclusively on prayer for therapeutic purposes and avoided medical cures, now be required to alter their beliefs? Not even in the Soviet Union were believers ever made to face such a stark choice. To even the least sophisticated it should now be obvious that the thrust of YouTube’s guidelines is not to promote health but to steer patients toward the extremely expensive solutions that have enabled the pharmacological industry to make a financial killing from Covid-19.

That impression is strongly reinforced by the nauseatingly repetitious proscriptions that follow:

“Content that recommends use of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19

“Claims that Hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment for COVID-19

“Categorical claims that Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19

“Claims that Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are safe to use in the treatment COVID-19

“Content that recommends use of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine for the prevention of COVID-19

“Claims that Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are safe to use in the treatment COVID-19.”

What evidence is there that they are unsafe? No indications are given. The governments of India, Japan, and the municipal authorities of Mexico City, among others, are quite happy with the results of the application of these treatments. So are their cured citizens who, however, are now prohibited by YouTube from telling others about their successful recovery.

If YouTube were merely a media platform, what possible interest could it have in disparaging cheap and effective alternatives to outrageously expensive, untested, and harmful pharmaceutical preparations of undisclosed composition, for the ill effects of which companies that produce them refuse to accept any tort liability?

The YouTube guideline goes on to disqualify questioning of masks or of their effectiveness and “claims that an approved COVID-19 vaccine will cause death, infertility, miscarriage, autism, or contraction of other infectious diseases,” although it is an amply documented fact that it will do all those things.

Also forbidden are claims that “an approved COVID-19 vaccine will contain substances that are not on the vaccine ingredient list, such as biological matter from fetuses (e.g. fetal tissue, fetal cell lines) or animal products.”  Never mind that several manufacturers have already admitted that it does, albeit using the weasel concept of “fetal cell lines” to mask the morally objectionable use of material from aborted babies, and so on and so forth, in dreary detail that even Dr. Goebbels would have felt too embarrassed to put in one of his directives.

Readers are again urged to go to the link provided above to confirm for themselves the extent to which a private virtually monopolistic media corporation such as YouTube (along with other similar concerns, such as Twitter and Facebook) is willing to go in dictating to citizens what opinions they are prohibited from expressing.

And now we come to the nitty-gritty: What happens if posted content violates YouTube policy:

“If your content violates this policy, we’ll remove the content and send you an email to let you know… If you get 3 strikes within 90 days, your channel will be terminated.

“We may terminate your channel or account for repeated violations of the Community Guidelines or Terms of Service. We may also terminate your channel or account after a single case of severe abuse, or when the channel is dedicated to a policy violation.”

There is no disclosure of who makes these determinations or any hint of due process or appellate procedure.

The perceptive reader must by now entertain the logical question: by what right does a private corporation, chartered to make its services available to all members of the public on a non-discriminatory basis, presume to dictate to its users what they may or may not think or post? The same question, of course, can be put to other private corporations which are also abusing their privileged position in order to impose ideological tyranny. Twitter and Facebook come to mind.

And where are the public authorities to reign in these unhinged private tyrants? The state, indeed, seems to have withered away, exactly as Marx predicted, or it may simply have merged with private corporations to lay the foundations of fascism, as Mussolini is alleged to have said. The state’s unsavoury role in this assault on freedom of expression is of particular concern. While passively subcontracting the dirty work to private corporations, it can perfidiously claim that no formal curtailment of personal liberties is taking place. The First Amendment remains technically intact since it is not the government that is undermining it.

The Covid-19 social control experiment has been running for almost two years. It cannot be denied that it has accomplished some of its objectives, but in important respects it has also been an unmitigated failure. YouTube’s offensive list of “don’ts,” issued after two years of intense global indoctrination, is irrefutable proof of that. In spite of unwavering support by politics, media, finance, and corrupt “science,” the Covid narrative has fallen apart under relentless battering by competent and informed partisans of truth and liberty.

Dr. Goebbels’ inept disciples have overlooked the concept of gute Propaganda, paradoxically one of the key postulates of the doctor’s technique. It means that to be credible, successful, and ultimately persuasive, propaganda must be heavily laced with elements of truth. In their hubris and unremitting reliance on crude force, they failed to do their homework. “Good propaganda,” Goebbels wrote, “need not lie, in fact must not lie. Propaganda which makes use of the lie … cannot have success in the long run …  but a right idea must also be set forth in the appropriate way.”

They have obviously failed to find the appropriate way to package Covid-19 for the hesitant and disbelieving masses. Hence, their inelegant solution is to try to ram it down everybody’s throat, which is a risky approach and likely to backfire. Schade … the doctor is probably muttering in his molten lake in hell.

*

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.

Stephen Karganovic is president of “Srebrenica Historical Project,” an NGO registered in the Netherlands to investigate the factual matrix and background of events that took place in Srebrenica in July of 1995.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Ministry of Propaganda Then and Now: Youtube Censorship. “Covid-19 Medical Misinformation Policy”
  • Tags:

China and Africa Move into New Era of Cooperation

November 30th, 2021 by Kester Kenn Klomegah

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.

***

Despite its large population of 1.5 billion which many have considered as an impediment, China’s domestic economic reforms and collaborative strategic diplomacy with external countries have made it attain superpower status over the United States. While United States’ influence is rapidly fading away, China has indeed taken up both the challenges and unique opportunities to strengthen its global position, especially its trade, investment and economic muscles.

Undoubtedly, China has attained its superpower status by working consistently on practical multifaceted sustainable development and simultaneously maintaining appreciably positive relations with countries around the world.

China is visible with its economic footprints in the United States, Latin America, Europe, Asia and Africa. China is the largest developing country in the world, and Africa is the continent with the largest number of developing countries. Shared past experiences and similar aims and goals have brought China and Africa close together. China and Africa will always be a community of shared future. Developing solidarity and cooperation with African countries has been the cornerstone of China’s foreign policy, as well as a firm and longstanding strategy.

Entering the new era, Chinese President Xi Jinping put forward the principles of China’s Africa policy – sincerity, real results, amity and good faith, and pursuing the greater good and shared interests, charting the course for China’s cooperation with Africa, and providing the fundamental guidelines. President Xi Jinping and African leaders unanimously decided at the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) Beijing Summit that the two sides would work to build an even stronger China-Africa community of shared future, advance cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative, establishing a new milestone in China-Africa relations.

Over the years, China has worked and always desirous to show real and tangible results from its undertakings in Africa. It is a champion of win-win cooperation and works to put the principle into action. China is committed to integrating its own development closely with Africa’s development, and the Chinese people’s interests with those of African peoples. By so doing, China sincerely hopes that African countries will grow stronger and that African life will get better. While pursuing its own development, China has extended support and assistance to its African friends to the limits of its capacity.

Particularly in recent years, China has scaled up its assistance and cooperation with Africa. Whenever it makes a commitment, China will always try to deliver promptly. It will continue to expand cooperation in investment and financing with Africa and strengthen mutually beneficial cooperation in agricultural and manufacturing sectors. By so doing, China will help African countries translate their strengths in resources into advantages in development and realize independent and sustainable development.

China’s approach involves upholding four principles:

  • Upholding sincerity, friendship and equality. The Chinese people have worked together with African people in pursuit of a shared future. China respects, appreciates and supports Africa.
  • Upholding shared interests and the greater good, with greater emphasis on the latter. In its cooperation with Africa, China applies the principles of giving more and taking less, giving before taking, and giving without asking for something in return. It welcomes African countries aboard the express train of China’s development with open arms.
  • Upholding a people-oriented approach in pursuing practical cooperation with efficiency. In its cooperation with Africa, China gives top priority to the interests and wellbeing of the peoples of China and Africa, and works to their benefit. China is committed to fully honoring the promises it has made to its African friends.
  • Upholding openness and inclusiveness. China stands ready to work with other international partners to support Africa in pursuing peace and development. It welcomes and supports all initiatives that further Africa’s interests.

In developing relations with Africa, there are five lines that China will not cross: no interference in African countries’ choice of a development path that fits their national conditions; no interference in African countries’ internal affairs; no imposition of its will on African countries; no attachment of political strings to assistance to Africa; and no pursuit of selfish political gains through investment and financing cooperation with Africa.

Building Political Trust

At Beijing Summit in 2018, China and Africa the FOCAC reached a strategic agreement to build a China-Africa community of shared future characterized by joint responsibility, win-win cooperation, happiness for all, cultural prosperity, common security, and harmony between humanity and nature.

China sees Africa as a broad stage for international cooperation rather than an arena for competition among major countries. China-Africa cooperation has never been a case of talk and no action. It is a case of bringing tangible benefits to people in China and Africa, and creating more favorable conditions for others in the international community to conduct cooperation with Africa.

In 2006, the FOCAC Beijing Summit decided to establish a new type of China-Africa strategic partnership. In 2015, the FOCAC Johannesburg Summit decided to build a China-Africa comprehensive strategic and cooperative partnership. In the 2018 FOCAC Beijing Summit, the two sides agreed to build an even stronger China-Africa community of shared future, raising China-Africa relations to a new level.

High-level exchanges play an important role in developing China-Africa relations. State leaders of the two sides value communication and coordination on bilateral relations. In March 2013, President Xi Jinping visited Africa, his first official overseas visit after assuming the office of president. To date he has made four visits to different locations across the continent.

During the 2018 FOCAC Beijing Summit, President Xi had one-on-one meetings with more than 50 African leaders, renewing friendships, exploring cooperation, and discussing the future. He also attended close to 70 bilateral and multilateral events.

After the FOCAC Beijing Summit in 2018, 17 African leaders came to China for state visits or meetings. Following the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, state leaders of the two sides have maintained contacts and communication via video and phone calls. In June 2020, President Xi Jinping presided over the Extraordinary China-Africa Summit on Solidarity Against Covid-19 via video link. Thirteen African leaders and chairperson of the AU Commission attended the summit.

China-Africa cooperation at the local level is flourishing. The two sides have held four cooperation forums between local governments since 2012. There are currently 160 pairings of sister provinces/cities between China and African countries, 48 of which have been established since 2013. China and African countries conduct close exchanges between political parties, legislative bodies and consultative bodies, building multi-level, multi-channel, multi-form and multi-dimensional friendly cooperation.

China, African Union and Regional Organizations

China has been active in developing cooperation with the AU and African sub-regional organizations. The AU Conference Center, which was built with Chinese assistance, was inaugurated in January 2012. It was the second-largest project in Africa to be built with China’s assistance after the Tanzania-Zambia Railway. In 2014, China sent a mission to the AU, marking a new stage of China-AU relations. China values the AU’s leading role in advancing African integration and building a stronger African continent through unity, and supports its dominant role in safeguarding peace and security in Africa. China also supports the AU in playing a bigger role in regional and international affairs, adopting Agenda 2063, and executing the First Ten-Year Implementation Plan.

In a capacity of observer, China has attended the summit of many African sub-regional organizations including the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the East African Community (EAC), and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development and the Economic Community of Central African States. China has sent ambassadors to the ECOWAS, SADC and EAC.

China’s Economic Achievements

China and Africa have seen economic and trade cooperation expanding rapidly in scale and extent. The 10 major cooperation plans and the eight major initiatives adopted at the 2015 FOCAC Johannesburg Summit and the 2018 FOCAC Beijing Summit raised China-Africa economic and trade cooperation to a new level.

  • Increasing development assistance. While pursuing its own growth, China supports African countries in seeking development and improving their people’s lives. In the new era, China has scaled up assistance to Africa. Foreign aid from 2013 to 2018 totaled RMB270 billion. Of this sum, 45 percent went to African countries in the form of grants, interest-free loans and concessional loans.

From 2000 to 2020, China helped African countries build more than 13,000 km of roads and railway and more than 80 large-scale power facilities, and funded over 130 medical facilities, 45 sports venues and over 170 schools. It also trained more than 160,000 personnel for Africa, and built a series of flagship projects including the AU Conference Center.

China’s assistance extended to various aspects of the economy, society and people’s lives, and was widely welcomed and supported by governments in Africa and the people. China has announced an exemption from debt incurred in the form of interest-free Chinese government loans due to mature by the end of 2018. It will apply to Africa’s least developed countries, heavily indebted and poor countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing countries that have diplomatic relations with China. During the Covid-19 pandemic, China cancelled the outstanding debts of 15 African countries in the form of interest-free loans that matured at the end of 2020

  • Booming trade relations. China has been Africa’s largest trading partner for the 12 years since 2009. The proportion of Africa’s trade with China in the continent’s total external trade has continued to rise. In 2020, the figure exceeded 21 percent. The structure of China-Africa trade is improving. There has been a marked increase in technology in China’s exports to Africa, with the export of mechanical and electrical products and high-tech products now accounting for more than 50 percent of the total.

China has increased its imports of non-resource products from Africa, and offered zero-tariff treatment to 97 percent of taxable items exported to China by the 33 least-developed countries in Africa, with the goal of helping more African agricultural and manufactured goods gain access to the Chinese market. China’s imports in services from Africa have been growing at an average annual rate of 20 percent since 2017, creating close to 400,000 jobs for the continent every year.

In recent years, China’s imports of agricultural products from Africa have also risen, and China has emerged as the second largest destination for Africa’s agricultural exports. China and Africa have seen booming trade in new business models including cross-border e-commerce. Cooperation under the Silk Road E-commerce initiative has advanced. China has built a mechanism for e-commerce cooperation with Rwanda, and Chinese businesses have been active in investing in overseas order fulfillment centers. High-quality and special products from Africa are now directly available to the Chinese market via e-commerce platforms. The China-Mauritius free trade agreement (FTA), which became effective on January 1 2021, was the first FTA between China and an African country. It has injected new vitality into China-Africa economic and trade cooperation.

  • Promoting cooperation in investment and financing. Cooperation in investment and financing has been one of the success stories of China-Africa cooperation in recent years, bringing new vitality into Africa’s economic and social development. Combining Africa’s needs and China’s strengths, China encourages its companies to increase and optimize investment in Africa, providing support in financing and export credit insurance for eligible projects. Thanks to the combined efforts of the Chinese government, financial institutions, and enterprises, China’s investment in Africa has built up sound momentum. It covers a wide range of fields including mining, processing and smelting of ores, equipment manufacturing, agriculture, home appliance production, aviation services, medicine and health, and the digital economy. With this help, African countries have been able to upgrade their industrialization, improve their industries, and increase their capacity to earn foreign exchange through exports.

By the end of 2020, direct investment of Chinese companies in Africa had surpassed $43 billion. China has established over 3,500 companies of various types across the continent. Private companies have gradually become the main investment force in Africa; more than 80 percent of their employees are locals, and they have directly and indirectly created millions of jobs.

  • Facilitating agricultural development in Africa. China has always been willing to share agricultural development experience and technology with Africa, to support African countries in improving agricultural production and processing, and to help them in building their agricultural value chains and trade. Since 2012, 7,456 African trainees have received agricultural training in China. Through projects such as sending Chinese agricultural experts to Africa, more than 50,000 Africans have been trained and 23 agricultural demonstration centers have been built. To date, China has established agricultural cooperation mechanisms with 23 African countries and regional organizations, and signed 72 bilateral and multilateral agricultural cooperation agreements.

Since 2012, China has signed 31 agricultural cooperation agreements with 20 African countries and regional organizations. In 2019, the First China-Africa Agriculture Cooperation Forum was held, which announced the establishment of the China-AU Agriculture Cooperation Commission and the formulation of a program of action to promote China-Africa cooperation in agricultural modernization. By the end of 2020, more than 200 Chinese companies had an investment stock of $1.11 billion in agricultural sector in 35 African countries. Their investments cover areas such as planting, breeding and processing. More than 350 types of African agricultural products can be traded with China. All this ensures steady growth in China-Africa agricultural trade.

  • Contributing to industrialization in Africa. Industrialization is a prerequisite for the continent to achieve inclusive and sustainable development, and is also the key to creating jobs, eradicating poverty, and improving living standards. China supports African countries in improving their “soft” and “hard” environment for investment in accordance with their national conditions and development needs. Taking industrial alignment and capacity cooperation as the engine, China helps advance the process of Africa’s industrialization and economic diversification. To date, China has established industrial capacity cooperation mechanisms with 15 countries in Africa.

China and African countries have worked together to build economic and trade cooperation zones, special economic zones, industrial parks and science parks, attracting enterprises from China and other countries to invest in Africa. They have built production and processing bases and localized their operations in Africa, contributing to an increase in local employment and tax revenues, and promoting industrial upgrading and technical cooperation. The China-Africa Fund for Production Capacity Cooperation has focused on the construction of highways, railways, and aviation networks, and industrialization in Africa.

As of March 2021, investments had been made in 21 projects, covering energy, resources and manufacturing and boosting industrial development in recipient countries. Dozens of Chinese-funded enterprises have cooperated with African counterparts to build photovoltaic power stations, with a cumulative installed capacity exceeding 1.5 GW, which has helped create photovoltaic industry chains from scratch in Africa, while effectively alleviating power shortages and reducing carbon emissions.

  • Expanding cooperation in infrastructure. China supports Africa in making infrastructure development a priority for economic revitalization. It encourages and supports Chinese enterprises to adopt various models to participate in the construction, investment, operation and management of infrastructure projects in Africa. From 2016 to 2020, total investment in infrastructure projects in Africa reached almost $200 billion. Projects implemented by Chinese companies accounted for 31.4 percent of all infrastructure projects on the African continent in 2020. Since the founding of FOCAC, Chinese companies have utilized various funds to help African countries build and upgrade more than 10,000 km of railways, nearly 100,000 km of highways, nearly 1,000 bridges and 100 ports, and 66,000 km of power transmission and distribution. They have also helped build an installed power-generating capacity of 120 million kW, a communications backbone network of 150,000 km and a network service covering nearly 700 million user terminals. Built and operated by Chinese companies, the Mombasa-Nairobi Railway was the first modern railway to be built in Kenya in 100 years.

Applying Chinese standards, technologies and equipment, the project has won praise as a road of friendship and cooperation, and a path towards win-win development between China and Africa in the new era. The railway has carried 5.4 million passengers and 1.3 million standard containers. It has contributed 1.5 percent to Kenya’s economic growth, and created 46,000 direct and indirect jobs. China has guided its enterprises to explore multiple forms of cooperation, such as BOT (build-operate-transfer), BOO (build-own-operate) and PPP (public-private partnership). Such efforts aim to transform China-Africa infrastructure cooperation to a wholly integrated model covering investment, construction and operation, and push forward the sustainable development of infrastructure projects.

  • Strengthening financial cooperation. Financial institutions from both sides have been exploring each other’s markets. Their central banks have expanded the scale of local currency settlement and currency swap, leading to a steady improvement in China-Africa financial facilitation. As of October 2021, the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System (CIPS) had 42 indirect participants in Africa, covering 19 African countries. The People’s Bank of China (PBOC), China’s central bank, has signed successive currency swap agreements with the central banks of South Africa, Morocco, Egypt and Nigeria, to a total amount of RMB73 billion.

China has signed a memorandum of understanding on cooperation in financial supervision with seven African countries including Egypt, South Africa and Nigeria, laying a solid foundation for steady and long-term bilateral financial cooperation. China has joined the African Development Bank (AfDB), the Eastern and Southern African Trade and Development Bank, the West African Development Bank and other multilateral development financial institutions. It has pledged to contribute a total of $996 million to the African Development Fund under the AfDB.

  • Expanding cooperation in the digital economy. China is helping African countries to eliminate the digital divide. Rapid development and fruitful results have been achieved in this field – building digital infrastructure, transition towards a digital society, and the application of new technologies such as the Internet of Things and mobile finance. Chinese companies have participated in a number of submarine cable projects connecting Africa and Europe, Asia, and the Americas.

They have cooperated with major African operators in achieving full basic coverage of telecommunications services in Africa. They have built more than half of the continent’s wireless sites and high-speed mobile broadband networks. In total, more than 200,000 km of optical fiber has been laid, giving broadband Internet access to 6 million households, and serving more than 900 million local people. To date, more than 1,500 companies in 17 cities in 15 African countries have selected Chinese corporate partners on their digital transformation path. Twenty-nine countries have selected smart government service solutions provided by Chinese companies. China and Africa have jointly established a public cloud service in South Africa that covers the entire African region. The two sides also released the first 5G independent networking commercial network in the region. The level and content of China-Africa e-commerce cooperation continue to grow. The Silk Road E-Commerce Capacity Building Cloud Lectures have effectively improved the digital literacy of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises in partner countries. Promotion activities have been held to help high-quality products from Africa to access the Chinese market.

Such activities include a government-initiated shopping festival that began in 2019, featuring Silk Road e-commerce, as well as the FOCAC African Products Online Promoting Season. Chinese companies actively participate in building platforms of public services in Africa such as electronic payment and smart logistics. All these efforts are designed to achieve win-win cooperation through promoting connectivity. At the China-Africa Internet Development and Cooperation Forum in August 2021, China announced its intention to formulate and implement a joint China-Africa Partnership Plan on Digital Innovation in Africa.

Social Dimensions

China is promoting cooperation with Africa in social fields such as poverty reduction, health, education, science and technology, environmental protection, climate change and exchanges among young people and women. Through strengthening exchanges, providing assistance and sharing experience, China is helping African countries to improve their comprehensive social development, which then provides internal impetus for their economic growth.

  • Sharing experience in poverty reduction. Poverty is a common challenge facing China and Africa. Ending poverty is the primary goal of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Since 2010, 10 Africa-China Poverty Reduction and Development conferences have been held in countries such as China, Ethiopia, South Africa and Uganda, with nearly 1,600 participants in total. From 2005 to 2021, China organized 160 poverty reduction and foreign aid training programs. Some 2,700 people from 53 African countries participated in the training, accounting for almost 60 percent of the total number of trainees.
  • Enhancing medical and health cooperation. Through concrete actions, China has helped African countries respond to various epidemics and plagues and build a public health system, promoting a China-Africa community of health. One of the longest and most effective cooperation projects that involves the greatest number of African countries is the dispatch of Chinese medical teams. At present, there are nearly 1,000 Chinese medical workers in 45 African countries, working at 98 medical centers.

Chinese medical teams carried out 34 free clinical programs under the Brightness Action initiative, restoring the eyesight of almost 10,000 African cataract patients. China focuses on helping African countries strengthen medical specialties, training 20,000 African medical personnel. To date, it has helped 18 African countries establish 20 centers in different medical specialties, covering cardiology, critical care medicine, trauma and endoscopy. China supports African countries in improving their capacity in border health and quarantine inspection, and sends disease control experts to the Africa Center for Disease Control and Prevention to provide technical support.

  • Expanding cooperation in education and human resources. China vigorously supports education in Africa. Based on the needs of African countries for economic and social development, it helps train much-needed professionals for African countries and encourages outstanding African youth to study in China through several scholarships. Starting from 2012, the two sides have implemented the 20+20 Cooperation Plan for Chinese and African Institutions of Higher Education as an exchange and cooperation platform among universities. China set up an educational trust fund under UNESCO to provide teacher training for more than 10,000 teachers in African countries. Since 2018, China has established Luban Workshops together with colleges and universities in countries including Egypt, South Africa, Djibouti and Kenya, sharing quality vocational education resources with Africa and training high-caliber technical personnel to meet the urgent needs of economic and social development on the continent.

China has helped more than 30 African universities set up Chinese language departments or Chinese language majors. In cooperation with China, 16 African countries have incorporated the Chinese language into their national education systems. The two sides have established 61 Confucius Institutes and 48 Confucius Classrooms in Africa. Since 2004, China has sent a total of 5,500 Chinese language teachers and volunteers to 48 African nations.

  • Stepping up scientific and technological collaboration, and knowledge sharing. China actively strengthens communication and coordination with Africa in terms of technological innovation strategies. It shares experience and achievements, and promotes the exchange and training of professionals and technology transfer, as well as innovation and entrepreneurship on both sides. China and African countries have set up high-level joint laboratories, the China-Africa Joint Research Center, and an innovation cooperation center.

In recent years, China has assisted Africa in cultivating a large number of scientific and technological talents through projects such as the Alliance of International Science Organizations in the Belt and Road Region Scholarship, Chinese government scholarships, the Talented Young Scientist Program, and the Innovative Talent Exchange Project.

Moving Towards the Future

Over the past two decades, FOCAC has become an important platform for collective dialogue between China and Africa and an effective mechanism for pragmatic cooperation. It has turned into a pacesetter for international cooperation with Africa in the new era. It now has 55 members comprising China, the 53 African countries that have diplomatic relations with China, and the AU Commission. The Ministerial Conference is held once every three years, rotating between China and African countries and co-chaired by China and an African hosting country, with the co-chairs also taking the lead in implementing conference outcomes.

Based on mutual agreements, some of the ministerial conferences have been upgraded into summits. To date three summits (the Beijing Summit in November 2006, the Johannesburg Summit in December 2015, and the Beijing Summit in September 2018) and seven ministerial conferences have been convened. These have yielded rich fruits, releasing a series of important documents to guide cooperation, and promoting the implementation of a series of major measures to facilitate development in Africa and solidify China-Africa friendship and mutually beneficial cooperation.

Africa is experiencing a flowing tide of solidarity and self-strengthening, and the continent’s influence in international affairs continues to grow. It is now forging ahead with the development of free trade zones, accelerating industrialization and modernization, and heading towards the bright future envisioned in the AU’s Agenda 2063.

At the end of November 2021, FOCAC will meet in African co-chair country Senegal. The meeting will evaluate the implementation of the outcomes of the 2018 Beijing Summit, and make plans for friendly cooperation in the next phase. This will be an important diplomatic event for China and Africa to discuss cooperation plans and promote common development, and will be of great importance in promoting post-pandemic economic recovery and development in Africa, China and the world at large. China will work closely with Africa to align China’s Second Centenary Goal of building a great modern socialist country by the middle of the century with the AU’s Agenda 2063.

*

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 China and Africa Move into New Era of Cooperation
  • 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.

***

Right away, the Australian 60 Minutes Youtube video titled “Prepare for Armageddon: China’s warning to the world” signals a polemic against China. The video’s opening backdrop features chairman Xi Jinping with a slightly raised fist flanked by a jet, tank, and a battery of missiles.

The program is rife with ad hominem, propaganda, disinformation, and lies of omission.

At the start, host Tom Steinfort says, “The message coming out of China is getting louder by the day, it doesn’t like other countries, especially Australia, ganging up and meddling in its affairs.”

Which country likes others ganging up and meddling in its domestic affairs? Does Australia like it if others meddle in Australian affairs? Yet Australia is notorious for meddling, or rather warring, in other countries. Among the wars that Australians have fought in are the war on Korea, the war on Viet Nam, the war on Afghanistan, the war on Iraq, and the war on Syria. The horrific Australian war crimes in Afghanistan were decried by Chinese government spokesman Lijian Zhao.

Steinfort complains that Beijing is doing its best to punish Australia. But he did not directly answer the question of whether China initiated negative actions against Australia?

The host goes on to cavil about Xi’s ratcheting up the rhetoric about the perils of a new cold war? In other words, said the host: “If we don’t stop poking the panda, we’ll face serious consequences.”

The host’s comment points to Australia being the initiator that caused China to respond to the “poking.” Australia is asked to stop meddling and poking the panda. Moreover, the substitution of the beloved roly-poly panda for the revered, sleek and imposing dragon could, in itself, be interpreted as a not-so-subtle poke at China.

To a critical viewer, the instigator is obviously the American cat’s paw, Australia. China has not been at war with any country for over 40 years, and pledges itself to peace. China is not launching missiles into Afghanistan; it is not occupying Syria and stealing its oil; it is not trying to cripple the economies in Cuba, Iran, and the Democratic Republic of Korea; it is not trying to topple elected governments as the US has done in Haiti and Honduras and is now doing in Venezuela and Nicaragua; it is not siding against legitimate Palestinian resistance to Jewish war crimes; it is not aligned with a Saudi genocide in Yemen; it did not destroy Libya. No, this “meddling” in the affairs of other countries is by the United States — supported by its ally, Australia.

The host continues, “It is worth taking that [Chinese] threat seriously.” As per usual among the Anglo-Saxon alliance, China — which is neither attacking nor oppressing any country and has only one military base abroad — is declared a threat for becoming socially, technologically, and economically preeminent.

60 Minutes goes to the crux of the matter: “the looming war with China,” the “unthinkable” Armageddon — the final battle between the forces of good and evil.

Richard Spencer, the former US secretary of the navy appears saying, “It’s gonna be waged on the economic front; it’s gonna be waged on the social affairs front. They’re gonna come at us in all ways.” Presumably “all ways” includes the military front.

Thus 60 Minutes asks, “How prepared are we?”

In 1946, the pacifist physicist Albert Einstein wrote a response to such a query in a letter to US congressman Robert Hale: “You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. The very prevention of war requires more faith, courage and resolution than are needed to prepare for war. We must all do our share that we may be equal to the task of peace.”

60 Minutes proceeds to demonize China as a belligerent poised to militarily invade Taiwan. The program interviews a Taiwanese tech entrepreneur, Xin Qing Xiao, who fears Chinese rule because of “losing all your freedoms…. It is just unimaginable that, you know, that we would be reunified with an authoritarian regime and then surrender such freedoms.”

It would be very easy to go into any country and find a person to speak out against whatever government is demeaned as an “authoritarian regime.” Notable throughout the program is that contrasting views will not be presented except for one exception (while acknowledging the former diplomat Victor Gao as an expert, 60 Minutes rudely described their guest as an “unofficial mouthpiece.”).

As for losing all freedoms in China, Frans Vandenbosch, who has been living in China since 2002, writes:

I moved to China for my private and professional FREEDOM

After some years, I returned to my home country in Europe, lived in Germany for 3 years. And went back to China.

For the FREEDOM. In China, there’s real freedom, in Western Europe it’s just a show.

Having lived and worked in several EU countries (Germany, Belgium, UK, ..) I moved to China because of the professional and private FREEDOM in China.

To the question “2 million Taiwanese work and live in China. How do they feel about living in mainland China, the ‘enemy’ of Taiwan?,” Kan Lui replied:

As a Taiwanese working in China, I fall into this category.

Based on what I see, people in the cities are happy and enjoy a high degree of freedom, and are reasonably informed…. Life is good and there is almost no street crime. As an ordinary person I am treated like everyone else by the government, who can be seen everywhere but doesn’t really intrude into my daily life, and most people don’t really care where you are from.

When I go back to Taiwan, I can see Taiwanese politicians sacrificing Taiwan’s economy for political leverage, and the Taiwanese media being surprisingly homogenous and highly biased on their coverage on China, which are primarily targeted at and gleefully consumed by those with almost no first hand knowledge of China.

I, too, from personal experience, having lived over seven years in China did not feel any loss of freedom while there.

Although 60 Minutes calls Taiwan “a renegade province,” it ought to point out that Australia and the US both acknowledge that there is one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. This fact is also affirmed by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758.

It is important to bear in mind that criticism by the US and Australia is criticism from countries constituted through genocide and the dispossession of the Indigenous peoples. To wit, previously I asked, “What if China promoted Hawaiian independence?

From Taiwan, 60 Minutes turned to Hong Kong saying, “The crackdown on democracy in nearby Hong Kong is be a warning of what may be to come.” Again a one-sided, unsubstantiated, and hypocritical depiction of what the rioting was about in Hong Kong and who was behind it. Not mentioned was that Hong Kong was wrested from China in the Opium Wars and that under British colonial rule Hong Kong enjoyed no democracy.

The disingenuity of 60 Minutes becomes patently transparent when it selectively and incorrectly quotes “the hardline” of chairman Xi on the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party of China: “Anyone who dares to try and do that will have their heads bashed bloody against the great wall of steel forged by our 1.4 billion Chinese people.”

Dares to try what? Why did 60 Minutes not mention this? Could it be that in proper context another clearer meaning emerges? Why is it that in a 5170-word speech that so many in the western monopoly media only cherrypick a few words — and still get it wrong?

So what did Xi say?

We Chinese are a people who uphold justice and are not intimidated by threats of force. As a nation, we have a strong sense of pride and confidence. We have never bullied, oppressed, or subjugated the people of any other country, and we never will. By the same token, we will never allow any foreign force to bully, oppress, or subjugate us. Anyone who would attempt to do so will find themselves on a collision course with a great wall of steel forged by over 1.4 billion Chinese people.

Now that provides context. Xi very saliently states, “We have never bullied, oppressed, or subjugated the people of any other country, and we never will. By the same token, we will never allow any foreign force to bully, oppress, or subjugate us.” The history of the Century of Humiliation by Europeans and Japan will not be forgotten by the Chinese.

Besides, walls are defensive structures. To run into a wall is foolhardy.

Militarism

60 Minutes objects to Chinese military jets breaching Taiwanese airspace.

First, a look at Taiwan’s claimed air defense identification zone reveals that it includes a sizeable chunk of mainland China.

Second, the fact that Taiwan is a province of China undermines any such objection to Chinese flights.

Third, under the 1992 Consensus both Taiwan and China have agreed that there is only one China, subject to different interpretations by both sides.

Responding to Steinfort’s presenting China as a threat, Gao asks him, “Do you really want to fear a panda?”

Enter erstwhile Australian major general Jim Molan: “I believe that the Chinese Communist Party’s aim is to be dominant in this region and perhaps dominant in the world.” The Council on Foreign Relations agrees with Molan’s assessment that China is seeking to become the “dominant force” in the Asia-Pacific region.

What does “dominant” mean? Most important, powerful, or influential? Molan says China must remove America from the Western Pacific to be dominant in the region. He envisions a Chinese military expansion.

60 Minutes, however, suggests that China’s military could be stymied by swarming miniature drones.

The Global Times reports that China has a defense for this with the YLC-48, the “terminator of drones,” so small that it can be carried by a single soldier — China’s first portable phased array radar that “can effectively detect and track incoming targets from any angle.”

A new wrinkle has been added in the calculation toward the down-under country following Australia’s joining the UK and US (AUKUS) to become equipped with nuclear-powered submarines. Argued Gao, “The safe approach is to target Australia as a nuclear-armed country.”

Steinfort says “senior figures in China” have stated that Australia is indeed a target for nuclear weapons. To be a target is one thing, but to be fired upon is another. China is on record as pledging no first use of nukes.

What does the future hold?

There is a dichotomy in tactics emphasized between Spencer and Molan on intervening in a hypothesized war between Taiwan and China. The American is cautious and pragmatic. “You have to think about what the results are and at what cost.”

This echoes the Chinese military genius, Sunzi:

Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.

Molan channels the domino theory asking where will it all end if China is allowed to retake Taiwan. However, what seemingly eludes Molan is that China would simply be taking back into the fold what is internationally recognized as already being a part of China. Nonetheless, Molan finds, “This situation now is an existential threat to Australia as a liberal democracy.”

Steinfort narrates, “It’s China’s move now.”

Gao taps the spirit of Chinese people when he says, “China prefers peace rather than war. That’s the key.” in his speech on the centenary of the Communist Party of China, Xi said:

We must continue working to promote the building of a human community with a shared future. Peace, concord, and harmony are ideas the Chinese nation has pursued and carried forward for more than 5,000 years. The Chinese nation does not carry aggressive or hegemonic traits in its genes. The Party cares about the future of humanity, and wishes to move forward in tandem with all progressive forces around the world. China has always worked to safeguard world peace, contribute to global development, and preserve international order.

On the journey ahead, we will remain committed to promoting peace, development, cooperation, and mutual benefit, to an independent foreign policy of peace, and to the path of peaceful development.

Unfortunately, one is unlikely to hear such peaceful overtures from the current Australian or American governments.

*

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

Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be emailed at: kimohp@gmail. Twitter: @kimpetersen. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Australia “Banging War Drums” on Alleged “China Threat”
  • 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.

Forward Global Research articles. Post them on your Blog.

.

We are the object of censorship by the search engines.

***

Powerful voice by a Canadian mother.

Her daughter’s 13-year-old friend who did not want to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

“Her Heart Stopped. She is in Critical Care. 

This is happening here right now in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Because she wanted to play soccer.

There are Children Dying All Over the World. 

“I am disgusted with our government. She did not want to take the Vaccine.

But when our Premier mandated the vaccine for children playing sport.  …. “

 

 

*

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Video: 13 Year-old Canadian Girl Took the Covid-19 Vaccine. “Try Not to Cry, Her Heart Stopped and Now She is in Critical Condition”

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.

***

Pedro Acosta, a 17-year-old Spanish Motocross champion, collapsed a la Tiffany Dover at a press conference on November 19. And just like Dover, about 10 minutes later, he was back up and talking again. Just more coincidences.

Just two weeks ago, we highlighted the deaths or cardiac episodes of five young athletes in an eight day stretch. Two of them were American high school football players. One was a European international hockey player. But the two professional soccer players in the story – Emil Pálsson and Segio “Kun” Mr. Agüero – garnered the most attention because mainstream media can no longer hide the realities happening in that sport.

It’s now a near-daily occurrence for soccer players (“footballers”) to clutch their chests and collapse on the field of play all around the world. The frequency of these incidence in 2021 is completely unprecedented. There’s no basis for comparison. This blogger was a sports reporter for years. But that doesn’t even matter. Common sense tells you that athletes are collapsing and/or dying regularly and unusually in 2021.

There’s only one thing different about 2021 than all years prior to this. Of course that’s the mRNA and viral vector DNA injections being forced upon humanity both by governments and by social coercion, and fueled by mainstream media. But don’t bother expecting so-called mainstream journalists or government authorities to hold anyone accountable.

Just from our coverage and that of Report24.news (more on that later), there have been at least 90 cases of young athletes collapsing with cardiac issues during the normal course of their respective sports since June. That’s about one athlete collapsing and/or dying every other day since June.

Some random guy named Professor Guido Pieles told the Daily Mail that all these athletes collapsing is sheer coincidence. This same guy told the same newspaper two months earlier that U.K. parents should hold off injecting their children until further research is done.

We reported on the American Heart Association (AHA) abstract that found mRNA injections significantly increase the risk of cardiac episodes. Dr. Aseem Malhorta conceded that the results of the AHA study must be replicated. But he also said there are scientists who have in fact replicated the AHA results, but are afraid to come forward for fear of losing funding from pharmaceutical companies.

Note the foregoing video will be censored on Youtube soon. Please leave a comment and let us know when it disappears and we’ll re-upload it elsewhere.

Bottom line is that we’re at war, both a war on information and a war to protect our health and well-being. By this time next week, there will be 2-3 more athletes who have collapsed and perhaps died. But here are the latest three soccer players.

Charlie Wyke collapses in training, Matt Li Tissier calls for investigation

It’s hard covering soccer because media reports are completely inconsistent.

The Guardian reported that 28-year-old Wigan Athletic striker Charlie Wyke  collapsed “during training” on Monday, November 22. Sky News reported that Mr. Wyke collapsed on Tuesday, November 23 during pregame warmups against Cambridge. The Athletic reported that the incident happened on Sunday, November 21. This is apparently mainstream media subterfuge. But the fact remains, Mr. Wyke collapsed while doing some sort of rigorous team activity.

The team released a statement on Thursday, writing in big bold letters that “Charlie has not received a COVID-19 vaccination.” There was no update on his condition other than saying he continues being monitored in a hospital. The team did not clarify the date the collapse happened. Vaxx subterfuges are ubiquitous. Further, 28-year-old athletes don’t just collapse despite mainstream media attempts to normalize it all. Take the statement for what you will.

Former Southampton midfielder and Sky Sports pundit Matt Le Tissier certainly isn’t buying the team’s statement. The 53-year-old pundit made his position clear this past Tuesday.

Announcer Trevor Sinclair cut off after John Fleck collapse

Sheffield United defeated Reading F.C. 1-0 on Tuesday, November 23 at Madejski Stadium, earning their first win in five games. But the Blades victory was an after thought due to yet another coincidence on the pitch (field). Sheffield United midfielder John Fleck suddenly collapsed a few minutes after the lone goal of the game by Jayden Bogle.

Click here to watch the video.

Fleck, 30, was convulsing on the ground before medics administered oxygen. He was back on his feet after about 11 minutes, and taken out of the game on a stretcher. The team tweeted the following day that Fleck, a Scotland native, was out of the hospital the next morning and back with the team.

The plot thickened further when TalkSport commentator Trevor Sinclair asked on a live broadcast the logical, sensible, journalistic question, “I think everyone wants to know if he has had the COVID vaccine.” The show’s producers quickly cut the live feed (obviously it’s on a few seconds tape delay) before Mr. Sinclair could even finish saying the word “vaccine.”

Click here to watch the video.

Of course the vaxx cult relentlessly attacked Mr. Sinclair, who played 19 years of professional soccer before retiring in 2008. He refused to back down from his common sense, critical thinking observations.

It’s literally an established playbook by the Gates Pharmaceutical global mainstream media to petulantly and childishly attack anyone who does not adhere to their death cult. The exact same thing happened to Ms. Jedidiah Bila on that radical feminist daytime talk show The View.

Ms. Bila, just like John Fleck, has natural immunity to so-called COVID-19 because she contracted the condition and recovered. But those “whatevers” on The View relentlessly attacked Ms. Bila on November 16 simply for speaking truth.

Adama Traore collapses, Carl Ikeme calls out the world

Real Madrid’s 3-0 victory over FC Sheriff Tiraspol on Wednesday night, November 24, was also marred by the new normal. Adama Traore, originally from Mali, is a winger for Sheriff Tiraspol. Mr. Traore, 26, suddenly clutched his chest and collapsed to the ground around the 77-minute mark of the match. Medics immediately placed smelling salts near his nose so he did not lose consciousness. But he barely reacted to them, which is a bit concerning.

Click here to watch the video.

Mr. Traore was eventually helped off the field. But there’s been no update on his condition since then. That brings us to Mr. Carl Ikeme. The 37-year-old Brit played 15 seasons and 207 total games for the Wolverhampton Wanderers from 2003 to 2018.

He retired in 2018 after beating leukemia. But he still loves the game and, like all other critical thinkers and people with common sense, recognizes this disturbing trend of players collapsing on the field after cardiac episodes.

Of course numerous vaxx trolls responded with the proverbial “how dare you even ask that.”

The Report24.news list

All credit for the following links (translated to English) goes to Report24.news. Their staff put together this list of 75 athletes who collapsed in the regular course of their sports from June 2021 to October 2021.

The original list on Report24.news is here.

  1. 4.6.21, Italy, 29 years old
    Italy: The 29-year-old ex-professional Giuseppe Perrino collapses during a charity game for his dead brother and dies.
  2. 7.6.21, Germany 38 years old
    The table tennis professional Michael Schneider dies suddenly and unexpectedly .
  3. 12.6.21, Denmark, 29 years old
    The footballer Christian Eriksen collapses lifelessly during a European Championship game – he can be revived if he needs a pacemaker for the rest of his life.
  4. 22.6.21, Hungary, 18 years old
    The footballer Viktor Marcell Hegedüs died while warming up for training in Hungary.
  5. 14.07.21, Netherlands, 31 years old,
    Olympic speed skating champion Kjelt Nuis, seriously ill after vaccination , with heart problems in hospital.
  6. 16/07/21, Egypt
    Footballer Imad Bayumi died during a friendly match in Egypt.
  7. July 22nd, 21, Germany, 36 years old On July 22nd, SV Olympia Schlanstedt and Germania from Kroppenstedt met. During the game Schlanstedts player Nicky Dalibor collapsed and had to be reanimated on the field .
  8. 23.07.21, Germany, 27 years old
    Tim B. from SV Hamberge (Schleswig-Holstein) collapses after returning from a soccer tournament and dies.
  9. 07/24/21, Germany
    player from TuS Hoberge-Uerentrup (Bielefeld) collapses on the pitch with cardiac arrest.
  10. 07/31/21, Netherlands, 19 years old
    The 19-year-old handball player Whitnée Abriska died of cardiac arrest just before a flight.
  11. 02.08.21, Belgium, 18 years old
    Rune Coghe (18) from Eendracht Hoglede (Belgium) suffers a heart attack during game
  12. 02.08.21, Austria, 18 years of history: 18-year-old unnamed player in Burgenland (Austria) collapses on the playing field and can be saved thanks to the use of a helicopter.
  13. 08/06/21, Germany
    district league player of the SpVgg. Oelde II has to be revived by his opponent .
  14. 14.08.21, Belgium, aged 37
    The only 37-year-old former French professional footballer Franck Berrier died of several heart attacks while playing tennis
  15. 08/15/21 Germany
    goalkeeping coach of SV Niederpöring suffers heart attack after training .
  16. 8/16/21 France 24 years
    Bordeaux pro Samuel Kalu breaks during a Ligue 1 game with cardiac arrest together
  17. 18.08.21, Belgium, 25 years old
    Belgian soccer player Jente Van Genechten (25) suffers cardiac arrest in the early stages of a cup game .
  18. 21.08.21, Turkey, 31 years old
    Fabrice N’Sakala (31) from Besiktas Istanbul collapses on the field without interference from the opponent and has to be taken to hospital
  19. 22.08.21, Italy, 29 years old
    Pedro Obiang from the Italian first division club Sassuolo Calcio after Covid vaccination with myocarditis in the hospital .
  20. 22.08.21, Venezuela, 30 years
    Venezuelan national marathon champion Alexaida Guedez dies of a heart attack during a 5,000 meter run.
  21. 24.08.21, Luxemburg, 29 years old
    José dos Reis, a player from Red Black Pfaffenthal (Luxemburg) collapses on the field and has to be resuscitated.
  22. 29.08.21, Germany
    In the C-League Dillenburg ( Central Hesse) a player from Hirzenhain collapses , the game is canceled.
  23. 05.09.21, France, 16 years old
    Diego Ferchaud (16 years old) from ASPTT Caen suffers a cardiac arrest in a U-18 league match in Saint-Lô.
  24. 06.09.21, Austria The
    player of ASV Baden (Lower Austria) collapses on the field and has to be reanimated .
  25. 09/06/21, Italy, 16 years old 16-year-old unnamed football player in Bergamo suffers cardiac arrest
  26. 06.09.21, Belgium, 27 years old
    Belgian amateur soccer player Jens De Smet (27) from Maldegem suffers a heart attack during the game and dies in hospital.
  27. 06.09.21, Italy, 13 years
    13-year-old soccer player from the Janus Nova club from Saccolongo (Italy) collapses on the field with cardiac arrest
  28. 07.09.21, Great Britain, 17 years
    old 17 year old soccer player Dylan Rich dies of a double heart attack during a game in England .
  29. 09.09.21, Germany
    player from Birati Club Munster suffers in a regional league game against FC Nordkirchen II Eriksen fate: collapse with cardiac arrest. Game is canceled
  30. 09/10/21, Germany, 24 years old
    Lucas Surek (24) from BFC Chemie Leipzig suffers from myocarditis .
  31. 09/11/21, France, 49 years old
    Ain / France: Frédéric Lartillot succumbs to a heart attack after a friendly match in the locker room
  32. 09/11/21, Italy, 45 years old
    Andrea Astolfi, sporting director of Calcio Orsago (Italy) suffers a fulminant heart attack after returning from training and dies at the age of 45 without any previous illness
  33. 09/11/21, Denmark, 22 years old
    Abou Ali (22) collapses with cardiac arrest during a two-tier game in Denmark
  34. 09/11/21, Netherlands, 19 years old
    The ice hockey player Sebastiaan Bos passed away suddenly and unexpectedly .
  35. 09/12/21, Austria, 40 years old
    A half marathon runner collapsed during the race and died a little later.
  36. 9/13/21, Germany
    Anil Usta from VfB Schwelm (Ennepetal) breaks on the field with heart problems together
  37. 13.09.21, France 33 years old Dimitri Liénard from FC Strasbourg collapses with heart problems in a Ligue 1 game
  38. 09/14/21, USA 37 years old
    Ex-NFL professional Parys Haralson dies suddenly and unexpectedly at the age of 37 .
  39. 09/18/21, Germany 25 years old
    Kingsley Coman (25) from FC Bayern Munich had an operation on the heart after an arrhythmia.
  40. 18.09.21, Canada 25 years old
    Canadian university football player Francis Perron passed away shortly after a match .
  41. 19.09.21, France 19 years old
    19 year old FC Nantes soccer player suffers cardiac arrest during training
  42. 19.09.21, Germany
    volleyball trainer Dirk Splisteser from SG Traktor Divitz collapses dead on the sidelines
  43. 21.09.21, Augsburg
    assistant referee of a Kreisliga Augsburg game in Emersacker , collapses with heart problems
  44. 09/21/21, Germany
    At the women’s World Cup qualifier between Germany and Serbia in Chemnitz, the English linesman Helen Byrne with heart problems has to be carried off the pitch
  45. 09/27/21, Germany Game abandoned
    due to cardiac arrest of the referee in a game of Lauber SV (Donauwörth district)
  46. 27.09.21, Italy, 20 years old
    Young rider suffers a heart attack at the end of a tournament .
  47. 9/28/21, Germany, 17 years
    17-year-old soccer player of the JSG High Hagen has reanimated in Hannoversch Munden during game be
  48. 09.28.21, Italy, 53 years
    53-year-old football coach Antonello Campus breaks in Sicily during practice with his youth team together dead
  49. 09/28/21, USA, 16 years old,
    twice vaccinated teenager collapses while playing soccer and dies a little later.
  50. 09/29/21, Germany Team leader Dietmar Gladow from Thalheim (Bitterfeld) suffers a fatal heart attack before the game
  51. 9/29/21, USA
    A high school football player collapsed during practice and died in the hospital.
  52. 09/30/21, Germany
    A player collapsed during the A 2 regional league game between SV Hoßkirch and TSV Sigmaringendorf. He suffered cardiac arrest and had to be resuscitated .
  53. 1.10.21, Germany, 15 years
    young goalkeeper Bruno Stein from FC An der Fahner Höhe in Gräfentonna, Thuringia , died at the age of 15 .
  54. October 3rd, 21, Austria, 64 years old
    ex-goalkeeper coach and most recently talent scout Ernst Scherr suddenly and unexpectedly died .
  55. 4.10.21, Germany, 42 years old
    Alexander Siegfried from VfB Moschendorf suddenly and unexpectedly collapsed and died.
  56. 7.10.21, Italy, 17 years old
    A 17-year-old athlete from Colverde collapses while training with cardiac arrest .
  57. 8.10.21, France, 49 years old
    SC Massay player suffers a fatal heart attack during the game .
  58. 9.10.21, Mexico
    Caddy Alberto Olguin collapses on the golf course after a heart attack. It is said to be the second death of its kind within a short period of time.
  59. 9.10.21, England, 29 years old
    Shrewsbury professional striker Ryan Bowman has to be treated with a defibrillator after half an hour of play with extreme heart problems.
  60. 10.10.21, Italy, 18 year old
    soccer player suddenly faints on the field, is reanimated by his teammate .
  61. 10/10/21, France, 40 years old
    Saint-James player suffers a heart attack after warming up .
  62. 10.10.21, Italy, 59 years old. A long-distance runner from Biella dies of heart failure during a race.
  63. 10.10.2021, Germany
    In the game between Wacker Mecklenbeck and Fortuna Freudenberg in the Women’s Westphalia League , a player collapsed shortly before the end without any opposing influence.
  64. 12.10.21 Germany, 25 years
    goalkeeper of HC TuRa Bergkamen, Lukas Bommer, dies suddenly and unexpectedly .
  65. 13.10.21, Mexico, 16 years old
    The student Hector Manuel Mendoza dies of a heart attack while training .
  66. 14.10.21, Brazil, 18 years old
    The young professional footballer Fellipe de Jesus Moreira suffered a double heart attack and is fighting for his life.
  67. 14.10.21, Italy, 27 years old
    The multiple cycling champion Gianni Moscon has to undergo an operation because of severe cardiac arrhythmias .
  68. 14.10.21, Italy, 53 years old
    An AH footballer suffers a heart attack while training .
  69. 15.10.21, USA, 14 years old
    The 14-year-old soccer player Ava Azzopardi collapsed on the pitch and is now fighting for her life in an artificial coma.
  70. 16.10.21, France, aged 54
    AH player Christophe Ramassamy died of a heart attack during a match .
  71. 17.10.21, France, 41 years old
    A soccer player collapsed on the field and died , apparently because of a cardiac arrest.
  72. 27.10.21, Austria, 26 years old
    The Ghanaian Raphael Dwamena collapsed with severe heart problems . He was wearing a defibrillator before the incident.
  73. 28.10.21, Germany,
    Hertha BSC co-trainer Selim Levent dies suddenly and unexpectedly while on vacation .
  74. 28.10.21, USA, 12 years
    The 12-year-old Jayson Kidd collapsed during basketball practice and later died.
  75. 30.10.21, Spain, 33-year-old
    star striker Kun Agüero from FC Barcelona had to be replaced in a game due to heart problems . He is now in the hospital for examinations.

*

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.

All images in this article are from The COVID Blog

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Revelation 2021? High-profile Soccer Figures, Players (“Footballers”) Forcing Conversation after Three More Soccer Players Collapse in Three Days
  • 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.

***

Recently the Botswana Government announced that a new variant of Covid had arisen from the Vaccinated. Read More.

One of the symptoms listed of the new Omicron Variant of Coronavirus; includes the following:

A number of heart-related complications may occur, including heart failure, arrhythmias, heart inflammation, and blood clots

This happens to be one of the primary negative effects of the COVID vaccines among men especially; which has led to a 5-fold increase in sudden and unexplained cardiac deaths in FIFA players in 2021. In fact, since December, 183 professional athletes and coaches have suddenly collapsed, 108 dead.

It looks like bureaucrats are already using the Omicron Variant to disguise the rapid increase in sudden and unexplained cardiac deaths in the vaccinated; just as they did with the Delta Variant.

Some athletes have begun to publicly question the mainstream narrative regarding these sudden cardiac events among the vaccinated.

*

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 Alberta Nationals

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.

***

Top U.S. infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci is proposing to inject every eligible American with Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine boosters every six months. He shared this idea during a recent interview with the ABC program “This Week.”

“We would hope – and this is something we are looking at very carefully – that the third [mRNA vaccine] shot … not only will boost you way up, but increases the durability so that you will not necessarily need it every six months or a year,” he said.

“We’re hoping it pushes out more. If it doesn’t and the data show we do need it more often, then we’ll do it.”

Fauci expressed the same sentiment toward booster shots when he spoke to Business Insider.

“Make it really simple: If you had a primary vaccination, get a booster. Right now, don’t make it complicated,” he said.

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director expressed hope that booster shots for all adult Americans will help keep people away from hospitalizations and deaths caused by COVID-19. “The effect of [injecting boosters] is very, very favorable to preventing people from getting infected,” he said.

“We have got to get almost everybody who’s gotten the primary vaccination regimen … to get them all boosted. Even though for the most part, the vaccines absent the boost protect quite well – particularly among younger people – against hospitalization.”

However, Fauci’s remarks conflicted with the guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The public health agency only recommended booster doses for adults aged 50 and above and long-term care residents aged 18 and up.

The CDC said other Americans who do not fall under the two categories may get their booster shots “based on their individual risks and benefits.”

Fauci redefines the term “fully vaccinated”

Back in September, Fauci argued that two vaccine doses will no longer suffice for full vaccination. He said during a White House briefing that month that three COVID-19 vaccine doses would be the standard for fully vaccinated individuals.

“I would not at all be surprised that the adequate, full regimen for vaccination will likely be three doses,” Fauci said. He continued that the protection from COVID-19 after a third booster dose was “dramatic” and “durable.” (Related: Fauci: Three shots will be the new standard for a full coronavirus vaccination.)

The NIAID director presented data from Israel about the vaccine’s waning protection after eight months. Despite the Middle Eastern country managing to vaccinate the majority of its population, the more transmissible B16172 delta variant caused a spike in so-called breakthrough infections among vaccinated Israelis.

In response, Israel started injecting older individuals with booster shots of the Pfizer vaccine on July 30. Fauci said the effects of the booster shot injection campaign included “a greater than tenfold decrease in the relative risk of both confirmed infection and severe disease.” This finding “supported the rationale for COVID-19 booster shots” in the U.S., he added. (Related: Israel’s covid plandemic czar tells citizens to prepare for upcoming FOURTH “booster” shot.)

“I would hope that the countries that are boosting their populations similar to what we are understand the importance of the global necessity to essentially suppress this at the global level,” Fauci remarked.

At least one other world leader followed Fauci’s footsteps in redefining the term “fully vaccinated” as having received three COVID-19 vaccine shots. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said during a press briefing that U.K. residents will definitely need a booster dose.

“On boosters, it’s very clear that getting three jabs … will become an important fact. It will make life easier for your in all sorts of ways, and we will have to adjust our concept of what constitutes a full vaccination to take account of that,” Johnson said.

“As we can see from what’s happening, the two [vaccine doses] sadly do start to wane, so we’ve got to be responsible and … reflect that fact in the way we measure what constitutes full vaccination.”

The prime minister also called on British citizens to get their booster doses as soon as they are eligible. Johnson said: “It would be an utter tragedy if, after everything we have been through, people who had done the right thing by getting double-vaccinated ended up being seriously ill or even losing their lives because they allowed their immunity to wane.”

*

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.

***

*

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

New Nuclear Deal With Iran?

November 29th, 2021 by Dr. Hadi Issa Dalloul

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 Monday, November 29, the parties involved in negotiations considering a new nuclear deal with Iran, the so-called ‘5 plus 1’, will meet in Vienna. Will Iran’s demands be met, and will the US be willing to compromise to avoid a regional military conflict, which all sides want to avoid?  

At the same time, there are rumored to be serious negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Iran.  The outcome of those meetings may stabilize the entire region.

However, in the border area of Iran and Azerbaijan, we see the hand of Israel causing chaos and destabilization.

In an effort to better understand the back-story to these headlines, Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed the Iranian Dr. Hadi Issa Dalloul, International Law and Nuclear Physics Consultant. Dr. Dalloul is a nuclear physicist who studied at the University of Houston, in the US and at Imperial College, in the UK.

*

Steven Sahiounie (SS): Nov 29 is the date of the new round of negotiations on the Iranian nuclear deal between Tehran and the West.  What is the status on the negotiations and will we see Iran and the west signing a new deal?

Hadi Dalloul (HD): This negotiating session will likely be the last session.  I don’t think there will be any extension to this meeting.  If the United States or any of the 5 plus 1, cannot confirm fully that the shameful practice of unilaterally breaking the former nuclear deal, as was carried out by President Trump, will never again be repeated by President Biden or any future US President, then a new deal will not be possible.  As we agreed in 2015, from Lausanne to Geneva in 90 days, that we confirmed to 82 terms which were registered under UN resolution 2231 which includes the percentage of enrichment and disabling a reactor for the heavy water, especially for Natanz and Fordow, and it will be a research center for Fordow, and it will not be published for 24 years from that date, which is about 19 years more from present, and then it will be established again. Nothing in the 154 pages of the agreement mentions Iran’s military defense systems.  Iran does not have a nuclear warhead, and it is not mentioned.

This session, if they will not confirm the release of all sanctions against Iran, and the agreement made in 2019, which is the first step to bypass the US sanctions, which is the exchange of inspections, must be a guarantee from all parties applied with Iran, and not through the UN, then we can proceed to restart the negotiations of 2015.  However, nothing in the agreement will be changed, and nothing will be added, only the new guarantee that the US or others will not break the agreement.

SS: News reports write of negotiations between Saudi Arabia and Iran.  Are these news reports correct? And if so, what is the status of this   negotiation? Will we see a decrease in tensions between Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf and Iran?

HD: We in Iran regard our Arab neighbors as brothers.  The US, Israel, and some European countries have taken the Persian Gulf Arab countries as hostages in an investment wave, political wave, or even a cultural wave.  In the cultural wave, their thinking is blocked in order to be controlled by the western agenda. This why they have goals to release all the natural resources of the oil and gas of the west coast of the Persian Gulf, and the west has sold military weapons to those countries as a form of blackmail using Iran as the threat.

We are trying to keep Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain, especially, as Qatar has taken a neutral position for the last three years, from making a relationship with Israel.  We are sorry we have lost UAE in our efforts.  We have told Saudi Arabia that if the US and EU would be willing to come to the table to negotiate for the Arabs, then the door is open 100 times.  We are willing to give everything the Arabs need, and even our blood, to prevent the Israelis from coming into Mecca and carrying out acts and policies as they are doing in Jerusalem.  To further this solidarity with Saudi Arabia, we ask them to come to the table as brothers: Arabs and Persians, and as Muslims, but without America, and Israel.  We hope this day will come in the future.

SS: The Zionist lobby in USA, AIPAC and others, are pressuring the White House to not sign a new nuclear deal with Iran.  Will US President Joe Biden bow down to Israeli occupation pressure, or will he ignore them and sign a new deal?

HD: We must delve deeply into the intentions of the Israelis and the Israeli lobby in the US.  The issues against Iran, with the nuclear program, are split into two units. The first unit is reflected with the targets of the Israelis and the second is reflected with the Israeli lobby. The Israelis are afraid of Iran developing a nuclear program to a stage where we can have enhanced the military defense program and the ballistic program that could be used to attack Israel from Iran, or by the hand of Hezbollah. That is why they need to block the enhancement of the Iranian program. The other side, which is more sensitive for the Israeli lobby, is the medical enhancement for the laboratory at Tehran University, we are working right now on multiple channels. One of the channels is working on the treatment of cancer.  If we discover a treatment for cancer, instead of chemotherapy, then the companies who produce chemotherapy drugs will be losing their market. This could be perceived as an enemy to drug companies who may have ties with Israel.  Another field is space exploration. Most information from space is coming from NASA.  If Iran goes up further into the atmosphere and begins installing satellites, we may find information coming previously from NASA is incorrect. This is why the US and others feel they must block Iran from getting into space.  Iran wants to know truthfully what is being done at the International Space Station, and this may be perceived as dangerous for NASA. This is why they try to prevent Iran from going into space.

Another area is viruses.  We have been studying Covid-19 and have made a vaccine which is effective. This is also seen as a threat to some Israeli tied companies.

The new nuclear agreement must be acceptable to Iran and the Iranian people, or we cannot enter into it.  If that should happen, Iran can continue their program presently and Iran has capability to make their own equipment, such as the centrifuge unit, and can progress at their own pace. We are almost at 70% enrichment of Uranium 235. Each step that we take with the nuclear program corresponds with a civil technical program, not a military program. It is up to the ‘5 plus 1’ members to understand what Iran is doing truthfully. We are ready for a war if it comes to that, but I do not think that will happen. Finally, we will continue ethically with the non-proliferation treaty which we signed previously during the period of the Kingdom of Iran.

SS: News reports suggest there is tension of the Azerbaijani-Iranian border.  Is the Israeli occupation using Azerbaijan to cause chaos on Iran’s border?  What is the Azerbaijani benefit from the situation?

HD: Yes, the left hand of Israel is seen in Azerbaijan.  It is on the eastern border with Iran, and Israel has tried to cause a border conflict on Iran. The Azerbaijanis are the loser in the conflict. Israel will try to find any channel to cause conflict with Iran.  Israel can use cyber warfare, and with partners, but they cannot attempt a military fight face to face.

SS: There is political tensions between Iran and several of its neighbors in the region.  Will this tension escalate into a military conflict? And will the US stand with the Israeli occupation if they decided on a military conflict with Iran?

HD: Israel cannot go ahead with a military move because they would be acting alone.  We have tried to separate Israel from the UN, and have it stand alone.  Russia and China have a vote at the UN Security Council, so America will be prevented from action.  The US has played games in Libya, Egypt and Syria before, but they will not be able to succeed against Iran. Israel cannot face Iran alone, and that is why they have tried to find a partner to fight with them.

*

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

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is an award-winning journalist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Mideast Discourse

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 European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 31,014 fatalities, and 2,890,600 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.

Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.

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

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

The EudraVigilance database reports that through November 20, 2021 there are 31,014 deaths and 2,890,600 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:

From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,355,192) are serious injuries.

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

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

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

Here is the summary data through November 20, 2021.

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2, Comirnaty) from BioNTechPfizer: 14,526 deaths and 1,323,370 injuries to 20/11/2021

  • 35,826   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 207 deaths
  • 40,230   Cardiac disorders incl. 2,128 deaths
  • 376        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 33 deaths
  • 17,995   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 10 deaths
  • 1,217     Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 20,443   Eye disorders incl. 32 deaths
  • 110,658 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 585 deaths
  • 337,450 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 4,118 deaths
  • 1,502     Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 75 deaths
  • 14,528   Immune system disorders incl. 76 deaths
  • 53,108   Infections and infestations incl. 1561 deaths
  • 20,222   Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 240 deaths
  • 33,067   Investigations incl. 451 deaths
  • 9,103     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 249 deaths
  • 164,885 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 179 deaths
  • 1,163     Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 114 deaths
  • 225,032 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,556 deaths
  • 1,851     Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 55 deaths
  • 206        Product issues incl. 2 deaths
  • 24,225   Psychiatric disorders incl. 174 deaths
  • 4,667     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 224 deaths
  • 43,949   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 57,013   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,617 deaths
  • 62,414   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 125 deaths
  • 2,765     Social circumstances incl. 19 deaths
  • 4,797     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 60 deaths
  • 34,678   Vascular disorders incl. 626 deaths

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna: 8,518 deathand 390,163 injuries to 20/11/2021

  • 8,227     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 94 deaths
  • 12,657   Cardiac disorders incl. 915 deaths
  • 156        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 4,698     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 348        Endocrine disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 5,731     Eye disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 32,091   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 326 deaths
  • 104,720 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 2,986 deaths
  • 644        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 40 deaths
  • 3,820     Immune system disorders incl. 16 deaths
  • 14,668   Infections and infestations incl. 782 deaths
  • 8,158     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 162 deaths
  • 7,117     Investigations incl. 143 deaths
  • 3,703     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 206 deaths
  • 47,355   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 174 deaths
  • 531        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 67 deaths
  • 66,320   Nervous system disorders incl. 823 deaths
  • 722        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 6 deaths
  • 78           Product issues incl. 2 deaths
  • 7,100     Psychiatric disorders incl. 142 deaths
  • 2,277     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 164 deaths
  • 8,061     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 7 deaths
  • 17,235   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 914 deaths
  • 20,963   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 76 deaths
  • 1,769     Social circumstances incl. 36 deaths
  • 1,374     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 78 deaths
  • 9,640     Vascular disorders incl. 319 deaths

Total reactions for the vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/AstraZeneca6,145 deathand 1,075,335 injuries to 20/11/2021

  • 13,124   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 248 deaths
  • 19,128   Cardiac disorders incl. 696 deaths
  • 195        Congenital familial and genetic disorders incl. 8 deaths
  • 12,669   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 597        Endocrine disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 18,919   Eye disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 102,402 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 312 deaths
  • 283,288 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,469 deaths
  • 950        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 60 deaths
  • 4,834     Immune system disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 32,441   Infections and infestations incl. 413 deaths
  • 12,358   Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 177 deaths
  • 23,611   Investigations incl. 150 deaths
  • 12,369   Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 91 deaths
  • 159,668 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 94 deaths
  • 624        Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 22 deaths
  • 221,536 Nervous system disorders incl. 958 deaths
  • 521        Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 12 deaths
  • 188        Product issues incl. 1 death
  • 19,933   Psychiatric disorders incl. 58 deaths
  • 4,031     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 58 deaths
  • 15,124   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 37,980   Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 735 deaths
  • 49,247   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 48 deaths
  • 1,498     Social circumstances incl. 6 deaths
  • 1,404     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 25 deaths
  • 26,696   Vascular disorders incl. 437 deaths      

Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson1,825 deaths and 101,732 injuries to 20/11/2021

  • 986        Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 40 deaths
  • 1,837     Cardiac disorders incl. 155 deaths
  • 35           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
  • 1,033     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 69           Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 1,351     Eye disorders incl. 7 deaths
  • 8,500     Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 75 deaths
  • 26,871   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 488 deaths
  • 121        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 445        Immune system disorders incl. 9 deaths
  • 4,315     Infections and infestations incl. 143 deaths
  • 920        Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 18 deaths
  • 4,766     Investigations incl. 103 deaths
  • 625        Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 45 deaths
  • 14,897   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 43 deaths
  • 54           Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 3 deaths
  • 20,097   Nervous system disorders incl. 197 deaths
  • 41           Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
  • 26           Product issues
  • 1,407     Psychiatric disorders incl. 16 deaths
  • 417        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 22 deaths
  • 2,059     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 3,617     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 234 deaths
  • 3,094     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 8 deaths
  • 319        Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
  • 690        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 54 deaths
  • 3,140     Vascular disorders incl. 140 deaths

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

Here are some faces and stories to attach to these cold statistics from those who paid the ultimate price to receive an experimental COVID-19 shot. All of these people were reportedly healthy prior to taking the shots, and they ended up dying very young, or became crippled and lost their careers.

First, we have a very emotional video posted online by a Canadian mother who mourns her daughter’s 13-year-old friend who did not want to take the COVID-19 shot, but finally gave in and took it as it was mandatory for her to continue participating in sports. Her heart stopped and now she is in critical condition.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 31,014 Deaths 2,890,600 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database of Adverse Reactions as Young, Previously Healthy People Continue to Die
  • 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.

***

 

 

Putin is considered a threat because he restored Russian sovereignty, erased the humiliation of the Boris Yeltsin era, and championed Russia’s national interests. But that is just what the U.S. elite could not tolerate.

The U.S. military-industrial complex needs enemies like human lungs need oxygen. When there are no enemies, they must be invented.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Pentagon spin doctors had to search for a new bogeyman to justify their immense $778 billion budget, and its crippling effect on the U.S. economy. If that meant creating a propaganda campaign to paint Panama President Manuel Noriega—a longtime CIA asset—as a mad-dog “threat to American democracy” in order to justify the 1989 invasion of Panama (whose dead have yet to all be counted 32 years later)—well, so be it.

Or if it meant that other CIA assets, like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, also had to be painted as dangerous threats to American democracy to justify the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, at the cost of countless Iraqi and Afghan lives, not to mention the lives of the thousands of gullible U.S. soldiers who served as cannon fodder—well, so be that, too.

But once those enemies were gone, a new one was needed. And almost as if on cue, the re-emergence of a strong, sovereign Russia in 1999 provided the ideal candidate. It also provided a perfect excuse to initiate a new Cold War, which would justify the ever-increasing expenditures for exotic weaponry that the military-industrial complex kept demanding from its bought-and-paid-for politicians in the White House and Congress.

Russia’s Rebirth from Failed State to Sovereign Nation—and latest “Enemy of U.S. Democracy”

The 1990s had been a decade of humiliation for Russia. Under the compliant, corrupt and alcoholic presidency of Boris Yeltsin, the country became a virtual neo-colony of Western imperialist powers. But the resignation of Boris Yeltsin in 1999, and his replacement by Vice President Vladimir Putin (who was then elected president on his own in 2000), signaled the dawn of a new era—and a new relationship between Russia and its Western tormentors.

Although constant headlines and soundbites have painted Russia (and China, Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and every other country that dares to exist outside the hegemonic control of U.S. imperialism) as existential threats to “our” national security, what do Americans really know about Russian society and foreign policy?

What is the correct class characterization of the Russian Federation? Why is the Biden government continually slapping new sanctions on Russia and expelling its diplomats? What is behind the new and recycled national religion of Russophobia? This article will begin to address these questions.

Restoring a Strong and Proud Russia

Russia is a medium-sized capitalist power — having the 11th largest GDP in the world, after 10th place South Korea and before 12th place Brazil. For comparison, the U.S. has a productive capacity 20 times that of Russia. This is the reality for a country trying to assert its interests, after a quarter century of ignominy, in a world order that has been thoroughly dominated by the United States and Western European powers.

Oligarchs and the capitalist Russian state are the central players in the $1.46 trillion Russian economy today. The socialist basis that underscored Russia’s relations with its smaller neighbor republics has been replaced by capitalist interests, and Russian national chauvinism is now widespread.

Vladimir Putin represents the nationalist section of the Russian bourgeoisie. In stark comparison to Boris Yeltsin and his cronies, Putin’s main objective is the return of a strong, proud Russia on the international stage. An ex-KGB agent who has been accused of assassinating his enemies and adopting strong-armed methods reminiscent of the Soviet era, Putin is immensely popular nevertheless in his homeland, especially when compared to the man who preceded him.

Image on the right: Putin with Boris Yeltsin at his inauguration in 2000. [Source: theconversation.com]

The wild decade: how the 1990s laid the foundations for Vladimir Putin's Russia

For two decades, the Putin administration has had as its chief foreign policy objective the creation of geopolitical breathing space to allow the country to restore its former power, restore itself as a major player in global politics and begin to catch up with the West.

Marlene Laruelle, Director of the Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies at The George Washington University, explains that slapping the fascist and totalitarian labels on Putin and Russia are not scholarly but are rather politicized attempts to discredit Russia in order to prevent the country of 144 million from being taken seriously in the international arena.

Professor Nicolai N. Petro, who holds the Silvia-Chandley Professorship of Peace Studies and Nonviolence at the University of Rhode Island, makes a similar argument, and points to many positive innovations under his leadership, including vital reforms in the Russian criminal justice system.

According to these authors, Putin is popular because he guarantees a certain stability for the elites, oligarchs, civil servants and other powerful sectors of Russian society. Many ordinary Russians furthermore recall the economic devastation of the Yeltsin era, and connect Putin with the economic improvements that have taken place since that time—even if certain hardships remain.

A street flea market in Rostov-on-Don, 1992. [Source: wikipedia.org]

Laruelle’s scholarship concludes that the Russian state draws from myriad ideological sources, such as social conservatism, Soviet nostalgia, illiberalism, Russian orthodoxy and Russian nationalism. In her book, Is Russia Fascist? Unraveling Propaganda East and West, she explains: “If there is an overarching ideological trend to identify, it is illiberalism…:a denunciation that holds that liberalism [capitalism, imperialism, Western hegemony, words the author never uses in her book] is now ‘obsolete’ and has ‘outlived its purpose,’ as Putin declared in 2019, and a return to an ideology of sovereignty—national, economic, and cultural-moral sovereignty.”[1]

The Backdrop of Putin’s Victory

For a people long accustomed to the egalitarianism and socio-economic rights of the Soviet Union and being equal operators on the world stage diametrically opposed to the most powerful empire in history, the 1990s return to being a vassal state of the West was a shock.

French economist Thomas Piketty charts the rise of income inequality and Russia’s descent into “a society of oligarchs engaged in grand larceny of public assets.”[2] The voucher system (1991-1995) concentrated wealth in the hands of billionaires as state assets were sold off to the highest bidder. Western advisers from the IMF and World Bank oversaw a monetary system that completely rejected the idea of inheritance and progressive taxes.

The post-communist system taxed everyone the same, regardless of whether they made a living as a fruit vendor or were a gas magnate, at 13%. Tax havens that deprived society of much needed social capital were the norm. Piketty’s Capital and Ideology concludes that Russia’s economic paradigm was to the right of Reagan and Thatcher and became the West’s freakish experiment in hyper-capitalism.

This explains why Yeltsin became a darling of the West and was described on covers of Time magazine at different moments as a maverick, a revolutionary and Bill Clinton’s “comrade.”

Russia expert Jeremy Kuzmarov explains the stark contrast between Yeltsin’s and Putin’s leadership:

“Putin’s vilification stems largely from the fact that he has promoted more nationalistic policies compared to his predecessor Boris Yeltsin who opened up the country to shock therapy specialists (Harvard University advisers) who advanced ill-conceived privatization schemes that led to record poverty and corruption levels in Russia during the 1990s. Over $150 billion left the country in just six years, much of it to be stored in Western or off-shore banks. Desperate Russians sold off privatization vouchers to avert starvation. Millions lost their life savings after Russia defaulted on its debt and devalued its currency, and life expectancy plummeted by over seven years for men.”[3]

A picture containing text Description automatically generated

Privatization voucher [Source: thetchblog.com]

Why Is Putin Popular?

According to a German polling agency, Putin’s approval rating has consistently been above 75%. The reason for this figure, as noted, is that Russia’s economy has improved dramatically under his rule from the 1990s, and Russia has reasserted itself on the world stage.

Putin’s popularity holds steady in face of protests, but Russians divided on Navalny

[Source: intellinews.com]

To understand the ire that Putin inspires from ruling circles in the West, we must return to Russia’s recent history. In an extensive interview with “The Empire Files,” entitled “Post-Soviet Russia: America’s ‘Colony’ to #1 Enemy,” journalist Mark Ames lays out a basis for why Putin’s leadership is so unforgivable to the would-be conquerors of one of the most strategic and rich regions of the world.

Ames lived in Russia under both Yeltsin and then Putin. He speaks on the trauma that Russian society felt when it went from the most equal to the most plutocratic society on earth, almost overnight. Some of the world’s largest gas reserves and one-third of the world’s nickel were auctioned off.

In 1998 the Russian stock market fell 95%, the ruble lost its value, there were food shortages, the state collapsed, teachers were not paid and one-third of the country returned to subsistence farming. At the end of the 1990s, as Western media heaped praises on their new neo-colony, Russians were sick of being experimented on. Ames sees the U.S.’s unilateral bombing of Kosovo in 1999 targeting Yugoslav/Serb forces allied with Russia as the final straw that angered the Russians, leading to a national sentiment of “the communists were right. We are next [on the chopping block].”

Kuzmarov’s “‘A New Battlefield for the United States’: Russia Sanctions and the New Cold War” offers a portrait of what Putin’s leadership has meant for everyday Russians:

“Famed Russian author Alexander Solzhenitsyn stated that ‘Putin inherited a ransacked and bewildered country. And he started to do with it what was possible—a slow and gradual restoration.’

This was in part achieved by ordering oligarchs to pay taxes, by regaining national control over oil and gas deposits sold off to Exxon and other Western oil companies under Yeltsin, and implementing policies that improved infrastructure, living standards, and led to a decrease in corruption and crime. Inflation, joblessness, and poverty rates subsequently declined while wages improved and the economy grew tenfold. Putin cut Russia’s national debt, stymied the exodus of Russian wealth abroad and put in place a successful pension system.”[4]

Like the Bolsheviks a century before, the underdog was standing up to the global Goliath.

A devastated people were searching for another way. This was the power vacuum that gave rise to Putin. Putin did not drink. He was serious. He was a former intelligence officer in the KGB.

Challenging Unipolarity

Jack Lew, Obama’s Treasury Secretary, said that economic sanctions are “a new battlefield for the United States, one that enables us to go after those who wish us harm without putting our troops in harm’s way.”

In Russia’s Response to Sanctions: How Western Economic Statecraft is Reshaping Political Economy in Russia, Professor Richard Connolly from the University of Birmingham assesses how the government is building a multipolar world by increasing trade with Washington’s other targets, such as China, Iran, and Venezuela.

On October 15th, Russia and Venezuelan representatives wrapped up the Intergovernmental Commission XV and Business Forum II where they agreed to continue cooperation in strategic sectors like agriculture, industry, fishing and cultural affairs. The U.S.’s hybrid war on Iran has pushed the country toward the Russian and Chinese anchored Shanghai Cooperation Organization, to the alarm of think tanks in Washington, Tel Aviv and Abu Dhabi.

These new alliances have led the global dictator to lash out in insane ways, imprisoning diplomats and trade ambassadors, most famously Alex Saab, who shun and bypass their dictates. Washington’s own overstepping and sanctioning of one-fourth of humanity has organically led the blockaded countries to increase trade with one another.

Critiques from the Russian Left

Putin to be sure has black spots on his record and has faced legitimate criticism from his domestic political opponents.

Gennady Zyuganov, leader of the Russian Communist Party (RCP), criticizes the repression of the opposition by forces under Putin, hostile takeovers of state-owned enterprises, and “cannibalistic pension reform.” The RCP has denounced the banning of Alexei Navalny’s website and restrictions of any protest. This view sees the other four major parties in the Duma as a controlled opposition all loyal to United Russia, proving there is little more than a semblance of a democratic structure.

“Staying the Course” is a YouTube channel run by Russian communist Vasily Eremeyev. Еremeyev contrasts Soviet parliamentary democracy and right to recall politicians versus the buying of congressional and duma seats under capitalism. The channel has also been vocal about the privatization of health care and education and the lack of taxes on the oligarchy. Inequality in Russia today is worse than in the U.S.

Russia Today (RT)

RT, formerly Russia Today, is the Russian state and private media behemoth with subsidiaries and projects such as Sputnik radio stations, RT news in different languages and Redfish documentaries. The producers, who hire the anchors, edit the story lines and invite the guests, project a hodgepodge of ideological lines that can cause great confusion if not unpacked.

Young revolutionaries in Russia have pointed out how RT (Russia Today) and their affiliates sometimes invite anti-imperialist guests and project left-leaning critiques of imperialism to provide a cover for Moscow’s true ideology. Russian state and private media use such guests in the same way that they use their right-wing guests, to deepen fissures in Western society. By giving voice to both ideologies that are shut out of liberal, mainstream discourse, their intention is to heighten the social contradictions in the West. They imagined a so-called “Red-Brown alliance,” where the Left and Right would unite in an anti-globalization movement.

RT has had frequent pieces against migration and voiced support for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and the French right wing. Putin prides himself on being anti-progressive and anti-woke. His recent speech in Sochi showed a callous misunderstanding of the history of white supremacy, misogyny and homophobia in the U.S. Again, we see the similarities to Trump’s rhetoric.

RT plays a counterbalancing, counter-hegemonic function. Time magazine’s exposé of RT, “Inside Putin’s On-Air Media Machine,” presents charts of how many millions of people the record-breaking RT is reaching worldwide versus BBC, VICE, ABC and other mouthpieces of the global power structure. Presenting itself and Western media as objective, Time presents RT as a mouthpiece of the Kremlin.

This is part of the backdrop that gave rise to the fanatical, wildly exaggerated claims by CNN and The New York Times that Russia intervened in the 2016 elections and put Trump into power. These critics see RT as providing a leftist façade for foreign consumption as an illiberal system targets and destroys the real Left at home in Russia. This is similar to the Iranian state that is not fundamentally socialist but echoes talking points of global anti-imperialist forces.

At the same time, Russian state actors are reviving “white ideology,” the pro-tzar and pro-monarchy resistance to the Bolsheviks and Red Army. Laruelle documents Putin’s paying honor to former white generals and exiles while spending resources on the rehabilitation of collaborationists through cinema and monuments. The mausoleum that holds Lenin’s body has been “under construction” since 2005.

At the May 9th WWII Victory Day parade, the Russian flag has replaced the Soviet flag. Vague references to “our ancestors” have replaced any mention of the Red Army’s and Soviet people’s heroic role in defeating the Nazis. In the informational war with the right-wing coup-mongers in Kyiv, Russian leadership often pointed at their fascist character. Eyewitnesses were alarmed at the anti-Ukrainian sentiments that were shoulder to shoulder with internationalist motivations in the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic.

There is a definite split in the U.S. ruling class toward Russia. Since Putin is a conservative nationalist but not a leftist, Fox, Breitbart and Newsmax tend to portray Putin more favorably.

The alternative media are all over the place, with outlets like Democracy Now echoing the mainstream media and bringing on guests like Masha Gessen who are anti-Putin. Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Maxine Waters are a few examples of “progressive Democrats” who have helped advance Russophobia. Trump, initially promoted more engagement with Russia but ultimately continued a confrontational approach and expanded sanctions and tore up arms control agreements like the Intermediate Nuclear-Range Force Treaty (INF). Trump’s initial policy was unacceptable to the true ruling class which had long ago decided that Trump was not “presidential.”

This honest overview of RT begs an important question: Should an anti-imperialist engage and offer analysis for RT or PressTV and HispanTV (the Iranian equivalents)? Should a committed anti-imperialist use these platforms to expose U.S. crimes from Honduras to Ukraine to Haiti? This is a most intriguing question for each radical organization and Marxist-Leninist party in the center of world imperialism to determine for itself. Organizing does not take place in the realm of purity but advances with setbacks and contradictions. Can Russia, with all of its social and economic contradictions, still be an ally for the forces of liberation fighting capitalism and white supremacy?

Is Russia Imperialist?

Russia may have committed many condemnable acts, but it is surely overblown and unscientific to call it “imperialist.”

In fact, for the last 25 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has done little to stop the U.S. war drive in country after country. Under Yeltsin, the Russian government was essentially subordinate to Washington. Until the 2013 neoliberal Maiden Coup, the Russian government hoped that if it did not challenge Washington in Latin America, the Middle East and Asia, and on its own borders, in exchange it would be allowed to grow again as a strong country. The absence of Russia as a strategic counterpoint has in fact been a dominant pillar of the U.S. unipolar world order, which has caused so much death and destruction.

If anything, Russia should be criticized for its passivity in the NATO/U.S. war on Libya in 2011 and allowing Western imperialist power to bomb a country with which it maintained strong relations. Russia abstained from the sham UN resolution that empowered the Western coalition to effect regime change but did not use its veto. At a crucial moment, Russia abided by another resolution to stop all arms sales to the Libyan government.

In 2015, for the first time, Russia drew the line to support its one remaining military ally in the Middle East: Syria. Russia’s intervention was not a sign of some grand design to take over the Middle East; Russia has nowhere near the military or economic capacity to even consider this task. It intervened directly, four years into the war, because it saw in the internal contradictions of the Obama administration an opportunity to step in and prevent a repeat of Libya. Unlike every U.S. coup, the Syrian government openly invited and welcomed Russian support against ISIS and its international backers.

From the perspective of the Syrian people and anti-imperialists the world over, Moscow provided critical military support to the Syrian government, as well as anti-aircraft weaponry that undoubtedly staved off direct U.S. bombing of Damascus.

The two Russian actions that most angered the West were really quite reasonable, and taken to protect its only warm water ports—the Crimean port of Sevastopol and the Syrian port of Tartus. Both were very important to Russia because its seven home ports—at Novorossiysk, St. Petersburg, Vladivostok, and other locations—froze over and severely crippled its capacity to trade in the winter months.

On account of this changed relationship of forces, Syria miraculously held on, and Russia issued the U.S. a challenge like no other in the era of unipolar U.S. domination.

Warding off U.S. imperialism in Syria and Eastern Ukraine was therefore a sensible action in light of national interests. Russia was not the aggressor.

U.S. military spending dwarfs that of Russia, $778 billion annually to $61.7 billion. U.S. military capacity exceeds that of the next eleven strongest militaries combined. With such glaring social needs, how does the Pentagon justify its 778 billion dollar budget? This is more than double what the Build Back Better legislation proposes: $350 billion a year on social investment.

[Source: wikipedia.org]

As if David were not sufficiently intimidated and overpowered by Goliath, the U.S. military machine also has its NATO allies operating on Russia’s doorstep. If Russia objects and dares to defend its borders, any NATO member has recourse to Article 5 of its charter, which lays out that “An attack on one member is an attack on all.”

In June of this year, NATO, the U.S. Sixth Fleet and Black Sea nations carried out Sea Breeze 21 “to enhance interoperability among the participating nations” on Russia’s borders. ​​Some 32 countries participated, including most NATO members and the U.S. client-regimes such as Egypt, South Korea and the United Arab Emirates.

Of course, any sort of multi-polar imperialist system, should one take shape in the future, must be strenuously fought as well; the needs of poor and working people cannot be met with capitalism or imperialism in any form. But to condemn Russia as co-equal to the United States has no basis in history and mischaracterizes Russian foreign policy.

This wrong analysis misinterprets the relationship of forces in global politics and the meaning of the Syria and Crimea intervention, and it preached neutrality at the very moment that a sovereign country of the formerly colonized world, Syria, is—for the first time since Vietnam—on the verge of withstanding the U.S. Empire.

Russia’s Geopolitical Interests

It is important to clarify Russia’s motives and the role it has played in Syria.

Russia’s support of the Assad government was not ideological; it was practical. For one, the overthrow of the Assad government by proxies of Western power and Gulf monarchies would have transformed Syria into a client-state that would likely have shut out Russia’s access to its warm water port at Tartus. It would also have blocked an important part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, for which Syria’s access to the Mediterranean was to function as an alternative to the U.S.-controlled Suez Canal.

Regime change in Syria would also have freed the Pentagon to pursue its next target in the region—perhaps Iran—and allow the U.S. to further tighten the screws on and encircle Russia itself. Much of Russia’s foreign policy is driven by the real fear that the United States has so little respect for national sovereignty that it will inevitably turn its attention to regime change in Russia itself. In some ways this campaign has already begun, as the West has thrown all of its ideological machinery behind neoliberal opposition leader Aleksei Navalny.

On October 20th, the EU granted Navalny the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, its top Human Rights award—reserved every year for a dissident of a government that Western imperialist nations are actively seeking to overthrow.

In this case, Russia’s pursuit of its own national interests overlapped with the interests of preserving Syria’s national independence from imperialist regime change and the social and cultural counter-revolution offered by the Saudi and U.S.-supported Salafists.

Russia to be sure has secured access to the Syrian warm water port at Tartus—a leased military installation of the Russian navy—though it stands to gain little economically from its intervention in Syria.

H I Sutton - Covert Shores

[Source: hisutton.com]

Russia’s re-entry onto the world stage has caused alarm for the unipolar hegemon. Turkeyand the U.S. are warning that the Russian paramilitary outfit, the Wagner Group, under Russian government control, is involved in conflicts from Libya to Syria to the Central African Republic to Eastern Ukraine.

U.S. think tanks like the Center for Strategic and International Studies see “Russia’s Blackwater” as potentially tilting the balance in these regional conflicts in favor of social forces hostile to imperialism. While the CIA wields its budget of billions to destabilize countries which refuse to stay in their neocolonial place, the U.S. brass is not accustomed to dealing with other international actors who seek to subvert its order. Jeremy Kuzmarov’s book The Russians are Coming, Again is an important review of this New Cold War propaganda.[5]

The reality however is that Russia’s single existing military base outside of the territory of the former Soviet Union is in northern Syria, near the city of Latakia (approximately 500 miles from Russia’s southern border.) Compare this to the 800 known U.S. military bases and installations and hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops occupying 140 different “sovereign” countries in the world.

Sandeep Deokar on Twitter: "Russia lacks the global reach to challenge America. As Putin noted in an interview with an Italian journalist “Publish a world map and mark all the U.S. military

[Source: twitter.com]

Russia: Bullied, Sanctioned, Blockaded and Surrounded 

In 2013, the European Union and the U.S. government helped orchestrate the Maiden counter-revolution, a right-wing coup in the former Soviet republic of Ukraine. NATO powers regularly carry out war drills meant to intimidate Russia. For example, Britain sent 800 troops to the Russian border in Estonia. NATO is not just serving as the most strategic imperialist vehicle but effectively as an anti-Russian alliance.

The U.S. refused to invite Russia, for instance, to join NATO even in the Yeltsin years when U.S.-Russia cooperation was at its highest. U.S. strategists believed that, as Russia regained its strength, it could potentially form a partnership with France and Germany and eliminate U.S. control of NATO. Instead, it promised it would not bring NATO any further east, into the former Soviet Union, but it has repeatedly broken this promise.

Imagine if the relationship were reversed and Russia was deploying its armies and prosecuting wars on America’s doorstep. If Russia were funding a proxy war in Mexico (Syria), engineered a coup in Canada (Ukraine) and were mobilizing troops in Puerto Rico (Estonia), would anyone expect the U.S. to capitulate?

This interactive map shows how the U.S. and NATO have Russia surrounded.

NATO expansion’s open door policy and war or peace in the Donbass

[Source: transnational.live]

There was speculation that the Trump administration could have offered Russia a sort of deal: a warming of relations between the two countries in exchange for Russia agreeing to the partition of Syria and the isolation of Iran. There was considerable speculation in the corporate media about Trump’s goal to work with Russia at the expense of China as well.

A correct position on the U.S. proxy war against Syria derives from a defense of oppressed countries’ right to self-defense and complete opposition to imperialist regime-change efforts. The Salafists’ overthrow of the Syrian bourgeois-nationalist and secular state, despite its many problems and contradictions, would constitute a huge step backward for the people and for the region—a counter-revolution in social terms that would likewise destroy Syria as a nation-state.

This should not be misunderstood as an embrace or endorsement of the political system of Syria, of Assad as an individual leader or of Baathism. Rather it is a recognition of the stakes of the current war, and that no socialist left-wing transformation of Syria has been on the table in the ongoing ten-year, life-and-death struggle.

Dialectics

This level of analysis raises critical questions that the U.S. military-industrial complex and the foreign policy establishment do not want the public to focus on. Instead, the corporate media, as the mouthpieces of the U.S. establishment, have a vested interest in making Russia the bad guy and the U.S.’s “democracy” the victim. Consequently, a U.S. state ideology of Russophobia permeates every sentence of The New York Times and Rachel Maddow’s teleprompters shaping millions of Americans’ myopic views of this massive, complex country.

Predictably, only 22% of Americans now view Russia favorably. The constant accusations of Russia’s meddling in U.S. elections and hacking are highly inflated and politicized to serve as the rationale for the ongoing anti-Russian offensive. The never-verified charges are especially hypocritical when one considers how much electoral interference—and how many post-WWII military coups—the U.S. intelligence agencies have orchestrated from Southeast Asia to the Middle East to South America and in Russia itself.

A revolutionary in the belly of the beast should have no illusions about the Russian state being a return of a Soviet Workers’ State that often stood in solidarity with national liberation movements across the world in the Global Class War, known by its Western euphemism, The Cold War.

At the same time, a genuine progressive can appreciate why blockaded and besieged Venezuelans, Syrians, Zimbabweans, Cubans, and Iranians, and oppressed people the world over, see Putin as a fearless badass and Russia as an ally who has stood up to the U.S. empire in defense of the sovereignty of oppressed nations.

*

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.

Danny Shaw teaches Latin American and Caribbean Studies and Race, Ethnicity, Class and Gender at the City University of New York. He can be reached at: [email protected].

Notes

  1. Marlene Laruelle, Is Russia Fascist? Unraveling Propaganda East and West (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2021). 
  2. Thomas Piketty, Capital and Ideology (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press 2020). 
  3. Jeremy Kuzmarov, “A New Battlefield for the United States: Russia Sanctions and the New Cold War,” Socialism and Democracy, August, 2020. 
  4. Kuzmarov, “A New Battlefield for the United States.” 
  5. Jeremy Kuzmarov and John Marciano, The Russians are Coming, Again: The First Cold War as Tragedy, the Second as Farce (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2018). 

Featured image is from CovertAction Magazine

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.

***

New research out of Germany shows that the most “vaccinated” areas of the world for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) also have the highest rates of excess mortality.

An English translation of the study’s findings explains that the less vaccinated the area, the higher the chances of survival. Conversely, the more vaccinated the area, the greater the rate of excess mortality.

“The correlation is + .31, is amazingly high and especially in an unexpected direction,” it explains.

“Actually, it should be negative, so that one could say: The higher the vaccination rate, the lower the excess mortality. However, the opposite is the case and this urgently needs to be clarified. Excess mortality can be observed in all 16 countries.”

Steve Kirsch of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund says that none of this is surprising to him. Since Chinese Virus injections are the deadliest class of “vaccine” in history by a factor of over 800, it only makes sense that people everywhere who take them are dying in droves.

“In plain English: vaccination makes things worse, not better,” he writes.

The original study is available for download as a Word document. Kirsch also uploaded an English version as a PDF for easy viewing.

Skip the jab and save your life

Dr. Ute Bergner is credited with putting the research together. She formerly belonged to the FDP parliamentary group in the Thuringian state parliament, but has since switched to the “Citizens for Thuringia” party.

In a recent speech, Bergner presented the analysis that she had commissioned. Two statisticians, she explained, were instructed to look for a connection between the vaccination rate and excess mortality in Germany’s 16 federal states.

These two statisticians, Drs. Rolf Steyer and Gregor Kappler, analyzed the period from week 36 to week 40. This is what they found, as presented in a summary:

“Excess mortality can be found in all 16 countries. The number of Covid deaths reported by the RKI in the period under review consistently only represents a relatively small part of the excess mortality and above all cannot explain the critical issue: The higher the vaccination rate, the higher the excess mortality.”

“The most direct explanation is: Complete vaccination increases the likelihood of death,” it goes on to explain.

The Unz Review put together a similar study that came to much the same conclusion. Everywhere in the world where Fauci Flu shots are widely administered is seeing a massive increase in excess mortality.

“Even excluding Covid deaths they were almost 20% above normal for the most recent week, and the trend is rising,” noted Alex Berenson on his Substack.

Obedience to the mandates, in other words, is just asking for death. This will become increasingly apparent as the full effects of the injections kick in over time.

In many cases, death does not occur immediately after the jab. This creates a false sense of “safety and effectiveness” that leads people to believe that everything is just fine.

Later down the road, however, is when the effects of the injections will become apparent. At that point, the death toll will skyrocket even more than it currently is, making it apparent that mass vaccination is just mass genocide in disguise.

“Please take ivermectin which has studies saying it cures cancer,” wrote one commenter at Steve Kirsch’s Substack to someone discussing non-vaccine remedies for the Chinese Virus.

“Or equivalent herbs and enzymes at least like quercetin, berberine, resveratrol, and sweet wormwood. There is a link between parasites and cancer.”

Another directed the already vaccinated to The Fleming Method website, which contains helpful information about how to mitigate and even eliminate some of the jab side effects.

*

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 by Ali Raza from PxHere

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 were no incidents in Slovenia on the first day of tighter epidemiological restrictions, with some dissatisfaction among unvaccinated citizens, mostly drivers who were unable to refuel their cars without a COVID-19 certificate.

Most petrol suppliers, including the Ljubljana-based Petrol, which operates the largest number of petrol stations in the country, are rigorously applying the new restrictions, adopted on Saturday, activating fuel dispensers only after a driver presents a certificate showing that they have recovered from COVID-19, have been vaccinated, or have tested negative.

Employees at petrol stations said that there were no delays on the first day of the new restrictions being in force, with only one incident having been reported in Brezice.

Drivers in international transport have been exempt from the new restrictions and can still refuel their vehicles without major restrictions but they do have to wear a face mask when paying for the fuel at the petrol station.

The rule on the compulsory COVID-19 certificate for a number of services and economic activities, applying both to providers of those services and their customers, was introduced due to a worsened epidemiological situation.

Janez Janza’s government is not ruling out the introduction of additional restrictions if the vaccination rate does not rise quickly and the number of new infections and hospitalisations continues to grow at the current rate.

Close to 2,800 new infections were reported in the last two days. In the past 24 hours, 1,364 new cases have been reported, with one in five tests being positive.

Six patients have died of COVID-19, and the number of patients receiving hospital treatment has increased to 347, including 75 in intensive care units. The government is expected to discuss new anti-epidemic rules on Thursday.

*

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 EVP

Syria: The Pentagon Doesn’t Care About Civilian Casualties

November 29th, 2021 by Prof. Stephen Zunes

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In August 2019, thousands of refugees, prisoners, and families of ISIS fighters crowded into an encampment in the border town of Baghuz in eastern Syria, one of the last territories controlled by the so-called Islamic State. The United States, supported on the ground by an allied Kurdish and Arab militia, launched a massive air assault on the enclave.

As The New York Times reported on November 13, 2021, a U.S. attack jet unleashed its payload on the civilian encampment. “As the smoke cleared,” the article noted, “a few people stumbled away in search of cover. Then, a jet tracking them dropped one 2,000-pound bomb, then another, killing most of the survivors.” At least seventy civilians died.

A Pentagon legal officer reported internally that this was a possible war crime, but, “at nearly every step, the military made moves that concealed the catastrophic strike,” according to the Times. The death toll was downplayed, and reports were delayed, sanitized, and classified.

The U.S-led coalition forces bulldozed the blast site. The office of the Defense Department’s independent inspector general launched an investigation, but the report was effectively censored. An evaluator in that office lost his job when he complained about the cover-up.

In response to an inquiry earlier this month from the Times, the U.S. Central Command acknowledged the strikes for the first time and admitted that eighty people were killed. Nevertheless, it insisted the airstrikes were justified and that “no formal war crime notification, criminal investigation, or disciplinary action was warranted.”

The Baghuz massacre was one the last of the 35,000 air strikes the United States launched over a five-year period in Syria and Iraq that ostensibly targeted ISIS. According to Pentagon rules, U.S. forces could call in airstrikes without checking to see if civilians were threatened, so long as it was deemed necessary for self-defense.

What constitutes “self-defense” for the Pentagon, however, is not just when its forces are under fire. The authorization of deadly force can also be granted if enemy troops are simply believed to be displaying “hostile intent,” which the Pentagon defined so broadly in the case of U.S-backed ground operations in Syria that it constituted 80 percent of all U.S. air strikes.

The New York Times article also noted that the Pentagon failed to keep track of the numerous reports of civilian casualties and usually failed to follow through with investigations. In the rare cases where an investigation was ordered, it was later squashed. An email shared with the Senate Armed Services Committee revealed that the only time an investigation was allowed to move forward was when there was “potential for high media attention, [or] concern with outcry from local community/government, concern sensitive images may get out.”

So far, the Democratic-led Senate Armed Services Committee has refused to open an investigation into the Baghuz attack or any other possible war crimes by U.S. forces in the war against ISIS.

New technologies have made bombing far more accurate than in World War II, the Korean War, or the Vietnam War. During those wars, the United States regularly engaged in carpet bombing of major urban areas—at the cost of hundreds of thousands of civilian lives. However, since the launch of “the war on terror,” both major political parties have gone to some length to justify the killing of civilians in the name of counterterrorism.

For example, Congress has passed a series of resolutions defending Israel’s attacks on civilian areas in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and Lebanon, which have attempted to exonerate the U.S.-backed Israeli armed forces for thousands of civilian casualties.

Often, these resolutions have defended the Israeli attacks on civilians by claiming Arab militia groups were using “human shields.” This is despite the fact that, while using civilians against their will to deter attacks on an adversary’s troops or military hardware is considered a war crime, it does not give license to bomb them any more than a criminal holding hostages gives police the right to shoot them all.

When investigations by Human Rights WatchAmnesty International, the United Nations Human Rights Council, the U.S. Army War College, and others failed to find a single documented case of any civilian deaths caused by either Hamas or Hezbollah using human shields while fighting Israeli forces, Congress decided to redefine it.

A 2009 resolution, drawn up by House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority, expanded the definition of the use of human shields to include any members of a designated “terrorist group” within a civilian population. By this definition, a Hamas official living in a high-rise apartment building in Gaza would make the entire structure a legitimate military target. In other words, when being in the proximity of a “terrorist” is enough to classify a civilian as a human shield, an entire city can become a free fire zone.

Years earlier, I predicted that this kind of defense for Israeli war crimes would likely be used as a rationale for “massive U.S. airstrikes on Mosul, Raqqa, and other Islamic State-controlled cities, regardless of civilian casualties.”

And this is indeed what happened. There were virtually no expressions of concern raised in Congress when, in 2017, the United States launched heavy attacks against Syrian and Iraqi cities held by ISIS (which really did use civilians as human shields).

An investigation by Amnesty International revealed that 1,600 civilians died in the U.S.-led bombing campaign in Raqqa, largely destroying the Syrian city. There has been no challenge to the accuracy of the report, which has been called the “most comprehensive investigation into civilian deaths in a modern conflict,” yet it was largely ignored in the mainstream U.S. media.

There was only a little more coverage of the U.S.-led bombing of Mosul earlier that year, when U.S. planes hit thousands of targets, turning much of that ancient city into rubble and resulting in the deaths of at least 3,000 civilians. A 2019 investigation by Human Rights Watch determined that approximately 7,000 civilians had been killed in the previous five years in Iraq and Syria in air strikes by the U.S. and its allies.

With virtually no negative reaction in Washington, D.C., or coverage in the mainstream media, there should be no surprise that the Pentagon thought they could get away with the 2019 massacre in Baghuz. There appears to be a sense that, given the horror of ISIS, the killing of large numbers of civilians may be necessary to ensure their defeat, so it’s important to keep such tragedies quiet.

The problem, however, goes well beyond ISIS. Even when it involves another extremist militia (and even if a U.S. attack on civilians does get in the news), the U.S. government has little reason to worry. For example, after its belated acknowledgement that a drone missile attack in Kabul this past August had targeted a car driven by an Afghan aid worker, killing him and nine others, including seven children, the Pentagon insisted there was no misconduct or negligence.

The implication is that there would, therefore, be no changes in procedures or personnel, and that the Pentagon would not take steps to prevent such tragedies from happening again.

And there appear to be few political costs. Not only have leading Republicans defended killing civilians in the name of fighting terrorism, but many Democratic members of Congress who have defended Israeli bombings of civilian targets in Gaza have been repeatedly endorsed as “bold progressives” and “peace leaders,” sending the message that the killing of civilians in the name of “self-defense against terrorists” is not considered a problem even within the Democratic left.

Meanwhile, the Biden Administration continues to provide arms, training, and maintenance to Saudi and Emirati forces that have killed tens of thousands of civilians through air strikes in Yemen. A bipartisan majority in Congress has reiterated that the billions of dollars’ worth of taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel remain “unconditional,” despite the hundreds of civilians killed during last spring’s bombardment of crowded urban neighborhoods in Gaza, again under the rationale of self-defense against terrorists.

Maybe it’s finally time to question what exactly constitutes terrorism.

*

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.

Stephen Zunes is a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and a contributing editor of Tikkun. His most recent book is “Western Sahara: War, Nationalism, and Conflict Irresolution” (Syracuse University Press).

Featured image is from The Grayzone


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.

***

Around this time last year (2020), Azerbaijan had conquered almost the entire Armenian exclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. If the war had attracted global attention, it was mainly because of one feature.

And that was the widespread use of armed drones of Turkish production, which decimated and demoralized the unprepared Armenians from the air.

In fact, the importance of armed drones nowadays is such that almost all the major countries are acquiring more and more armed drone systems. A side effect of this proliferation is an increase in their exports, a fact that was conclusively proved last week with the release of two reports.

On November 25, Reportlinker.com announced the release of ‘Aircraft Insulation Market by Platform, Type, Material, Application and Region – Forecast to 2026’. According to the report, the global aircraft insulation market size is projected to grow from $5.5 billion in 2021 to $8.2 billion by 2026, at a CAGR of 8.3% from 2021 to 2026.

*

Based on this, the report says that the UAV platforms happen to be the fastest segment of the aircraft insulation market. It is not much affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. And major players of this market are DuPont (US), Triumph Group, Inc. (US), Transdigm Group, Inc. (US), Zotefoams (UK), BASF SE (Germany), Rogers Corporation (US), Safran Group (France), and Evonik Industries (Germany).

The other report coming on November 23, estimates that the Global Defense Drone Market will generate $16,902.0 million and exhibit a CAGR of 7.9% from 2021 to 2028, owing to increasing defense expenditure in many countries around the world.

The Asia-Pacific region is anticipated to observe the fastest growth by 2028, the report, which, incidentally, is prepared by “Research Dive”, a market research firm based in Pune, India, says.

*

Based on payload, the small drones sub-segment is estimated to generate a revenue of $7,901.2 million by 2028 and hold dominating market share over the forecast period. This is majorly owing to the effectiveness of small drones to lift a payload up to 25 kg, and perform computerized command, communication, control, and information functions.

Based on application, the combat operations sub-segment is expected to generate a revenue of $6,556.2 million by 2028 and is predicted to witness the fastest growth during the analysis period. This is mainly due to the rising need for upgrading the existing unmanned aerial attack systems for threat elimination missions and target identification in military aviation.

*

Based on region, the Asia-Pacific market for defense drones is expected to surpass $4,071.7 million by 2028 and witness the fastest growth in the global industry over the forecast period. The increasing military expenditure of major countries in the region, such as China, India, Japan, Australia, and others is the major factor predicted to boost the regional market growth by 2028.

…Turkish Bayraktar TB2 is now export-hit and Ankara has ensured that the development and production of the drone can run as autonomously as possible. Among TB2’s customers are now Ukraine and Poland.

The US, of course, is the leader in the market as it has used drones in conflicts for long, particularly in asymmetric conflicts with low intensity – both to cover ground groups from the air and to target suspected terrorist targets. In Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Yemen, the US MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper systems have been used extensively.

*

Proliferation Of Military Drones

All told, if military drones are becoming increasingly indispensable for the armed forces all over the world, there are essentially four reasons behind this trend.

One, they are less costly but pretty effective as operational intelligence platforms for proper data flow and they provide real-time surveillance to detect ballistic missile threats.

Two, they can be used in remote locations where the communication systems are poor. They are thus able to provide vital data, irrespective of location. As a result, the control center of the user is able to plan and prepare for uncertain attacks. They, thus, help in making well-informed decisions.

Three, and this is a corollary of the above, in heavy fighting zones, drones help in providing information to the command center to identify the targets better, improve safety, and protect infrastructures from any kind of external threats or risks. In this sense, they greatly reduce putting military personnel in harm’s way or in combat….

Four, drones are proving also lethal to enemy combats as regular airplanes. This means that it is easier to neutralize enemy power using a drone with minimal human casualties.

However, the biggest criticism against military drones is that they often cause collateral damages to civilian lives and property…..No wonder why US MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper are such dirty words in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.

But then, modern warfare is increasingly becoming insensitive to civilian opinions. National interests weigh over notions of rights and wrong in fighting wars, particularly when the enemies happen to be those who have the scantiest respect for these very notions of rights and wrongs.

And that explains why the armed drone market is growing and will grow further.

*

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.

Author and veteran journalist Prakash Nanda has been commenting on politics, foreign policy on strategic affairs for nearly three decades. A former National Fellow of the Indian Council for Historical Research and recipient of the Seoul Peace Prize Scholarship, he is also a Distinguished Fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.

Featured image is from Drone Wars UK

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Next-generation Warfare: Combat Drones Become Fastest-growing Weaponry in Global Military Arsenal
  • 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.

***

 

 

 

 

 

Many informed Canadians remain surprisingly unenlightened about the country’s military history. Canada’s military is widely viewed as either nonexistent, irrelevant, or a force for good. The Canadian Forces’ (CF) public relations department has been very effective in crafting a positive image for the country’s military. In addition, constant comparisons to the US’s rampant militarism benefits Canada’s image.

With the new book Stand on Guard for Whom: A People’s History of the Canadian Military, Canadian foreign policy expert Yves Engler produces a rigorously researched document that exposes Canada’s role as the handmaiden of imperialism—first of the British then of the US—and reveals countless details that qualify the Canadian military as an international actor in its own right.

Private capital and Canada’s arms industry

Like its militaristic neighbor to the south, Canada’s weapons industry is an international juggernaut with links to big business and the highest government posts. The country’s largest military firm is Montreal-based CAE, which trains thousands of Canadian, US, and British fighter pilots. In addition, CAE trained military personnel of apartheid Israel, and trained Saudi and Emirati pilots that bombed Yemen beginning in 2015. Over 100 Canadian weapons firms exported products to Israel, according to a 2009 report. Wherever atrocities are committed, Canadian arms manufacturers seem to be found. During the Indonesian genocide of East Timor, Canada “pumped more than a third of a billion dollars in military exports into Indonesia, an outlaw state repeatedly condemned by the United Nations,” for example.

Montreal-based construction and engineering firm SNC Lavalin, infamous for a sordid legacy of corruption that has involved Prime Minister Trudeau, oversaw the building and management of CF bases in Kandahar, Bosnia, and Kabul “worth hundreds of millions of dollars” in a partnership with the US, and received hundreds of millions more to help service warships. The equally infamous Blackwater private security company, now rebranded as Academi, “was paid over $10 million to train JTF2 [elite special forces] personnel and CF police” and employed former CF special forces members. Many of these private security companies are run by former high-ranking officials who shuttle back and forth between private and government positions, often approving funding and contracts to companies that they work for.

Similar to Blackwater, Montreal-based GardaWorld is the world’s largest privately held security company, with over 90,000 employees. Engler reveals that GardaWorld netted hundreds of millions of dollars from the US-led invasion of Iraq, for instance, even though Canada did not nominally declare war on Iraq. Former CF Lieutenant-Colonel Andrew Zdunich was the head of GardaWorld’s Libya operations, and former CF Commander Daniel Menard was the head of GardaWorld’s Afghanistan operations. “Garda’s board of directors also included “prominent former US and British military and security officials.”

Colonialist and imperialist

Other chapters detail the use of the CF to clear Indigenous land for colonization, often building military bases on seized Indigenous territory. As Engler reveals, this process is not ancient history, but continued unabated from the earliest colonial incursions of the British Empire, through the 20th century, and into today. “The naval base in Esquimalt was built on land taken from the Songhees… CFB [Canadian Forces Base] Chilliwack was built on land taken from the Three Sto:lo; CFB Petawawa was land from the Algonquins of Holden Lake; CFB Gagetown on Oromocto territory,” Engler writes.

Other chapters detail the Canadian military’s obscene destruction of the environment, its legacy of sexism and racism, its malignant capacity in NATO and NORAD, its economic tentacles that reach into all aspects of Canadian life, and its significant role in overthrowing liberation leaders including Kwame Nkrumah, Patrice Lumumba and, more recently, Jean-Bertrand Aristide and Muammar Gadaffi. Canada’s involvement in the Boer war, the two world wars, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, in addition to its leadership position in the destruction of Yugoslavia, Libya, and Haiti, are all examined in depth.

Canada’s largest public relations machine

https://i0.wp.com/yvesengler.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/bases_map-1280x720-1.jpg?ssl=1

A map of current and potential Canadian military bases. Illustration: The Breach

Many Canadians continue to believe that their military is a force for peace, even after Chief of Defence Rick Hillier clearly asserted “our job is to be able to kill people.” Engler does not ignore this aspect of the Canadian Forces, but investigates how the army’s public relations department maintains such a high degree of effectiveness—an aspect of military operations generally ignored by military analysts or historians.

“The CF operates the largest PR machine in the country,” Engler writes. “To protect its image and promote its worldview the CF spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on public relations and related military commemorations.” Over 600 staff members are devoted to public relations operations. Meanwhile the activists and anti-war groups that combat the pernicious influence of CF propaganda campaigns usually work as volunteers, in their spare time, and make extraordinary sacrifices to procure funds for the most basic expenses. In response to any criticism of Canada’s armed forces, its public affairs employees engage in flack campaigns, attacking journalists who composed unflattering articles about the CF, intimidating those who spoke up, investigating journalists’ sources, and writing to their bosses and editors to threaten their livelihoods. At times the CF disseminated outright lies to the media and academics.

Engler’s writing is not imbued with ideology, nor is it speculative, or creative. His great strength is meticulous research, and as a result this book will appeal most to those seeking authoritative evidence. While this may detract from any page-turning appeal that this subject could possess, the book more than compensates with its sheer density of information. At times, each sentence is followed by a reference—by my calculations the book contains over 2,000 footnotes—and Engler lists about 200 books in the bibliography.

The first edition, published by Black Rose Books, is left wanting in one regard, which could be rectified in future printings: the lack of a comprehensive index. The print version of this book could be an even more effective tool for researchers with this addition.

Following Engler’s books that have focused on the foreign policy of the Trudeau and Harper administrations, Canada’s historic foreign policy, Lester Pearson, and Canada’s role in Haiti, Africa, and Israel, respectively, Engler set out to write the first general overview of the Canadian military that approached the topic “from the perspective of those harmed or disenfranchised in Canadian wars, repression, and military culture.” The result is an indispensable publication for researchers, writers, journalists, activists, pundits, and those readers seeking a greater awareness of Canada’s place in today’s geopolitical landscape and that of the past 200 years. “There was never a clear break with the colonial mindset of enforcing imperial rule,” concludes Engler.

*

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 People’s History of the Canadian Military: Yves Engler
  • Tags: ,

The China-Russia Strategic Partnership

November 29th, 2021 by Andrew Korybko

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 state of their bilateral relations is now indeed a model of effective inter-state interaction in the 21st century exactly as President Putin described them. They trust one another, treat each other as equals, and prioritize political solutions over saber-rattling and rumor-mongering. This is the exact opposite of the US’ relations with the rest of the world.

President Putin said earlier this month that “Some Western partners are blatantly trying to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing, but this is obvious for us and together with our Chinese friends we will further respond by expanding cooperation in politics, the economy and other areas and will coordinate steps on the international arena.” This is because Chinese-Russian relations “are a model of effective inter-state interaction in the 21st century.” These observations will now be elaborated upon.

Regarding President Putin’s warning, it’s become increasingly clear that the US is attempting to “triangulate” between itself, China, and Russia. After all, American media and think tanks openly spoke about this ahead of last June’s summit between Presidents Putin and US President Joe Biden in Geneva. They built upon prior fake news narratives to wildly speculate that Russia might somehow be tempted to go against China in exchange for limited relief from the US-led Western pressure upon it.

Not only did that never happen, but it’s also absurd to countenance. That’s because the Chinese-Russian Strategic Partnership is mutually beneficial. Their leaders share the same worldview with respect to jointly accelerating the emerging multipolar world order. Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Russian counterpart adhere to international law and support the UN’s central role in International Relations. Their countries’ economies are also mutually complementary and there exist no bilateral disputes.

Everything could have been very different around the end of the Cold War. China and the erstwhile Soviet Union had a falling out a few decades prior. They even clashed along their then-disputed frontier on several occasions. Instead of being swayed by Western ill-wishers, they responsibly decided to discuss their problems and ultimately founded what’s now known as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is Eurasia’s premier socio-economic and security organization.

The resultant state of their bilateral relations is now indeed a model of effective inter-state interaction in the 21st century exactly as President Putin described them. They trust one another, treat each other as equals, and prioritize political solutions over saber-rattling and rumor-mongering. This is the exact opposite of the US’ relations with the rest of the world. It doesn’t even trust its NATO allies since it’s been caught spying on them several times before, it treats them as vassals, and always pressures them.

Just this last May, for example, it was reported that Denmark helped the US spy on outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel from 2012-2014. This is in spite of Germany hosting more US military forces than any other NATO country. Expanding on the reality of German-US relations, Washington has also sought to unsuccessfully coerce Berlin into canceling the Nord Stream II pipeline with Russia. Furthermore, it’s tried to pressure its ally into curtailing its trade and investment ties with China.

This politically inconvenient reality is emblematic of how the US treats its so-called allies. America’s attitude towards those dozens of other countries that are less strategically important for it than Germany is even worse, but highlighting how it abuses Berlin is instructive for showing that even its “highest standard” in bilateral relations falls far short of the standard set by Chinese-Russian relations. One can only imagine how terribly the US treats its African and Latin American partners.

By contrast, China and Russia employ the exemplary model of inter-state relations that they pioneered with one another in all of their other foreign partnerships. This naturally includes those African, Asian, European, Latin American, and Oceanic countries that the US always mistreats. The emerging model of International Relations being led by those two major countries is accelerating the multipolar world order exactly as their leaders envision. This is in turn helping to stabilize global affairs.

While some observers have high hopes that the US might learn from those two for pragmatism’s sake, that’s unlikely to happen. Instead of applying the lessons that China and Russia are teaching the world, the US stubbornly continues to cling to its counterproductive model of aggressively imposing its hegemony on all others. The more independently that its so-called allies behave, the more pressure that it puts upon them as evidenced by the earlier explained German example.

The American model is therefore strategically unsustainable. It cannot continue to uphold its influence by coercion, threats, and even sometimes force. The international community is taking the opportunity to embrace the pragmatic multipolar model jointly spearheaded by China and Russia in order to collectively forge a community of common destiny for mankind. It’s only a matter of time before the US isolates itself, but before then, it can be expected to make a lot of trouble for its own allies.

*

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.

***

 

It is often the case that when proscribing movements as terrorist, or seeking exclusion orders on individuals, the Home Office defines its actions in a way which leaves itself wide open to legal challenge.

Thus it is with the Home Office’s explanatory memorandum that accompanies an amendment to the Terrorism Act 2000, which proscribes Hamas in its entirety in the UK. The memorandum provides only three reasons for the proscription, both political and military, in the UK.

The memo says that Hamas participated in terrorism by firing more than 4,000 rockets at Israel indiscriminately in May this year, killing civilians, including two children. It says that the use of incendiary balloons was a terrorist act that caused fires in communities in southern Israel, and that Hamas prepared youths in Gaza for terrorism by running training camps.

Even if you accept these assertions at face value (and admittedly this is hard: Israel’s bombardment of Gaza in May killed 256 Palestinians, including 66 children, and the Israeli school curriculum does not refer to their neighbours as Palestinians, but only as Arabs, who are depicted as refugees, primitive farmers and terrorists), none of the claims in the document refer to any activity in the UK.

It is significant that this is a Home Office document, not a Foreign Office one – and yet, the reasons for banning Hamas as a political movement occur outside the UK and in Palestine itself. There is no mention of antisemitism, or any activity by Hamas or its supporters in the UK that would justify such a ban.

In response to MEE questions, the Home Office stated that “following a new assessment the Home Secretary has concluded it [Hamas] should be proscribed in its entirety. This action will support efforts to protect the British public and the international community in the global fight against terrorism. Hamas is already listed in its entirety by the United States and European Union.”

The Home Office went on to explain that Hamas’s military wing was proscribed in March 2001 because “it was the government’s assessment that there was a distinction between the political and military wings of the group. This distinction is now assessed to be artificial, with Hamas as an organisation involved in committing, participating, preparing for, and encouraging acts of terrorism.

“Hamas commits, participates, prepares for and promotes and encourages terrorism. If we tolerate extremism, it will erode the rock of security,” said Home Secretary Priti Patel in a keynote speech last week at the Heritage Foundation. “Hamas has significant terrorist capability, including access to extensive and sophisticated weaponry as well as terrorist training facilities, and it has long been involved in significant terrorist violence.”

Illegal occupier

The explanatory note, however, acknowledges, albeit in brackets, changes to the 1988 Hamas charter, by which Hamas recognises de facto the 1967 borders of Israel and no longer demands the destruction of Israel in its covenant. This recognition would allow lawyers to argue in UK courts that Hamas has a legitimate right to self-defence against an illegal occupier of historic Palestinian lands.

By being so patently partisan in its description of the events that took place this past May, and by omitting the civilian bloodshed caused by Israeli forces – including the frequent storming of al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, attacks by armed vigilante mobs of settlers on Palestinian civilians in Israel’s mixed cities, and targeted attacks on dozens of buildings in Gaza, which destroyed more than 460 housing and commercial units – the Home Office’s explanatory note destroys its own case.

Indeed, it is remarkable how little support the Home secretary has had from the Foreign Office itself.

Peter Ricketts, former diplomat and chair of the Joint Intelligence Committee under former Prime Minister Tony Blair, told the BBC’s World at One on Friday that this proscription of Hamas’s political wing will not change the UK’s foreign policy, and that Hamas has to be part of a political solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. What he left unsaid is that from Wednesday, the search for a political solution will be much more complicated because of this ban.

This was stated loud and clear by other Palestinian factions, not least Fatah, which does recognise Israel. The same warning was given by MPs in Jordan.

The Palestinian Authority’s foreign ministry condemned the designation of Hamas as a terrorist organisation as “an unjustified attack on the Palestinian people, who are subjected to the most heinous forms of occupation, and historical injustice established by the Balfour Declaration”. The PA added that the designation will impede peace and ongoing efforts to consolidate the truce and rebuild Gaza.

Status bolstered

At the risk of stating the obvious, the PA has no love for Hamas, a rival Palestinian faction that has considerably more legitimacy and popularity in the occupied West Bank than Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas does. Rather, it is obliged to make a statement like this, knowing all too well how popular Hamas is.

That is also the assessment of Israel’s domestic security service, Shin Bet. In the run-up to planned elections this year – which ended up being postponed, or in truth cancelled, by Abbas – they threatened Hamas political activists with years-long detention if they ran in the elections. These were not empty threats: dozens of Hamas cadres and leaders, along with members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, students and union activists, were arrested this past February.

The elections were cancelled by Abbas on the pretext of Palestinians not being allowed by Israel to cast their vote in Jerusalem. But had the polls gone ahead, Abbas’s list would have been decimated, as Fatah would have been divided into two or three competing factions, headed by the imprisoned Marwan Barghouti and the exiled Mohammed Dahlan.

Hamas itself was not expecting to do as well in 2021 as it did in 2006, when it emerged as the majority faction in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Indeed, there was vigorous debate within the movement as to the wisdom of running in an election, the odds of which were stacked against Hamas. The leadership rightly calculated that Abbas would blink first, and in this calculation, they were proved right.

In any case, their status was immeasurably bolstered among Palestinians by the decision of the military wing to fire a volley of missiles over Jerusalem, the act that ignited the May war. As Fatah froze in the face of daily incursions by Israeli police at al-Aqsa complex, Hamas was seen – in the eyes of Jerusalemites and Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank – to be doing something about resisting the occupation.

This is something that neither Israel, nor Patel, nor the pro-Israel lobby in the UK appear to understand.

Wide political reach

Hamas is supported by many Palestinians who do not necessarily favour armed resistance, rockets or suicide bombs. They are supported by many Christian Palestinian families in Bethlehem.

Why? Because Hamas is not seen as corrupt, as Fatah and the PA have become; it has not recognised Israel; it does not open the doors of the West Bank every night to Israeli forces; and it resists the occupation. This is the view of many Palestinians who are secular, or if they are religious, do not identify as Islamist. It is also the view of many Palestinians with Israeli citizenship who live in the Israel of 1948.

Of course many don’t, and there is an Islamist party that supports the Israeli government. But the fact is that Hamas’s political reach spreads far beyond Gaza itself. Whether Patel and the Home Office like it or not, this is the reality in the occupied West Bank.

This broader support worries Israeli military intelligence. Israel thinks it can deal with Hamas per se as a militant organisation; as such, peaceful or non-violent resistance is a cause for concern. This is why great efforts are made by Israel’s elite signals intelligence squad, Unit 8200, and Shin Bet to intercept conversations in an attempt to find levers they can use to get informers – details of marital infidelity, debts, homosexuality – anything that can be used to tear Palestinian society apart.

To these Palestinians, Patel and the UK are sending a message: You can have democracy, just as long as you vote for the right party, and just as long as the party you vote for accepts the right of Israeli troops to raid and terrorise your homes and families every night.

The message is also that any other option of resisting the occupation is off the table. Choose non-violence, such as boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), and you will be labelled antisemitic. Whatever it does, Israel cannot be sanctioned. Whatever it does, Israel cannot be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, whose current investigation has been condemned by the US and UK.

Deepening the conflict

So what exactly can you do, if you are a Palestinian living under Israeli occupation in the West Bank, East Jerusalem or Gaza? To the Palestinian diaspora, particularly in the UK, this move sends an even more damaging message.

Exactly as was predicted when antisemitism was broadened through a “working definition”, which includes examples such as holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the state of Israel, the ability of anyone in Britain to support the Palestinian cause is being diminished.

Attempt to mount an exhibition, and you will be ever harder put to find a venue. Stage a meeting in a university, and you will be monitored by Prevent. You could be targeted on social media as an antisemite and lose your job. Now, you could also be branded as a supporter of a proscribed organisation and jailed for 14 years, or lose your citizenship without any recourse to a court.

None of this will solve the conflict. It will only deepen it. Patel has done something that even Blair would not do, for all his hatred of political Islam.

Blair, who had engaged in seven rounds of negotiations with Khaled Meshaal, then the political director of Hamas in Doha, in 2015, said two years later that he regretted that the UK and other western countries had excluded Hamas from the negotiating table and supported Israel’s blockade of Gaza – and he acknowledged the UK had maintained an informal dialogue with the group.

This approach solves conflicts, and it is the one Blair and his predecessor, John Major, both used in reaching peace in Northern Ireland. They talked to the IRA, and they did it directly.

Former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher – so admired by Patel – is discredited on this issue. Thatcher famously said at a Commonwealth summit in Vancouver in 1987: “A considerable number of the ANC leaders are communists … When the ANC says that they will target British companies, this shows what a typical terrorist organisation it is. I fought terrorism all my life … I will have nothing to do with any organisation that practises violence. I have never seen anyone from ANC or the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization] or the IRA and would not do so.” And look at what happened to the ANC in South Africa, or indeed Sinn Fein on both sides of the border today.

Patel’s ban, a move resisted by Blair at the height of the Second Intifada, has done immeasurable damage to the search for peace in Palestine.

*

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.

David Hearst is co-founder and editor-in-chief of Middle East Eye. He is a commentator and speaker on the region and analyst on Saudi Arabia. He was The Guardian’s foreign leader writer, and was correspondent in Russia, Europe, and Belfast. He joined the Guardian from The Scotsman, where he was education correspondent.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This was originally published in November 2020.

In the latest episode of our second season of “TRUTH” with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Kennedy interviews Dr. David Martin.

The two primarily discussed medical patents and the involvement from Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Highlights of their conversation include:

  • Breaking down Dr. David Martin’s company ‘M•CAM’ and how he found a way to put up intangible assets as collateral security.
  • The Bayn
  • Dole Act that led to Fauci profiting from royalties off University patents.
  • Fauci working for the NIAID but failing to study infectious diseases and allergies.
  • Fauci involved in dodgy deals and price-fixing medicine in the USA.
  • SARS vaccine patented in March 2019, 8 months before the COVID-19 outbreak.

*

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

Afghanistan: One Hundred Days of Solitude

November 29th, 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.

***

As the Taliban completes its first hundred days in power, the Western powers are groping for a face-saving formula to engage with the authorities in Kabul with some modicum of dignity. 

The European Union is taking the lead role here. The European countries have a sense of urgency over potential refugee flow from Afghanistan. The EU intends to launch an “inclusive regional dialogue platform, initially with Afghanistan’s six immediate neighbours” (China, Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.) 

Speaking during the 13th Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Friday that the EU must support the people of Afghanistan “to prevent imminent economic and social collapse that the country faces.” 

Last month, the EU had announced a humanitarian package worth 1 billion Euro for the Afghan people and neighbouring countries, including 300 million Euro in humanitarian aid. The EU is expected to shortly reopen its embassy in Kabul but insists that it is not recognising the Taliban Govt.

There has been a flurry of activity lately with officials from Brussels flying in and out of Central Asian capitals, especially Tashkent and Dushanbe. The EU hopes to open a ‘humanitarian corridor’ to Afghanistan. The recent EU-Central Asia Ministerial meeting in Dushanbe has been an effort in that direction. The EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell who lead the delegation to the Dushanbe meeting later wrote: 

“Central Asia may not be at the top of the news for most EU media but it is an important region, sandwiched between major powers, next door to Afghanistan and connecting East and West through trade, investment and other links. As EU, we have clear interests at stake – and so do the Central Asians.” 

Borrell probably got carried away by his first exposure to the Central Asian region when he wrote,

“The region appreciates having an ‘EU-option’, alongside their relationships with their immediate neighbours. They see the EU as a factor of balance and predictability in a volatile international landscape mired in great power politics.” 

To be sure, there is a sudden spike in attention in Brussels.

“Where politicians go is a sign of their political priorities, so this uptake in travel, in both directions, is a sign that things are moving in EU-Central Asian relations,” as Borrell puts it. 

How far this hype translates into concrete actions remains to be seen. Russia is the main provider of security for Central Asian region and Moscow has a troubled relationship with the EU and Borrell in particular. Unsurprisingly, Borrell projected the EU’s focusing on Central Asian region in benign terms, saying,

“The EU wants to keep the region as an open space for connectivity and cooperation rather than an area of binary strategic choices and rivalry.”

Against this backdrop, the talks in Doha on Saturday between the Taliban and the US / EU officials are expected to be an attempt to kickstart the moribund Doha peace process. The talks will cover political issues, frozen assets, humanitarian aid, education, health, security, reopening of embassies in Kabul, according to the Spokesman of Afghan Foreign Ministry, Abdul Qahar Balkhi.  

Without doubt, the Western narrative is changing tack. The BBC News programme The Real Story today featured its latest episode under the title Hunger in Afghanistan: Time to work with the Taliban?

The running theme of the 50-minute programme is that it is irresponsible that a political legitimacy crisis should stand in the way of the international community’s engagement with the Afghan people. Yogita Limaye, BBC News correspondent who covers South Asia, reported from western Afghanistan: 

“The desperation and the urgency of the (humanitarian) situation here is hard to put in words. It’s quite clear that there is no more time left to reach the people of Afghanistan. It cannot wait while the world debates whether or not to recognise a Taliban Government.” 

Jan Egeland, Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), another participant in The BBC discussion, flagged the imperative need for engaging with the Taliban. His remarks are particularly interesting since the NRC runs one of the biggest western aid programmes in Afghanistan and has on its staff currently over 1000 Afghan nationals deployed in Kabul and the provinces. Egeland forcefully reinforced Limaye’s assessment: 

“There’s unanimous disbelief that the Western countries, the Nato countries, left just like that and pulled the rug under the population … There are very many questions like the rights of women to education, but we have negotiated a deal for the rights of all our female staff to work. So, it’s possible to engage with the new government.” 

That said, Western engagement with the Taliban remains problematic. To my mind, the Taliban, after mulling over things in solitude through the past 100 days, may now be even less willing to share power in Kabul or to accept any Western pre-conditions. The only way forward is to encourage the Taliban to continue on its current path of moderation. 

The Western preconditions are plainly unrealistic. Abdul Qahar Balkhi, the MFA spokesperson who took part in the BBC programme was dismissive when asked about the Western conditions: 

“We never wanted this situation. All we did was to fight for our freedom, to gain our independence from occupation. And for others to come and dictate our life, to the Afghans — that is not the solution to the problem. The solution to the problem is not pressure tactic to dictate. The solution to the problem is through cooperation, through positive relations and through encouragement to bring about a situation where all of us can work together.”

On the other hand, while the Western capitals feel the pressure to do something quickly that prevents a refugee flow, a system needs to be put in place first whereby they can directly reach out to the Afghan people, sidestepping the Taliban. 

Some bizarre ideas are being floated such as creating liquidity in the Afghan economy by disbursing money directly to the people via a central bank in Kabul that will be independent of the Taliban government and audited by the IMF! Taliban will never countenance such a patent Western encroachment on their country’s sovereignty!  

Equally, is it realistic to expect that the Taliban will reconstitute the government by easing out the Haqqanis as quid pro quo for lifting of US sanctions? Above all, the precipitous fall in Biden’s rating casts a shadow, as his willingness to fairly and sincerely develop a new relationship with the Taliban is in doubt.

Simply put, Afghanistan will become a political football in the US politics as the mid-term elections approach next year, and Biden’s instinct will be to play it safe. Biden will prioritise counter-terrorism. 

Thus it is that, all things considered, the US and its Nato allies have come full circle back to the old pathway that it is only Pakistan who can be depended upon to leverage the Taliban to get them to accede to Western demands.

Accordingly, a high-level Pakistani military delegation was hosted at the Nato Headquarters in Brussels this week. At the same time, on a parallel track, in a stunning volte-face, Washington has also extended an invitation to Pakistan to participate in the virtual Summit of Democracy in Washington on December 9-10. The strategy is to carry both the civilian and military leaderships in Pakistan.

Significantly, the Nato Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg stated today that the US wants to keep military contacts with Pakistan and the recent visit to NATO Headquarters by the high-level Pakistani military delegation was part of that process. As he put it,

“When it comes to Pakistan, NATO has had regular contacts with Pakistan for many, many years. Of course, not least discussing the situation in Afghanistan. We have political contacts, we have regular military contacts and dialogue and I think this is important that this continues, because there are still many challenges in the region, especially related to the future of Afghanistan.”

What a dramatic turnaround! Pakistan is back in the good books of the Americans. The US/Nato overture to the Pakistani military leadership in Rawalpindi coincides with the resumption of talks in Doha between the US officials and the Taliban. Washington is seeking a political fix in Kabul with Pakistani help.

*

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: Taliban Acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi (L) met Qatari officials before talks with US/EU representatives, Doha, Nov. 27, 2021 (Source: Indian Punchline)

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

World’s First Vaccine Murder case against Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla filed in India’s High Court. [Kiran Yadav Vs. State and ors.Criminal Writ Petition (St.) 18017 of 2021]

Petitioner has sought prosecution of AstraZeneca’s (Covishield) manufacturer Bill Gates, his partner Adar Poonawalla and other Government officials and leaders involved in the murder of a 23 year old man, who lost his life because of vaccination. The deceased took the Covishield vaccine by believing in the false narrative that the vaccine is completely safe and also owing to the compliance requirement set by the Railways that only double vaccinated people would be allowed to travel.

The Government of India’s AEFI (Adverse Event Following Immunisation) Committee has recently admitted that the death of Dr. Snehal Lunawat, was due to side effects of the Covishield vaccine. The said report has exposed the falsity of the claim made by vaccine syndicatethat vaccines are totally safe.

Petitioner has claimed Rs. 1000 crores ($ 134 million USD) compensation and has asked for interim compensation of Rs. 100 crores ($ 13.4 million USD).

Petitioner has also sought Lie Detector, Narco Analysis Test of accused Bill Gates and others.

In a case before the American Court regarding the side effects of MR vaccines, the Court accepted the settlement of compensation of 101 Million US Dollars (around Rs. 752 Crores) to the victim.

In another case in America, the CIA, FDA’s office of criminal investigation, recovered around 10.2 Billion US Dollar (around Rs.76,00 crores) from Pharma Company GlaxoSmithKline for various offences including suppression of side effects of the medicines and putting the life of Americans in danger.

The company’s unlawful promotion of certain prescription drugs, its failure to report certain safety data, and its civil liability for alleged false price reporting practices.

The United States further alleges that GSK sponsored dinner programs, lunch programs, spa programs and similar activities to promote the use of Paxil in children and adolescents. GSK paid a speaker to talk to an audience of doctors and paid for the meal or spa treatment for the doctors who attended.

Between 2001 and 2007, GSK failed to include certain safety data about Avandia, a diabetes drug.

The missing information included data regarding certain post-marketing studies, as well as data regarding two studies undertaken in response to European regulators’ concerns about the cardiovascular safety of Avandia. Since 2007, the FDA has added two black box warnings to the Avandia label to alert physicians about the potential increased risk of (1) congestive heart failure, and (2) myocardial infarction (heart attack).

It also includes allegations that GSK paid kickbacks to health care professionals to induce them to promote and prescribe these drugs as well as the drugs Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent and Valtrex. The United States alleges that this conduct caused false claims to be submitted to federal health care programs.

Constitution Bench of Supreme Court of India in Anita Kushwaha’s case (2016) 8 SCC 509, made it clear that the rights of Indians are no lesser than the people across the world.

In India lakhs of compensation claims are expected to be filed soon.

The judgment in Montgomery’s case [2015] UKSC 11, Airdale NHS Trust Vs. Bland (1993) 1 All ER 821, Common Cause Vs. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1 and Registrar General Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130 and also the Universal Declaration on Bioethics & Human Rights, 2005, makes it clear that before giving vaccine or any treatment to a person, he should be informed about the side effects of the medicine and also about the alternate remedies available.

If any person is vaccinated by suppressing the facts or by telling a lie that the said vaccines are completely safe, amount to the consent being obtained under deception. In India, vaccination under deception or by force/coercion or by putting certain stiflingconditions, is a civil and criminal wrong. [Registrar General Vs. State of Meghalaya 2021 SCC OnLineMegh 130]

Based on the abovesaid legal position the petitioner asked for registration of an F.I.R. under Section 52, 115, 302, 409, 120(B), 420, 34, 109 etc. of IPC and section 51(b), 55 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 against concerned officials who were marketing the vaccines as completely safe.

Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla, the partners in manufacturing the Covishield (AstraZeneca) vaccine are made accused for their involvement in conspiracy.

In India, the person allowing the false marketing of his product is also held to be guilty due to his act of commission and omission. In this regard the provisions of Section 120(B), 34, 109 etc. of IPC get attracted to make Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla guilty of mass murders i.e. Section 302, 115, etc. of IPC.

The prayers in the petition read thus;

“i) C.B.I. be directed to treat this petition as F.I.R. and prosecute the offender as done by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Noida Entrepreneurs Association Vs. Noida (2011) 6 SCC 508 and followed by this Hon’ble Court in the matter between Param Bir Singh v. State of Maharashtra, 2021 SCC OnLineBom 516.

ii) B.I. be further directed to immediately start custodial interrogation of the accused and take use of scientific tests like Lie Detector Test, Brain Mapping Test and Narco Analysis Test to unearth the complete conspiracy and to save the life of Indian Citizen;

iii) Direction to Respondent No. 1 i.e. State of Maharashtra to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 100 crores to the Petitioner forthwith and then to recover it from the guilty officials responsible for death of the Petitioners citizen by their deliberate and unlawful act of commission and omission.”

As per the expert opinion, considering the proofs of sterling nature, Bill Gates and Adar Poonawalla will get death penalty.

The Petitioner also relied upon the criminal antecedents of Bill Gates in killing 8 female children by unauthorized trial of HPV vaccines in India and judgment of Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Kalpana Mehta’s Case (2018) 7 SCC 1, which is a strong proof against Bill Gates and his vaccine syndicate.

Petitioner has also referred to the proofs of sinister plan of Bill Gates in polio programme which spoiled the lives of 4.5 lakh children in India as they suffered new type of paralysis. This is also an additional proof of Bill Gates’ pervert and criminal mindset.

As per experts, there is no chance of Bill Gates getting bail in the case and all the movable and immovable properties of the accused will be confiscated soon.

Various social organizations and common people have decided to exercise citizen’s right to arrest the accused as provided under section 43 of Cr.P.C. As per the said section, any citizen can arrest Bill Gates, Adar Poonawalla and other accused and handover them to the police.

Recently in Australia around 10,000 compensation claims are filed against the vaccine injury. See this.

In India, lakhs of cases will be filed soon, as informed by Adv. Ishwarlal Agarwal, the Indian Bar Association’s National Co-ordination Committee Head.

*

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 Inga – stock.adobe.com

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Abstract

Vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) started to be developed since the initiation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Up to now, four vaccines have been authorized by international agencies such as European Medicines Agency (EMA). Two are DNA vaccines (ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and Ad26.COV2.S) and two mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). The administration of the vaccines has been associated with a strong decrease in the infections by SARS-CoV-2 and deaths associated with it.

However, in parallel to these results, some rare adverse events have also been described. In that sense, events of thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, and hemorrhage have been described in close temporal proximity to the administration of the DNA vaccines ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and Ad26.COV2.S, but also mRNA vaccines.

Recent scientific reports have been released with updated information on the possible association of thrombotic thrombocytopenia and COVID-19 vaccines. On the other hand, since the initiation of the vaccination campaigns, adverse hypersensitivity reactions have been described after mRNA and DNA vaccines administration for COVID-19. Although globally these adverse events are rare, a high proportion of the world population will be exposed to these vaccines. For that reason, their safety and tolerance should be carefully considered. In this review, we provide an updated review of the last scientific findings that can explain the rare side effects that the vaccines for COVID-19 can produce.

1. Vaccines for COVID-19: DNA and mRNA vaccines

Four vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) produced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been authorized by European Medicines Agency (EMA) so far. Two are mRNA vaccines: BNT162b2 developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and mRNA-1273 developed by Moderna Therapeutics. The other two are DNA vaccines: ChAdOx1 nCov-19 produced by AstraZeneca and Ad26.COV2.S produced by Janssen-Johnson&Johnson. The approvals were based on randomized, blinded, controlled clinical trials [1–3, 52]. Both mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 are based on a mRNA molecule that encodes the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2. The mRNA molecule on these vaccines is surrounded by a lipid nanoparticle (LNP) that provides stability (Figure 1). In order to increase the vaccine efficiency and delivery, the LNP was subjected to a process of PEGylation, that is based on the chemical association of polyethylene glycol (PEG) to the LNP surface. On the other hand, the DNA vaccines ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and Ad26.COV2.S are based on adenovirus vectors (Figure 2). Ad26.COV2.S vaccine contains a replicant deficient human adenovirus type 26 vector and the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine (also named AZD1222, commercial name: Vaxzevria) is based on the replication-deficient chimpanzee adenovirus vector ChAdOx1 containing the gene that encodes the glycoprotein spike (S) antigen of SARS-CoV-2.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is IIRI_A_1939696_F0001_C.jpg

Figure 1. Graphic representation of the active component of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19. BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 (PEGylated LNP surrounding the mRNA molecule encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2). The list of ingredients of each vaccine is depicted and the components with allergic potential are highlighted in red color and represented in the center of the figure. Biorender software was used to create this figure under an academic license.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is IIRI_A_1939696_F0002_C.jpg

Figure 2. Graphic representation of the active component of the DNA vaccines for COVID-19. ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and Ad26.COV2.S (replicant deficient adenovirus vector containing the DNA molecule encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2). The list of ingredients of each vaccine is depicted and the component with allergic potential is highlighted in red color and represented in the center of the figure. Biorender software was used to create this figure under an academic license.

The administration of the vaccines for COVID-19 to the general population has been associated with an important drop in new infections with SARS-CoV-2 and a decrease in deaths due to COVID-19 [4,5]. However, since the initiation of the administration of the vaccines for COVID-19 in December 2020, adverse events have also been described. The mRNA vaccines were the first to be administrated and for those vaccines, some cases of adverse hypersensitivity reactions were reported [6]. The DNA vaccine ChAdOx1 nCov-19 was also involved in hypersensitivity reactions, and it has been recently linked, together to the other DNA vaccine Ad26.COV2.S, to rare thrombotic events. Cases of thrombotic events have also been described in close temporal proximity with the administration of mRNA vaccines. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge regarding the safety of the currently available vaccines for COVID-19 with special attention to the last scientific advancements made on the adverse events that these vaccines might induce.

2. Thrombotic thrombocytopenia after administration of vaccines for COVID-19

Recent adverse events involving thrombocytopenia, thrombosis, and hemorrhage, that include a few cases of deaths, in temporal proximity to the administration of ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine, promoted the temporary suspension of the administration of the vaccine by different European countries on March 15, 2021, and a reevaluation of the vaccine safety by EMA [7]. EMA concluded that although the causal link of very rare events of thrombosis and ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine has not been proven, the connection cannot be excluded. Consequently, the safety information of the vaccine was updated including the warning on the rare events of thrombotic thrombocytopenia as a potential rare side effect. EMA highlighted that the benefits of the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccine continue to outweigh the risks. However, the agency advised that the scientific bases of the potential side effects require investigation [8]. Cases of thrombosis in close temporary proximity to the administration of the vaccine Ad26.COV2.S have also been recently reported in the USA [9–11], which prompted FDA to halt the administration of the vaccine and to stop its distribution in Europe in order to perform a reevaluation of the possible side effects linked with the cases of thrombosis. Recent scientific reports have deepened onto the possible link of the adverse events of thrombotic thrombocytopenia and COVID-19 vaccines [10,12,13].

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 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.

***

In a recent freedom rally held in Alberta, Canada, top Canadian pathologist and virologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson explained why the COVID-19 vaccination program being brutally forced on nations is counterproductive, harmful, and doomed to fail:

We can’t vaccinate ourselves out of this mess….The RNA virus constantly mutates. You can never get ahead of an RNA virus [like SARS-CoV-2].  It’s a fool’s game.  Not only that, it’s dogma in those that specialize in vaccinology—it’s absolute dogma:  You never, ever, ever start a mass vaccination program right in the middle of a pandemic.  You NEVER EVER do that.  And the reason you don’t do that is because the vaccine will escape control.  It will encourage the emergence of scariants [variants hyped by the fear-mongering media]…which of course is another ‘reason’ to get vaccinated with a booster jab, and a booster jab, and a booster jab.  How long is this going to go on?  Are they insane?

In his important, stirring speech, Dr. Hodkinson declares: “The whole thing is an absolute fraud.  You’ve been suckered in by a whole bunch of lies. Believe nothing you’ve been told.  It’s all a pack of lies, pure propaganda from start to finish.”

He lays bare the fraudulent PCR test, the junk data concocted to justify a fake pandemic, the useless lockdowns, the dangerous “vaccines” and the media’s propaganda campaign to spread groundless fear.

A voice of sanity, Dr. Hodkinson calls the vaccination of children with the COVID-19 shots “abhorrent…criminal…utterly insane…a child sacrifice for no benefit whatsoever”.  He condemns the injection of pregnant women, which has led to countless miscarriages and stillbirths.  He also discusses how the vaxxed are shedding spike proteins, endangering the unvaccinated who happen to be in close proximity to the vaxxed, as well as the COVID-19 vaccines’ alarming potential to drastically raise the odds of developing cancer.

According to Dr. Hodkinson, “Gain-of-function research is one of the most existential threats to humanity…. Gain-of-function research should be prohibited internationally.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, used millions of taxpayers’ dollars to fund gain-of-function research in China designed to make coronaviruses more infectious and more lethal. “Gain-of-function research” is basically a euphemism for bioweapons research—and Fauci collaborated with an enemy of the United States for years, which in all probability led to the creation of SARS-CoV-2.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in his new book “The Real Anthony Fauci” divulges how Fauci “partnered with the Pentagon and intelligence agencies in gain-of-function experiments to breed pandemic superbugs in poorly regulated labs in Wuhan, China and elsewhere, under conditions that virtually guaranteed the escape of weaponized microbes like SARS-CoV-2.”  Other researchers believe the COVID-19 lab-engineered bioweapon was released deliberately, either by U.S. operatives, Chinese agents, or both sides.

Hodkinson ends his speech with an urgent message:  “This is the time to stand up and be counted.  To show governments that you cannot be bossed around by idiots.”

You can watch the full speech here:

Click here to watch the video.

*

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

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.

***

 

 

 

 

 

“I go back from age to age up to the remotest antiquity; but I find no parallel to what is occurring before my eyes: as the past has ceased to throw its light upon the future, the mind of man wanders in obscurity.” Alexis de Tocqueville

Mike Whitney: I was under the impression that Putin opposed forced vaccination, but you say Russians are being coerced into getting jabbed. How does that work? Are the local governors acting unilaterally and imposing vaccine mandates behind Putin’s back or is there something else going on?

Riley Waggaman: Putin’s position on compulsory vaccination has arguably evolved over time. In March, he described such policies as “counterproductive.” Then, in early June, he said the vaccine would be available to anyone who “wants” it—while stressing authorities must do a better job of “clarifying the need” to get jabbed. Notably, he openly mocked some of the incentives (“free beer and sausage”) being used at the time by Western governments to entice people to roll up their sleeves. Two months later, Russia’s president argued vaccination should remain voluntary, while stipulating it was now “necessary” to create “different kinds of incentives” to increase uptake.

Whatever Putin’s personal views on mandatory vaccination may be, the reality is that Russia’s capital introduced the country’s first compulsory vaccination policy in mid-June, which required various business sectors to meet a 60% vaccination quota among employees. Workers who refused the shot were at risk of being suspended indefinitely without pay (or, in layman’s terms, “being fired”). Many other regions followed suit with similar (and even more stringent) mandates.

After the State Duma elections in late September, Russia’s regions began mass adopting vaccine mandates as well as QR-coded “health” passes. All 85 federal subjects of the Russian Federation now have compulsory vaccination rules (some more strict than others). For example, in Leningrad Oblast, all state, municipal and private organizations must ensure 100% of employees are fully vaccinated, or have a medical exemption or proof of prior infection in the last six months. Hold-outs will need to be tested every 72 hours. Do not be fooled by the loopholes: the same region ordered certain sectors to vaccinate 80% of their employees by September. The same strategy of incrementalism is being employed across Russia. Some parts of the country are even denying routine medical care to those without a QR code. One region recently announced that in four districts, all unvaccinated people would have to self-isolate—an “Austria-style” lockdown (which was actually inspired by a Tatarstan-style lockdown). In St. Petersburg and several other parts of the country, vaccination is now compulsory for all people over the age of 60.

Russia is now set to implement a nationwide QR code system to be used for nearly all aspects of “normal life.” Assuming the legislation passes the State Duma, these society-transforming restrictions—which will deprive the unvaccinated of freedom of movement and commerce, essentially making them second-class citizens—will come into force in February.

Are Russia’s regions acting against the wishes of the Kremlin as they tighten the screws on compulsory vaccination? Actually, all available evidence suggests quite the opposite. Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on October 7 that “any measures that can encourage more people to get vaccinated are good.” A week later, Peskov accused unvaccinated Russians (the majority of the country) of making an “irresponsible” choice that “kills.” The Kremlin has been spouting this kind of puzzling, inflammatory rhetoric for months. On June 17, one day after Moscow announced its mandatory inoculation regime, Putin’s spokesman explained that the “principle” of non-obligatory vaccination “generally remains,” but Russians are not proactive enough about getting the shot. A day later, Anna Popova, the head of Russia’s consumer rights protection and human wellbeing agency (Rospotrebnadzor), described compulsory immunization as a “new tool” that can be utilized as the government sees fit.

Popova recently stated COVID restrictions will only end after “everyone” is vaccinated. With more than 50% of Russian adults still unvaccinated nearly a year after the country’s mass inoculation program began, how does the Russian government intend to make this happen?

MW: I’ve read quite a bit about the four main vaccines in the West, but know next to nothing about the Russian vaccines. Can you bring us up to speed on these injections? In particular, we’d like to know whether they use the same experimental “gene-based” technology that is employed by Pfizer, Moderna, J&J and AZ?

Image on the right is from Brasil Wire

RW: There are several Russian COVID vaccines. Sputnik V, developed by the ministry of health’s Gamaleya Center, is by far the most commonly used drug, and so it’s the one that deserves the most scrutiny. Sputnik V is based on Gamaleya’s human adenovirus vector platform (Ad26 and Ad5), which is designed to transport genetic material into cells. If you examine the patent for Gamaleya’s influenza shot (which is posted on Sputnik V’s official website), the technology now being used for Sputnik V is openly referred to as a “genetic vaccine.”… Interestingly, Gamaleya’s director, Alexander Gintsburg, said there are no “significant” differences between Sputnik V and AstraZeneca’s vaccine.

A common claim made by Russian officials and the media is that there is no reason to worry about Sputnik V’s long-term safety because it is based on Gamaleya’s “proven” human adenovirus platform. The problem with this argument is that before Sputnik V, Gamaleya had repeatedly failed to bring a “genetic vaccine” to market. One attempt resulted in an embezzlement scandal, while other prototypes were never submitted for formal approval—suggesting they lacked the necessary safety and efficacy data to get the greenlight from regulators.

In terms of safety, how does Sputnik V’s stack up against Pfizer’s shot and other mRNA vaccines? It’s difficult to say. Russia does not have a VAERS-like database for reporting suspected adverse events among the general public. In fact, there is no regularly updated, publicly available data on any post-vaccination complications in Russia. It seems the Russian government’s position is that they do not exist. But doctors and lawmakers tell a different story, one supported by an informal database of suspected vaccine-linked deaths. Undeterred, authorities have compared these concerned citizens to “terrorists” and are now threatening “anti-vax” doctors with fines and even prison time, in essence making any medical professional who questions the vaccine a suspected criminal in the eyes of the Russian government.

There is another, equally alarming element to the Sputnik-mRNA vaccine comparison. There is now a huge body of evidence showing mRNA vaccines can cause serious side effects, and even death. But Sputnik V’s own developers openly support using Pfizer’s shot in Russia. Gamaleya’s Dmitry Shcheblyakov, who helped create Russia’s flagship jab, recently claimed there are clear “advantages” to mixing Sputnik V with “different vaccines made using different technologies.” Harvard-educated ex-Goldman Sachs banker Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), which provides financing for Sputnik V, announced last month that joint research with Pfizer was already underway, and expressed confidence that a Sputnik/Pfizer cocktail will be a “very successful combination.” Similar “joint research” is reportedly being conducted with Moderna.

There are also questions about who, or what, is actually behind Sputnik V. In May 2020, Russia’s largest bank, Sberbank, created a subsidiary—Immunotechnology LLC—to help “transfer technology” related to the vaccine. The CEO of Sberbank, Herman Gref, is part of JP Morgan’s International Council and is also a member of the World Economic Forum’s board of trustees. Gref claims he got the vaccine in April 2020—which would make him one of the first people in the world to be injected with Sputnik V (in fact, months before it was even known as “Sputnik V”).

As Russians become increasingly worried about the “QR-ization” of their country, it’s worth noting that Sberbank is developing a QR code-based payment system, while Gref has been toying with the idea of creating a “Sbercoin” digital currency in partnership with JP Morgan.

MW: Your answer is so far-reaching, I’m not sure how to follow it up. First, you confirm that Sputnik V is a “genetic vaccine” which suggests that the risks of bleeding, blood clots and autoimmunity are the same in Russia as they are the US. Then, you say there is a connection between the creator of the Russian vaccine and Pfizer as well as with some “Harvard-educated ex-Goldman Sachs banker” whose organization “provides financing for Sputnik V”. Finally, you suggest that the funding for the vaccine operation may come from the “CEO of Sberbank, Herman Gref, is part of JP Morgan’s International Council and is also a member of the World Economic Forum’s board of trustees.”

Your answer underscores the suspicion that these vaccines are the cornerstone of a much larger project aimed at restructuring the global economy and, perhaps, reducing the world’s population. Where does Bill Gates fit into the picture or does he?

RW: Gates definitely fits into the picture. Russia’s former health minister, Veronika Skvortosva, is a board member of the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB). Created by the World Health Organization and World Bank, the GPMB has received generous funding from Gates (who is also a top contributor to the WHO, of course). Guess who else is on GPMB’s board? Anthony Fauci, as well as Chris Elias, President of the Bill & Melinda Gates’ Global Development Program. As RFK Jr. detailed in his newly released book, GPMB serves as

the real-life authoritative collective for imposing rules during the upcoming pandemic. This so-called “independent” monitoring and accountability body’s purpose was to validate the imposition of police state controls by global and local political leaders and technocrats, endorsing their efforts to take the kind of harsh actions that Gates’s simulation modeled: subduing resistance, ruthlessly censoring dissent, isolating the healthy, collapsing economies, and compelling vaccination during a projected worldwide health crises.

[…]

In June 2019, about twenty weeks before the start of the COVID pandemic, Dr. Michael Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s health emergencies program, summarized the conclusions of GPMB’s pandemic report, warning that “we are entering a new phase of high impact epidemics” that would constitute “a new normal” where governments worldwide would strengthen control and restrict the mobility of citizens.

Does any of that sound familiar?

In January 2020, just a few months before the world was turned upside down by COVID lockdowns and restrictions, Skvortsova resigned as Russia’s health minister as part of a shake-up of Putin’s cabinet. A week later she was appointed the head of Russia’s federal biomedical agency (FMBA). As head of the FMBA, she played an integral role in the early days of Russia’s COVID response, and later produced data showing Moscow had been overwhelmed by the “Delta strain”. Her findings provided some much-needed “science” to justify the capital’s highly unpopular compulsory vaccine mandate. As health minister, Skvortsova presided over a years-long data manipulation scandal involving fraudulent mortality rates. The fraud was so blatant that the Russian government even admitted that their books were cooked (the country’s regional governors were blamed and thrown under the bus by Dmitry Medvedev).

As for “COVID-triggered” economic restructuring: the Russian government has openly embraced the World Economic Forum’s Fourth Industrial Revolution. In October, the Russian government and the WEF signed a memorandum on the establishment of a Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution in Russia. Russia has already adopted a law allowing for “experimental legal regimes” to allow corporations and institutions to deploy AI and robots into the economy, without being encumbered by regulatory red tape.Returning to Gref and his digital Sbercoin: Russia’s central bank is already planning to test-run a digital ruble that, among other nifty features, could be used to restrict purchases.

Many are probably aware of UN Agenda 2030. Well, there is a Moscow 2030 plan, and it’s quite extraordinary. The blueprint for Russia’s capital calls for “genetic passports” that can be used to administer “gene therapies.” A document envisioning life in Moscow by the end of the decade also talks about “implanted medical digital devices” that can be used by insurance companies to calculate health insurance payments. It seems these ambitions won’t be limited to Moscow. In the last half of 2019, Russia’s State Duma commissioned a report to investigate the “conflict-free development” of a “new generation of technologies” (such as “genome editing”) in order to create a “new type of society.”

MW: I have a hard time believing that a Russian patriot, like Vladimir Putin, would go along with– what amounts to– a takeover of the country by foreign elites, the banker Mafia and the global drug cartel. Is he oblivious to what is going on right beneath his nose or are other factors at play?

RW: Wherever Putin stands on this, surely he must realize that the Russian government is pursuing hugely unpopular policies, first with coercive vaccination, and now with the proposed QR-ization of the country. State Duma Deputy Deputy Mikhail Delyagin recently warned that the adoption of a nationwide digital health “ausweis” would amount to a “coup d’état” that would hand external management of the country over to “Big Tech and Big Pharma through the WHO.” The reason I bring this up is because, at least as I understood his comments, Delyagin does not believe Putin is directly involved in what is happening and fears the Russian president will end up taking the blame for any social and/or economic chaos that may lie ahead (Delyagin: “When these feral oligarchs come to power, when this feral medical mafia comes to power, Russia will not exist! There will be no one to defend Russia! If Putin signs this law, who will defend Putin? I’ll name two dozen, but what about the rest? Help yourself, protect yourself and Russia from a coup d’état!”). If this is the case, it is imperative to stop these dangerous, destabilizing policies before they spark serious upheaval in Russia.

In truth, it’s hard to argue Putin is a clear ally in the fight against experimental drug mandates or the World Economic Forum’s twisted vision for the future. In January, the Russian president gave an address at the WEF in which he called for “expanding the scale of [COVID] testing and vaccinations” around the world. He went on to state that a “high-quality structure” must be created to help overcome “social imbalances” that have been exacerbated by the pandemic. “State budgets and central banks” should play a “key role” in quickly restoring the global and national economies, Putin explained.

Isn’t this just a fancy way of saying Build Back Better?

We desperately need open, frank dialogue about what is happening in Russia right now–discussions which are conspicuously absent in the vast majority of “indy media.” I don’t pretend to have all the answers, but I’m shocked that so few seem to be asking any questions.

MW: In Russia, we see the same red flags that are appearing across the West; coerced vaccinations, suspension of civil rights, and the steady slide towards authoritarianism. To what extent do you see these developments as a primordial struggle between good and evil?

RW: I am often reminded of that unsettling line from Alexis de Tocqueville: “I go back from age to age up to the remotest antiquity; but I find no parallel to what is occurring before my eyes: as the past has ceased to throw its light upon the future, the mind of man wanders in obscurity.”

With each passing day it seems we are being forcibly severed from our own past. We are being “retrained” to accept a new civilizational model.It’s happening at the local, regional, national and global level. It is tearing apart families.

I do believe we are facing an evil that has no equal in human history. We are in completely unchartered and extremely dangerous territory. Still, there are lessons, and warnings, we can take from history. The worldwide introduction of digital health passes bears a striking resemblance to the global adoption of international passports after WW1. Your passport is a WW1 relic. It was supposed to be a temporary document to control the flow of refugees and keep out enemy spies. It wasn’t so temporary though, was it?

The Austrian novelist Stefan Zweig wrote at length about what this new system of control meant for those who had lived in pre-war Europe: “Human beings were made to feel that they were objects and not subjects, that nothing was their right but everything merely a favor by official grace. They were codified, registered, numbered, stamped… The humiliations which once had been devised with criminals alone in mind now were imposed upon the traveler, before and during every journey.”

He added: “Always I had to think of what an exiled Russian had said to me years ago: ‘Formerly man had only a body and a soul. Now he needs a passport as well for without it he will not be treated like a human being.’”

Now we are all suspected biohazards, on top of being potential criminals. At this point, are the “unjabbed masses” even viewed as human beings in the eyes of our global overlords? Even those who dutifully got their booster shot must now realize their freedoms will not be returned to them. That’s not how it works. Duma Deputy Delyagin touched on this in his video appeal to Russians:

“They are already talking to us in the same way they usually talk to animals. The state now speaks so boorishly to the people. This is how they talk to the population of the occupied territories, who for some reason do not understand that they are occupied.”

A remarkable observation, one that applies to almost the entire world.

I have a young son. He is a Russian citizen. I would like him to be treated as a human being.

The situation is extremely grim. Personally, I believe there is a deep spiritual element at play. How do we stop this profound evil?

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Riley Waggaman is a Moscow-based writer. He worked for Russia Insider, RT, and Press TV. He contributes to Russian-Faith.com and Anti-Empire.com. He writes regularly about Russia on his Substack account: Edwardslavsquat.substack.com

Michael Whitney, renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Featured image is from TUR

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

By Peter Koenig, November 28, 2021

Behind its development is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – with support of the Rockefeller Foundation – and others belonging to the sinister all-digitization, depopulation and eugenics agenda. It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society. It’s an electronic ID-program that uses generalized vaccination against Covid-19 as a platform for digital identity.

The Spy Business. Just Follow the Money

By Philip Giraldi, November 28, 2021

I have reconstructed the sequence of events as follows: A business intelligence research firm Fusion GPS originally began researching Trump’s possible ties with Russia during the primary elections on behalf of a conservative who wanted to damage Trump’s campaign.

Invention of “The Covid Narrative”: The PCR Test Sustains The Myth of a Global Pandemic. It Serves to “Maintain Fear”

By Dr. Nicole Delépine, November 28, 2021

Everywhere in the rich countries, the rulers impose its deadly use thanks to the corruption of many scientists and doctors, media to whom we let the word, the many others being defamed threatened and muzzled.

One World Governance and the Council on Foreign Relations. “We Shall have World Government… by Conquest or Consent.”

By Joachim Hagopian, November 28, 2021

New World Order propaganda rules and shapes the world. And there’s no more powerful propagator of propaganda that rules and shapes US global hegemony, world events and major geopolitical developments than the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

The Covid-19 Omicron Variant: Towards a Fourth Wave Lockdown? Pretext to Introduce New Repressive Policy Measures

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 28, 2021

A travel ban against Africa, using the Covid-19 omicron variant as a pretext, could also have devastating social and economic impacts on the African Continent, including the disruption of trade relations. Is there a hidden agenda?

Video: The WHO and the Road Towards a Fake Medical Dystopia. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg

By Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and Planet Lockdown, November 27, 2021

In this intimate sit down interview with Wolfgang Wodarg, we discuss the broad issue of corruption in the WHO, how we should understand the “pandemic,” or lack there of and how we must stop this diabolical trend towards a fake medical dystopia that will take over all aspects of our lives.

The WHO Recommends Genetic Manipulation and Gene Editing of Humans “To Promote Public Health”

By Jens Bernert, November 27, 2021

Those who warned that Corona “vaccinations“ were the first step towards the genetic manipulation of humans faced harsh attacks from quality media, politicians and activists who denied this and ridiculed the corresponding fears.

Will the Covid Pandemic Trigger a New May 1968 in Europe?

By Germán Gorraiz López, November 26, 2021

The current dominant or establishment system of Western societies would use the invisible dictatorship of compulsive consumerism of material goods to annul the ideals of the original individual and transform him into an uncritical, fearful and conformist being who will inevitably swell the ranks of a homogeneous, uniform society, easily manipulated by mass manipulation techniques.

The Collapse of America: Distant Early Warning Signs of Uncle Sam’s Demise. Andrei Martyanov

By Michael Welch, November 26, 2021

According to the Survey of Mothers with Young Children, 40.1% of the mothers with children 12 and younger reported household food insecurity since the on-set of COVID-19. That’s up 170 percent over food insecurity numbers in 2018!

Migration Crisis in Europe Is Real and Demonizing Belarus Will Not Solve It

By Uriel Araujo, November 26, 2021

The migration crisis in the Belarusian-Polish border has become a hot topic in Europe. Last week a group of about 400 people was flown from Belarus back to Iraq in a repatriation flight.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: The WHO and the Road Towards a Fake Medical Dystopia.

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.

***

 

Here is a live broadcast of the first Republic of Poland Members of Parliament Investigation Committee as part of the Nuremberg 2.0 project with the special guest Dr. Reiner Füllmich in attendance.

The committee was led by the Member of Parliament Grzegorz Braun and Prof. Mirosław Piotrowski, Paweł Skutecki, attorney Jacek Wilk.

Among other guests attending the committee you can find: attorney Arkadiusz Tetela, attorney Krzysztof Łopatowski and attorney Jarosław Litwin. The live broadcast was on November 15th (Monday).

About Dr. Reiner Füllmich

Dr Reiner Füllmich is an international trial lawyer who has successfully sued large fraudulent corporations like Volkswagen and Deutsche Bank. Dr. Reiner Fuellmich leads over 1,000 lawyers and 10,000 medical specialists and sues CDC, WHO and Davos Group for crimes against humanity.

What is the Nuremberg 2.0 project?

The Nuremberg 2.0 project is a civic initiative created from the necessity of the moment and the need of the heart.

What are the goals of the project?

The goal of the project is to activate conscious and responsible Poles to collect historical and legal documentation describing acts of crimes, lawlessness, abuses and omissions of public authority and to document individual tragedies unknown to the wider public today, which you will want to voluntarily share with us.

How are we going to achieve the goals of the project?

We will collect and register documentation and individual legal acts will be prepared to formulate charges and indict specific persons directly or indirectly responsible for the committed crimes. We will also register professional archival documentation and on its basis, we will publish historical journals under the collective name of “Journals Nuremberg 2.0”.

What was the reason for setting up the project?

As a consequence of the decisions of the Polish government, and in particular of the Ministry of Health and its subordinate agencies, many human injustices and grievances were caused and the victims were primarily Poles – citizens of the Republic of Poland.

Where does the name of our project come from?

The Nuremberg 2.0 project recalls the trial known from the history: the National Socialist system of the Third Reich was tried for the crimes committed by those who represented policies and rules implemented by this system . The name of our project is purely symbolic.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video, Nuremberg 2.0 : Poland’s Parliamentary Investigation Committee: Inauguration with Dr. Reiner Füllmich
  • 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.

***

 

Yesterday, I participated in demonstrations in downtown Amman against the latest step taken by the Jordanian government to normalize relations with Israel through yet another U.S.-brokered deal, this one ostensibly as a response to climate change.

The deal is for Jordan to receive 200 million cubic meters (7.06 billion cubic feet) of desalinated water from Israel. In return Israel would get 600 megawatts of electricity generated from a UAE-funded solar energy plant in Jordan. This agreement is the brainchild of Jordan’s EcoPeace, an Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian non-governmental “peace-building” organization — one of those normalizing NGOs that flourished during the Oslo “peace process” and linger on.

In the defunct language of the defunct “peace process,” Jordan’s EcoPeace Director Yana Abu Taleb avowed: “We need to look at projects of cooperation like this, for the benefit of our people; We need to rebuild healthy interdependencies.” U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry, who was present at the signing of the project’s “declaration of intent” in Dubai along with Jordan’s water minister, Israel’s energy minister, and the UAE’s climate change minister, also spoke of the huge impact of the agreement on “Jordan’s effort at climate adaptation.” Both spread the fake news that the agreement was all about the environment and had nothing to do with politics.

Not so the demonstrators in Amman whose passionate and angry chants rejected the deal and called for the liberation of Palestine with full understanding of its political context, which is that of the Wadi Araba Treaty of 26 October 1994. The Jordanian public had overwhelmingly opposed this treaty then, which predictably (like the Oslo “peace process”) has not worked in favor of the country or its people and has affected Jordan negatively on various fronts as activist Azzam Tamimi and political analyst Lamis Andoni pointed out.

Some of the chants in the following video clip say:

Normalization is Betrayal; Wadi Araba is Betrayal; Surrender is betrayal; Palestine is the land of Islam; God is great and praise be to God (الله اكبر وله الحمد).

Some of the posters say:

“We don’t want to die of thirst but we don’t want to betray; normalization is a big betrayal.”

“Let Wadi Araba Treaty fall.”

The demonstrators also rejected the vaunted environmental benefits the deal is supposed to bestow on Jordan with head of Jordan’s Environmental Union Omar Sushan explaining: “We need to strengthen our national water network, build public awareness about water management, and use new methods of irrigation in Jordan. This is our strategic option. We cannot rely on Israel.”

Jawad al-Anani, Jordan’s former deputy prime minister for economic affairs also pointed out that “it is more secure for Jordan to get desalinated water for drinking purposes … from Jordan, rather than Israel.”

It is clear that, as with the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people, the Jordanian government, led by King Abdullah, does not represent the demands and wishes of the Jordanian people. And it is clear that this agreement is not in the best interests of the Jordanian people either politically or economically and environmentally.

In the following video clip, you can clearly hear chants of: “The whole government is [made up of] traders. الحكومه كلها تجار”. And in reference to the fact that the agreement had not been presented to Parliament as stipulated by Article 33 of Jordan’s constitution, which states that any agreement involving financial commitments to the Treasury is not valid unless approved by the National Assembly, some demonstrators held placards that said: “No tampering with the constitution لا للعبث بالدستور”.

Masar Badil, Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement, has launched “a unified popular movement and an organized framework (the Council of Palestinian Organizations and Institutions) to lead the masses of our people, defend our national and human rights, liberate the potential of our Palestinian people, especially the younger generations, and strengthen their decisive leadership position in the next phase of struggle.” The movement understands very well that only resistance can ensure the restoration of basic values and ideas that will enable the masses to work together to realize their rights.

Resistance, as a way of life, can help change the current image portrayed by the political and security elites in all of the Arab countries. The sentiment of this demonstration was loudly and repeatedly conveyed in the following chant: “Death rather than humiliation” (الموت ولا المذله).

*

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.

Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem and whose mother’s side of the family is from Ijzim, south of Haifa. She is an activist, researcher and retired professor of English literature, Al-Quds University, occupied West Bank.

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: “We don’t want to die of thirst but we don’t want to betray; normalization is a big betrayal.”  “Let Wadi Araba Treaty fall.” [Rima Najjar]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Palestine: “We Don’t Want to Die of Thirst, but We Don’t Want to Betray: Normalization with Israel Is a Big Betrayal.”
  • 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.

***

Prof. David Millard Haskell of Wilfrid Laurier University, Ontario warns students – now banned from their university campuses for resisting the unscientific & immoral vaccine mandates – that the injustice they are experiencing is just the beginning.

Links to studies proving that the mandate is not supported by the most current research are found below.

Dr. Haskell explains that the current tyranny of government and university officials is just part of a trend developing for years; furthermore, he predicts that things are going to get worse.

He shows that university professors and administrators claiming that they stand for inclusion and equity, are not truthful.

He concludes with a call to action.

Students suffering this injustice who do not have a supporting community are encouraged to contact Dr. Haskell at his university email; he will try to connect you to like-mined others who will stand by you.

Dr. Haskell mentions research studies showing that the vaccinated and unvaccinated catch and spread the Covid-19 virus in near equal measure. Thus, the vaccine mandates do not stop the spread and are, in fact, refuted by “the science.” Here are a few of those studies:

Dr. Haskell mentioned research studies showing that the Covid-19 vaccines have been proven more harmful to younger people than the virus itself. Here are a few of those studies:

 

*

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.

Our thanks for Mark Taliano for bringing this to our attention.

Prof. David Millard Haskell is a Professor at Laurier University. He is a Christian and a conservative. Before academia, Prof. Haskell was a journalist. He started as a print features writer and later moved to TV working as a reporter in London, Windsor, and Waterloo Region. He has received awards from TV Ontario and the Radio Television News Directors Association (RTNDA) for his news reporting. Just prior to joining the faculty at Laurier’s Brantford campus in 2005, he spent four years as a professor of Journalism at Conestoga College in Kitchener, Ontario. He has also enjoyed careers as a high school teacher, professional musician and motivational speaker.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

Video: The Real Anthony Fauci with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

November 29th, 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.

***

Joining us today to talk about his new bestselling book, The Real Anthony Fauci, is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. of ChildrensHealthDefense.org.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The Real Anthony Fauci with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
  • 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.

***

The population of Ukraine decreased from 45.5 million to 30.1 million, according to some other data to 28 million. 5 million were lost due to excessive mortality; the remaining 10 million left the country in search of work. About 50% of those who left Ukraine (up to 5 million) have already become naturalized citizens in the EU and Russia, having taken out their families. This part of Ukrainian migrants does not contribute to the economy of the state anymore.

According to the IMF and the World Bank, GDP of Ukraine was $155.582 billion by the end of 2020. Compared to 2013, when it was $ 183.31 billion, it fell by 15%.

Compared to 2013, the industry collapsed by 25%. Thousands of enterprises have been closed. As a result, the unemployed population currently makes up 11% of the number of able-bodied citizens.

The country’s energy dependence on imported supplies of hydrocarbons and electricity has increased. Ukraine’s own natural gas production decreased by 6.6% since 2013; and the decline continues. Ukraine is forced to buy coal and electricity from Russia, while being “at war” with Moscow, from Belarus, while being engaged in subversive activities against Minsk, and from the United States, paying significantly higher prices.

The outflow of investments from the country continues. In 2013, Kiev received more than 5.6 billion US dollars; while in 2021 it got less than 800 million US dollars, according to the State Statistics Service and the Council of the National Bank of Ukraine.

Ukrainian GDP per capita in 2013 was 4030.3 US dollars. In 2020, it was 3725.6 US dollars. Over the same period, the income stratification of the Ukrainian society has sharply increased.

The average purchasing power has decreased by 20%. Today, 70% of Ukrainians have an income of 210-250 US dollars per month. At the same time, the food and medicine prices in Ukraine are much higher than in the neighboring countries. As a result, according to official data, 10 million citizens are suffering from malnourishing on a daily basis, and about 2 million are starving.

The country’s only “success” turned into a scandal. The data of the World Bank’s Doing Business rating, which assessed the situation of Ukraine as “positive”, were recognized as “distorted” by the World Bank, the rating was closed, and a bribery investigation was launched.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Summary Results of the Colonial Administration of Ukraine (2013-2021)
  • 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.

***

From Columbus Day to Independence Day to Thanksgiving, the U.S. pretty much specializes in taking dates that celebrate genocide and discrimination, and repackaging them as family-friendly holidays. So as Thanksgiving 2021 — the 400th anniversary of the supposed first Thanksgiving — approaches, you may be wondering exactly why Thanksgiving is bad.

Not only is Thanksgiving offensive to Indigenous people, but it glorifies colonialism, slavery, and even epidemics. Many Americans who celebrate Thanksgiving have no idea just how cruel the holiday’s origins are, while those who do may choose to either boycott the holiday, or just use it as an excuse to express general gratitude, gather with family, and eat comfort foods.

Here’s a look into the true history of Thanksgiving, and what really went down between the Pilgrims and the Native Americans whose land they stole.

Why is Thanksgiving bad? The history of the holiday students learn is not quite accurate.

In U.S. schools, children are taught that Thanksgiving celebrates a 1621 harvest feast hosted by the Pilgrims (the English colonialists who arrived on the Mayflower), along with their guests, the Wampanoag (a Native American tribe), as facilitated by the bilingual Tisquantum, better known as Squanto, which is what the Pilgrims called him.

The typical curriculum frames this story as one of the Pilgrims struggling to grow food, and the Wampanoag lending them a helping hand on the fields. And while there is evidence that some of those vague details did happen, a lot of details are left out of this sweet story.

Thanksgiving is rooted in a historical fallacy,” Matika Wilbur, a member of the Tulalip and Swinomish tribes, told TODAY Parents in 2020. “The main Pilgrim narrative coincides with colonization that was inherently oppressive and brutal.”

Here’s the real history of Thanksgiving.

As Smithsonian Magazine puts it, the watered-down version of the story frames the Pilgrims as the protagonists. In actuality, they were the antagonists. For thousands of years before the Pilgrims arrived in the 1610s, the Wampanoag lived in the Americas. They were spread across the areas we now know as Massachusetts and Rhode Island, with a total of 69 different villages, as per Smithsonian Magazine.

Plus, the Pilgrims were not the first colonizers to arrive in the Americas and discriminate against the Wampanoag. As Smithsonian Magazine explains, for years before the Pilgrims landed, various other English colonizers showed up in the Americas on multiple occasions. Not only did they bring European plagues to the Americas, but many of these men actually kidnapped Native Americans, brought them back to Europe, and sold them as slaves — something that was made easier as more and more Indigenous people got sick from these new diseases.

So when the Pilgrims arrived in the region of Patuxet, which they renamed Plymouth, they thought they had discovered a miracle: the perfect land to steal and build a society upon. The land had arable fields, a spring, and, most importantly, “every single native person who had been living there was a corpse,” due to the plagues brought there by the English, as sociologist and author James W. Loewen explained to The New York Times.

Eventually, the Pilgrims met their neighbors, a tribe of Wampanoag peoples who survived the epidemic that wiped out the Wampanoag members who had lived in Patuxet. Tisquantum, who the Pilgrims called Squanto, is well known as the Native American who served as liaison between the Pilgrims and the Wampanoag, because he spoke English.

But why did he know English? According to Biography, years before, an English colonialist kidnapped Squanto and sold him as a slave in Europe, where he learned the language.

After a few years, he managed to escape and return to the Americas, to discover that his tribe had been killed by the epidemic — a zoonotic disease, according to Slate. (Remember that COVID-19 is a zoonotic disease, as well.) So, Tisquantum joined a neighboring Wampanoag village, eventually becoming the translator between his new tribe and the Pilgrims, as per Slate.

Here’s what happened at the “first Thanksgiving.”

The “first Thanksgiving” that is taught in history textbooks tells the story of the Pilgrims graciously inviting the Wampanoag for a feast as a thank you to the tribe for teaching them about the harvest.

And as explained by Blackfeet Tribe member Gyasi Ross in an essay for MSNBC, the narrative often suggests that the Pilgrims came to the Americas “in good faith,” that they happily hosted the Wampanoag at Thanksgiving, and that they cooked turkey and sweet potato pie for them. However, this is part of the “mythology of white America,” according to Ross.

“[The Pilgrims] could not [bring food to Thanksgiving]. They were broke,” Ross said. “They were begging. They brought nothing of value. But they got fed [by the Wampanoag].” Without the Wampanoag, the Pilgrims would not have survived in America.

According to TIME, there is no clear evidence explaining exactly why the two groups, consisting of about 50 Pilgrims and 90 Wampanoag members, came together. And as Britannica notes, the event was chaotic, filled with liquor, gun shooting, and hunting.

Was there turkey at the first Thanksgiving?

View the post here.

There is actually no written evidence that turkeys were eaten at the 1621 Thanksgiving. As The New York Times reports, many experts believe some sort of wild bird, such as ducks, geese, or turkeys were hunted, cooked, and served at the feast, alongside produce.

Every year, Americans breed, kill, and eat around 46 million turkeys on Thanksgiving — and there’s really no reason for this cruel and unsustainable tradition. These days, there are so many vegan turkey alternatives on the market, which are all more compassionate and environmentally-friendly choices.

If you are hosting or attending a Thanksgiving dinner this year, remember the true origins of the holiday — and consider sharing the true story with your friends and family.

*

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.

Fidel Castro Reflects on John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy

November 28th, 2021 by Fidel Castro Ruz

First published by Global Research on May 1, 2009

I confess that many times I have meditated on the dramatic story of John F. Kennedy. It was my fate to live through the era when he was the greatest and most dangerous adversary of the Revolution. It was something that didn’t play a part in his calculations. He saw himself as the representative of a new generation of Americans who were confronting the old-style, dirty politics of men of the sort of Nixon whom he had defeated with a tremendous display of political talent.

He had behind him his history as a combatant in the Pacific and of his adroit pen.

Because he was over-confident, he was dragged into the Bay of Pigs adventure by his predecessors, since he had no doubts about the experience and professional capacity of all those men. His failure was bitter and unexpected, a scant three months after his inauguration. Even though he was on the point of attacking the Island with his country’s powerful and sophisticated weaponry, on that occasion he didn’t do what Nixon would have done: use the fighter-bombers and land the Marines. Rivers of blood would have flowed in our Homeland where hundreds of thousands of combatants were ready to die. He controlled himself and came up with a categorical phrase that is hard to forget: “Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.”

His life continued to be dramatic, like a shadow that accompanied him at all times. On the strength of wounded pride, he again succumbed to the idea of invading us. This brought on the October [Missile] Crisis and the most serious risks of thermonuclear warfare that the world has ever known until the present day. He emerged from this test as an authority thanks to the mistakes of his chief adversary. He seriously wanted to talk with Cuba and that’s what he decided to do. He sent Jean Daniel to talk with me and return to Washington. His mission was being carried out at that moment when the news of President Kennedy’s assassination arrived. His death and the strange way in which it was orchestrated and carried out, was truly sad.

Later I met close family members who visited Cuba. I never mentioned the unpleasant aspects of his policy against our country, nor did I refer at all to the attempts to eliminate me. I met his son when he was an adult, who had been a young child when his father had been the president of the United States. We got together as friends. His own brother Robert was also assassinated, multiplying the drama shadowing that family.

At the distance of so many years, information arrived about a gesture that impressed me.

These days, while so much was being said about the lengthy and unfair blockade of Cuba in the upper echelons of the continent’s countries, I read a news item in Mexico’s La Jornada: “At the end of 1963, the then Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy sought to overturn the ban on travel to Cuba and today his daughter, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, wrote that President Barack Obama ought to take this into account and support legislative initiatives that would allow all Americans to travel to the island.

“In official documents declassified by the National Security Archive research centre it is recorded that on December 12, 1963, less than one month after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy sent a communication to Secretary of State Dean Rusk, urging the removal of regulations prohibiting Americans from traveling to Cuba.

“Robert Kennedy claimed that the prohibition violated American freedoms. According to the document, he affirmed that the current restrictions on travel are inconsistent with traditional American freedoms.

“That position was unsuccessful inside the Lyndon B. Johnson administration and the State Department decided that to suspend the restrictions would be perceived as a softening of the Cuban policy and that they were part of the joint effort made by the United States and other American republics to isolate Cuba.

“In an editorial article by Kathleen Kennedy printed today in The Washington Post, Robert’s daughter expresses her wish that her father’s position be adopted by the Barack Obama government, and that this should be the position promoted by Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. while the Obama government weighs the next step it will take with Cuba, one that should be pushing for allowing more than just Cuban-Americans to travel freely to the island and dealing with the rights of all Americans, most of whom are not free to go.

“Kathleen Kennedy writes that just as Obama found out at the summit meeting last week-end, Latin American leaders have adopted a coordinated message on Cuba: the time is here to normalize relations with Havana. By keeping on trying to isolate Cuba, they essentially told Obama, Washington has only succeeded in isolating itself.

“Thus, the niece of the president who attempted to invade and overthrow the Cuban Revolutionary government and impose the blockade, adds her voice now to the ever-growing chorus in favor of reversing these policies which were put in place half a century ago.”

A worthy article by Kathleen Kennedy!

Fidel Castro Ruz

April 24, 2009

The Spy Business. Just Follow the Money

November 28th, 2021 by Philip Giraldi

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.

***

 

 

I have been following the story regarding the arrest of the sub-source who reportedly provided much of the apparently fabricated “intelligence” that went into the Christopher Steele dossier that was commissioned by Hillary Clinton and the DNC to get the dirt on GOP candidate Donald Trump. The real story is, of course, that the Democrats used their incumbency in the presidency to illegally involve various national security agencies in the process of defaming Trump, but for the time being we have to be content with the detention of Russian born Virginia resident Igor Danchenko for the crime of lying to the FBI.

My problem is that apart from the lying, which might be categorized in a file labeled “Everyone Lies to the Police,” I can’t quite figure out what the poor sod did that was criminal.

I have reconstructed the sequence of events as follows: A business intelligence research firm Fusion GPS originally began researching Trump’s possible ties with Russia during the primary elections on behalf of a conservative who wanted to damage Trump’s campaign.

After Trump became the Republican nominee, the original funder discontinued the search, but Fusion GPS was hired to keep going by the Perkins Coie law firm, which was working for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Christopher Steele, former MI-6 officer with a good reputation and reported access to information coming from Russia among other places, was sub-contracted by Fusion to assist in the effort by compiling a dossier containing defamatory material on Trump.

As he had limited access to the kind of sleaze that was being sought, Steele contacted a known intelligence researcher who appeared to have such access. That was Danchenko, an analyst who specialized in Russia, whom Steele subsequently described as his “primary sub-source.” Danchenko had worked for the Washington DC based and Democratic Party linked Brookings Institution from 2005 until 2010 and was considered reliable.

Steele tasked Danchenko with finding out details about Trump and the Russians, to include possible contacts with the Kremlin’s intelligence services during a trip to Moscow in 2013 where the Trump Organization was hosting the Miss Universe contest.

Danchenko did just that to Steele’s satisfaction, which also pleased Steele’s clients. The information collected subsequently was incorporated into what became the notorious Steele Dossier and was used by the FBI among others to make a case against Donald Trump and his associates. Among other initiatives, the Bureau used the file, which it knew to be largely innuendo, as justification to obtain a secret surveillance court order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court (FISA) which authorized a wiretap targeting former Trump adviser Carter Page.

The only problem was that some of the information was fabricated, apparently by Danchenko, though that is by no means clear. The fake material included the notorious anecdote about Trump urinating on a prostitute in the bed that Barak Obama had slept in when he had visited the Russian capital. The assumption was that Trump would have been photographed in flagrante and the Kremlin would have been able to use the material to blackmail him. Other parts of the final dossier were also discovered to be false.

Making something up in a criminal investigation might be wrong, even criminal, but both Steele and Danchenko were private citizens with no legal status at the time. It was up to Steele to validate the information he was receiving. As for Danchenko, he was one of numerous former officials of various governments that have set themselves up profitably as intelligence peddlers.

Some of them make a very nice living from it and many of them are quite willing to bend the facts to make a client happy. In my own experience in CIA I have run into many intelligence peddlers in Europe and the Middle East and they all use the same MO, namely mixing confirmable factual information with fabricated information so the former validates the latter. Since leaving government, I have also worked for three private security firms in the US and I would suggest that at least two of them would have been quite willing to slant what they were discovering to fit what the client was seeking to find. Such behavior is not at all unusual in the business since ex-intelligence officers and policemen tend to have a history of operating with little oversight and minimum accountability.

In this case, the charges cited in the indictment derived from statements made by Danchenko describing the sources he claimed to have used in providing sensitive information to a Steele’s United Kingdom investigative firm with which he had contracted to prepare what are identified in the indictment as “Company Reports.” The implication would of course be that he had no actual sources and instead used his creative writing skills to come up with some suitable narratives relating to Trump’s behavior. Danchenko, for his part, reportedly claimed to investigators that it was Steele who overstated the information that had been provided from confidential Russian sources which was in the nature of “raw intelligence,” not a finished product.

Be that as it may, the final dossier was a concoction of verifiable facts mixed with gossip, rumors and sheer speculation. Danchenko also denied knowing who was paying for the investigation even though it appears that he had had contact with several Clinton associates, most notably one Charles H. Dolan, who may have actually suggested to the investigators what type of “information” was being sought.

The arrest came as part of the special counsel John Durham investigation into Russiagate and related matters, most specifically the claim that Russian intelligence agencies had interfered in the 2016 election. This latest activity comes after Durham’s recent charging of Hillary Clinton’s former campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann in an indictment that alleges that he lied to federal investigators in September 2016, when he gave them information that he falsely claimed showed a connection between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank in Russia.

So the takeaway from all of this is that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians to subvert the 2016 election.

On the contrary, it was Hillary Clinton’s campaign that sought the dirt on Trump and used a largely fraudulent dossier to make its case.

And, oh yes, President Barack Obama knew exactly what was going on, which led to the completely illegal involvement of the intelligence and law enforcement federal agencies.

And you can bet that if Obama knew, so did his Vice President Joe Biden. And the former head of CIA John Brennan and FBI head James Comey, who corruptly engaged their agencies in the conspiracy, are still walking free instead of in jail where they should be. And as for Hillary….I will leave that up to the reader.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

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

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published by GR on October 25, 2021

The latest Bond flick No Time To Die was certainly a rollercoaster ride of exciting action scenes and great special effects, yet contained more than a quantum of longueurs. With a running time of 163 minutes it certainly tries the patience and the bladders of its audiences (who I saw popping out of the cinema throughout the film). Personally, I think 90 minutes is enough for any film, especially since the disappearance of the intermission and ice-cream selling of yore. In this case, the increased length seems to have been to incorporate backstories of some of the individuals involved. The effect of this is to attenuate Bond’s appearances in the film, while adding very little to the story (hence the longueurs).

One effect of this narrative style is to put more emphasis on the story of Bond and less on the usual geopolitics and action we associate with Bond films. Now this is very interesting considering that if one was to ask oneself: which country would be the most likely target and villain of the latest Bond film as a cultural representative of the world’s imperialist and neo-colonial powers? It would have to be: China.

Trailer

Who’s bad?

Yet there were no Chinese baddies, no stereotyped ‘yellow peril’, no Chinese mad scientists, no Chinese monomaniacal nutter bent on ruling the world.

Why would this be? Could it be something to do with new British geopolitical sensitivities and Brexit anxieties over its current position in the world? In the past the Russians were usually targeted, as well as the more abstract multinational SPECTRE baddies. At least during the Cold War (and some time after) there was definitely a cultural reflection of the realities of geopolitics in the James Bond narratives. Are they keeping one eye on the potential economic and military alliances of the future while keeping the other eye on their current alliances?

Instead what we get is yet another Russian mad scientist with a comically exaggerated Russian accent, lots of SPECTRE goings on, and the monomaniacal nutter ‘Lyutsifer Safin’ (with equally crazy spelling). Thus we have a caricature of the early Bond films with some ’emotionally deep’ background filling to make up for its lack of relevance to current geopolitics.

Added to this emasculated plotline is the Bond’s 007 replacement with Nomi, his successor – a female black Bond. Not that there’s anything wrong with a female black Bond, but it does show one of the weaknesses of current identity politics, that her identity as an operative for an imperialist, militarist organisation is more important than her identity as a colonial victim of imperialist, militarist organisations in the past.

There is also a slight ramping up of what I call the ‘theatre of cruelty’ factor – that is the pushing beyond the normal standards of ‘common decency’ that underlies cinema narratives in the public sphere. In general the depiction of violence and cruelty has been increasing steadily since the 1950s and 1960s, progressively desensitising audiences to basic human norms (another role of action movies like the Bond films). In this case, a child (Mathilde) is used in the narrative as a human shield but in the end the film does not go so far as to actually hurt her – there are still some limits to what is acceptable in the public’s eyes.

One Empire

Militarism

However, there seems to be very few limits to the extent to which the British government is creating new and targeted strategies to promote support for the military, for example:

“Armed Forces Day, Uniform to Work Day, Camo Day, National Heroes Day – in the streets, on television, on the web, at sports events, in schools, advertising and fashion – the military presence in civilian life is on the march. The public and ever younger children are being groomed to collude in the increasing militarisation of UK society.”

The role of these forms of militarism has been to encourage people “to see the military, and spying, in positive terms; to think of violent, military solutions as the best way to solve international disagreements; and to ignore peaceful alternatives.”

Children have long been drawn in through comics such as The Boy’s Own Paper, published from 1879 to 1967, and aimed at young and teenage boys. For example the first volume’s serials included “From Powder Monkey to Admiral, or The Stirring Days of the British Navy” and promoted the British Empire as the peak of civilization.

Image on the right: The Victor cover

Later comics about World War 2 were founded in the late 1950s and early 1960s, such as War Picture Library (1958), The Victor (1961) and Commando (1961) (which is still in print today) were popular for decades after the war. According to Rod Driver, these comics

“had a strong focus on patriotism and heroism. They stereotyped people from enemy countries as cruel or cowardly, and used derogatory terms such as jerries, huns or krauts for German people, eyeties for Italian people, or nips for Japanese people. A generation of children grew up with a very distorted view of the war and people in other countries.”

As for the adults, stereotypes and cruelty are still the stock in trade of culture producers and the James Bond films rejoice in them.

Recruitment campaigns

The significance of Nomi as a black 007 can be seen in new recruitment advertisements which feature a black female soldier. Women represent less than 10% of the British Army, so they launched a new female-led recruitment campaign. According to Imogen Watson, the ‘This is Belonging’ campaign:

“follows the army’s most successful recruitment to date. Four days after the launch, the record was broken for the highest number of applications received in a single day. After a month, 141% of the army’s application target was reached. By March, it had surpassed 100% of its annual recruiting target for soldiers, for the first time in eight years.”

International institutions

In one sense James Bond films depict a reality that despite the many International institutions dedicated to promoting world peace, military build-ups continue apace. In an article entitled ‘The False Promise of International Institutions’, John J. Mearsheimer writes “that institutions have minimal influence on state behavior, and thus hold little promise for promoting stability in the post-Cold War world.”[p7]

He discusses the differences between the ideas of Realists and Critical Theorists. The Realists believe that there is an objective and knowable world while the Critical Theorists see “the possibility of endless interpretations of the world before them”, and therefore there is no reason “why a communitarian discourse of peace and harmony cannot supplant the realist discourse of security competition and war”.

However, there is a contradiction in that, for example, Americans who think seriously about foreign policy dislike realism as it clashes with their basic values and how they prefer to think about themselves in the wider world. Mearsheimer outlines the negative aspects of realism that depict a world of stark and harsh competition, where there is no escape from the evil of power and which treats war as inevitable. Realism goes against deep-seated beliefs that progress is desirable and “and with time and effort reasonable individuals can solve important social problems.” One major problem is that while the international system strongly shapes the behavior of states, “states still have considerable freedom of action”. He gives the example of the failure of the League of Nations to address German and Japanese aggression in the 1930s. Thus, the role of international institutions may actually be to stave off war until countries feel ready to attack or defend themselves.

What he does not discuss however is the situations where ordinary people rose up to extricate their nations from imperialist wars, such as Ireland in 1916 (“We serve neither King nor Kaiser), and the Peace! Land! Bread! campaign of the Bolsheviks in 1917. These campaigns show that while ordinary people are generally considered cannon fodder in times of war, it is possible for future mass movements to transcend the narrow triumphalism and national chauvinism encouraged by recruitment campaigns and blockbuster films.

*

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.

Caoimhghin Ó Croidheáin is an Irish artist, lecturer and writer. His artwork consists of paintings based on contemporary geopolitical themes as well as Irish history and cityscapes of Dublin. His blog of critical writing based on cinema, art and politics along with research on a database of Realist and Social Realist art from around the world can be viewed country by country here.

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

Featured image is from the official James Bond 007 Website

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on No Time To Think, “No Time to Die”: The Changing Geopolitics of International Blockbusters?
  • Tags:

First published by Consortium News, posted on Global Research on December 9, 2020

***

In their World Economic Forum treatise Covid-19: The Great Reset, economists Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret bring us the voice of would-be Global Governance.

By titling their recently published World Economic Forum treatise Covid-19: The Great Reset, the authors link the pandemic to their futuristic proposals in ways bound to be met with a chorus of “Aha!”s. In the current atmosphere of confusion and distrust, the glee with which economists Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret greet the pandemic as harbinger of their proposed socioeconomic upheaval suggests that if Covid-19 hadn’t come along by accident, they would have created it (had they been able).

In fact, World Economic Forum founder Schwab was already energetically hyping the Great Reset, using climate change as the triggering crisis, before the latest coronavirus outbreak provided him with an even more immediate pretext for touting his plans to remake the world.

The authors start right in by proclaiming that “the world as we knew it in the early months of 2020 is no more,” that radical changes will shape a “new normal.”  We ourselves will be transformed. “Many of our beliefs and assumptions about what the world could or should look like will be shattered in the process.”

Throughout the book, the authors seem to gloat over the presumed effects of widespread “fear” of the virus, which is supposed to condition people to desire the radical changes they envisage. They employ technocratic psychobabble to announce that the pandemic is already transforming the human mentality to conform to the new reality they consider inevitable.

“Our lingering and possibly lasting fear of being infected with a virus … will thus speed the relentless march of automation…” Really?

“The pandemic may increase our anxiety about sitting in an enclosed space with complete strangers, and many people may decide that staying home to watch the latest movie or opera is the wisest option.”

“There are other first round effects that are much easier to anticipate. Cleanliness is one of them. The pandemic will certainly heighten our focus on hygiene. A new obsession with cleanliness will particularly entail the creation of new forms of packaging. We will be encouraged not to touch the products we buy. Simple pleasures like smelling a melon or squeezing a fruit will be frowned upon and may even become a thing of the past.”

This is the voice of would-be Global Governance.  From on high, experts decide what the masses ought to want, and twist the alleged popular wishes to fit the profit-making schemes they are peddling. Their schemes center on digital innovation, massive automation using “artificial intelligence,” finally even “improving” human beings by endowing them artificially with some of the attributes of robots: such as problem-solving devoid of ethical distractions.

Engineer-economist Klaus Schwab, born in Ravensburg, Germany, in 1938, founded his World Economic Forum in 1971, attracting massive sponsorship from international corporations.  It meets once a year in Davos, Switzerland – last time in January 2020 and next year in May, delayed because of Covid-19.

A Powerful Lobby

Image on the right: Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman, World Economic Forum, on Jan. 21, 2015. (World Economic Forum, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

What is it, exactly?  I would describe the WEF as a combination capitalist consulting firm and gigantic lobby.  The futuristic predictions are designed to guide investors into profitable areas in what Schwab calls “the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR)” and then, as the areas are defined, to put pressure on governments to support such investments by way of subsidies, tax breaks, procurements, regulations and legislation.  In short, the WEF is the lobby for new technologies, digital everything, artificial intelligence, transhumanism.

It is powerful today because it is operating in an environment of State Capitalism, where the role of the State (especially in the United States, less so in Europe) has been largely reduced to responding positively to the demands of such lobbies, especially the financial sector.  Immunized by campaign donations from the obscure wishes of ordinary people, most of today’s politicians practically need the guidance of lobbies such as the WEF to tell them what to do.

In the 20th century, notably in the New Deal, the government was under pressure from conflicting interests.  The economic success of the armaments industry during World War II gave birth to a Military-Industrial Complex, which has become a permanent structural factor in the U.S. economy.

It is the dominant role of the MIC and its resulting lobbies that have definitively transformed the nation into State Capitalism rather than a Republic.

The proof of this transformation is the unanimity with which Congress never balks at approving grotesquely inflated military budgets.  The MIC has spawned media and Think Tanks which ceaselessly indoctrinate the public in the existential need to keep pouring the nation’s wealth into weapons of war. Insofar as voters do not agree, they can find no means of political expression with elections monopolized by two pro-MIC parties.

The WEF can be seen as analogous to the MIC.  It intends to engage governments and opinion manufacturers in the promotion of a “4IR” which will dominate the civilian economy and civilian life itself.

The pandemic is a temporary pretext; the need to “protect the environment” will be the more sustainable pretext.  Just as the MIC is presented as absolutely necessary to “protect our freedoms,” the 4IR will be hailed as absolutely necessary to “save the environment” – and in both cases, many of the measures advocated will have the opposite effect.

Public street art on 6th Street in Austin, Texas, depicting the impact of Covid-19 closings. (Leah Rodgers, CC BY 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

So far, the techno-tyranny of Schwab’s 4IR has not quite won its place in U.S. State Capitalism.  But its prospects are looking good.  Silicon Valley contributed heavily to the Joe Biden campaign, and Biden hastened to appoint its moguls to his transition team.

But the real danger of all power going to the Reset lies not with what is there, but with what is not there: any serious political opposition.

Can Democracy Be Restored?

The Great Reset has a boulevard open to it for the simple reason that there is nothing in its way.  No widespread awareness of the issues, no effective popular political organization, nothing.  Schwab’s dystopia is frightening simply for that reason.

The 2020 presidential election has just illustrated the almost total depoliticization of the American people.  That may sound odd considering the violent partisan emotions displayed.  But it was all much ado about nothing.

There were no real issues debated, no serious political questions raised either about war or about the directions of future economic development. The vicious quarrels were about persons, not policy.  Bumbling Trump was accused of being “Hitler,” and Wall Street-beholden Democrat warhawks were described by Trumpists as “socialists.” Lies, insults and confusion prevailed.

A revival of democracy could stem from organized, concentrated study of the issues raised by the Davos planners, in order to arouse an informed public opinion to evaluate which technical innovations are socially acceptable and which are not.

Cries of alarm from the margins will not influence the intellectual relationship of forces.  What is needed is for people to get together everywhere to study the issues and develop well-reasoned opinions on goals and methods of future development.

Unless faced with informed and precise critiques, Silicon Valley and its corporate and financial allies will simply proceed in doing whatever they imagine they can do, whatever the social effects.

Serious evaluation should draw distinctions between potentially beneficial and unwelcome innovations, to prevent popular notions from being used to gain acceptance of every “technological advance,” however ominous.

Redefining Issues

The political distinctions between left and right, between Republican and Democrat, have grown more impassioned just as they reveal themselves to be incoherent, distorted and irrelevant, based more on ideological bias than on facts.  New and more fruitful political alignments could be built through confrontation with specific concrete issues.

We could take the proposals of the Great Reset one by one and examine them in both pragmatic and ethical terms.

No. 1 – Thanks to the pandemic, there has been a great increase in the use of teleconferences, using Skype, Zoom or other new platforms.  The WEF welcomes this as a trend.  Is it bad for that reason?  To be fair, this innovation is positive in enabling many people to attend conferences without the expense, trouble and environmental cost of air travel.  It has the negative side of preventing direct human contact. This is a simple issue, where positive points seem to prevail.

No. 2 – Should higher education go online, with professors giving courses to students via internet? This is a vastly more complicated question, which should be thoroughly discussed by educational institutions themselves and the communities they serve, weighing the pros and cons, remembering that those who provide the technology want to sell it, and care little about the value of human contact in education – not only human contact between student and professor, but often life-determining contacts between students themselves. Online courses may benefit geographically isolated students, but breaking up the educational community would be a major step toward the destruction of human community altogether.

No. 3 – Health and “well-being”. Here is where the discussion should heat up considerably. According to Schwab and Malleret: “Three industries in particular will flourish (in the aggregate) in the post-pandemic era: big tech, health and wellness.”  For the Davos planners, the three merge.

Those who think that well-being is largely self-generated, dependent on attitudes, activity and lifestyle choices, miss the point. “The combination of AI [artificial intelligence], the IoT [internet of things] and sensors and wearable technology will produce new insights into personal well-being. They will model how we are and feel […] precise information on our carbon footprints, our impact on biodiversity, on the toxicity of all the ingredients we consume and the environments or spatial contexts in which we evolve will generate significant progress in terms of our awareness of collective and individual well-being.”

Question: do we really want or need all this cybernetic narcissism?  Can’t we just enjoy life by helping a friend, stroking a cat, reading a book, listening to Bach or watching a sunset?  We better make up our minds before they make over our minds.

User being monitored in a biometrics lab. (Grish068, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

No. 4 – Food.  In order not to spoil my healthy appetite, I’ll skip over this. The tech wizards would like to phase out farmers, with all their dirty soil and animals, and industrially manufacture enhanced artificial foods created in nice clean labs – out of what exactly?

The Central Issue: Homo Faber

No. 5 – What about human work?

“In all likelihood, the recession induced by the pandemic will trigger a sharp increase in labor-substitution, meaning that physical labor will be replaced by robots and ‘intelligent’ machines, which will in turn provoke lasting and structural changes in the labor market.”

This replacement has already been underway for decades.  Along with outsourcing and immigration, it has already weakened the collective power of labor.  But clearly, the tech industries are poised to go much, much further and faster in throwing humans out of work.

The Covid-19 crisis and social distancing have “suddenly accelerated this process of innovation and technological change. Chatbots, which often use the same voice recognition technology behind Amazon’s Alexa, and other software that can replace tasks normally performed by human employees, are being rapidly introduced. These innovations provoked by necessity (i.e. sanitary measures) will soon result in hundreds of thousands, and potentially millions, of job losses.”

Cutting labor costs has long been the guiding motive of these innovations, along with the internal dynamic of technology industry to “do whatever it can do.” Then socially beneficial pretexts are devised in justification. Like this:

 “As consumers may prefer automated services to face-to-face interactions for some time to come, what is currently happening with call centers will inevitably occur in other sectors as well.”

“Consumers may prefer…”! Everyone I know complains of the exasperation of trying to reach the bank or insurance company to explain an emergency, and instead to be confronted with a dead voice and a choice of irrelevant numbers to click.  Perhaps I am underestimating the degree of hostility toward our fellow humans that now pervades society, but my impression is that there is a vast unexpressed public demand for LESS automated services and MORE contact with real persons who can think outside the algorithm and can actually UNDERSTAND the problem, not simply cough up preprogrammed fixes.

“Corporate agility in the Fourth Industrial Revolution” session held in Tianjin,China, September 2018. (World Economic Forum, Faruk Pinjo, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

There is a potential movement out there.  But we hear nothing of it, being persuaded by our media that the greatest problem facing people in their daily lives is to hear someone exhibit confusion over someone else’s confused gender.

In this, I maintain, consumer demand would merge with the desperate need of able-minded human beings to earn a living.  The technocrats earn theirs handsomely by eliminating the means to earn a living of other people.

Here is one of their great ideas. “In cities as varied as Hangzhou, Washington DC and Tel Aviv, efforts are under way to move from pilot programs to  large-scale operations capable of putting an army of delivery robots on the road and in the air.”  What a great alternative to paying human deliverers a living wage!

And incidentally, a guy riding a delivery bicycle is using renewable energy.  But all those robots and drones?  Batteries, batteries and more batteries, made of what materials, coming from where and manufactured how?  By more robots?  Where is the energy coming from to replace not only fossil fuels, but also human physical effort?

At the last Davos meeting, Israeli intellectual Yuval Harari issued a dire warning that:

“Whereas in the past, humans had to struggle against exploitation, in the twenty-first century the really big struggle will be against irrelevance… Those who fail in the struggle against irrelevance would constitute a new ‘useless class’ – not from the viewpoint of their friends and family, but useless from the viewpoint of the economic and political system. And this useless class will be separated by an ever-growing gap from the ever more powerful elite.”

No. 5 – And the military.  Our capitalist prophets of doom foresee the semi-collapse of civil aviation and the aeronautical industry as people all decide to stay home glued to their screens.  But not to worry!

“This makes the defense aerospace sector an exception and a relatively safe haven.” For capital investment, that is.  Instead of vacations on sunny beaches, we can look forward to space wars.  It may happen sooner rather than later, because, as the Brookings Institution concludes in a 2018 report on “How artificial intelligence is transforming the world,” everything is going faster, including war:

“The big data analytics associated with AI will profoundly affect intelligence analysis, as massive amounts of data are sifted in near real time … thereby providing commanders and their staffs a level of intelligence analysis and productivity heretofore unseen.  Command and control will similarly be affected as human commanders delegate certain routine, and in special circumstances, key decisions to AI platforms, reducing dramatically the time associated with the decision and subsequent action.”

So, no danger that some soft-hearted officer will hesitate to start World War III because of a sentimental attachment to humanity.  When the AI platform sees an opportunity, go for it!

“In the end, warfare is a time competitive process, where the side able to decide the fastest and move most quickly to execution will generally prevail.  Indeed, artificially intelligent intelligence systems, tied to AI-assisted command and control systems, can move decision support and decision-making to a speed vastly superior to the speeds of the traditional means of waging war. So fast will be this process especially if coupled to automatic decisions to launch artificially intelligent autonomous weapons systems capable of lethal outcomes, that a new term has been coined specifically to embrace the speed at which war will be waged: hyperwar.”

Americans have a choice.  Either continue to quarrel over trivialities or wake up, really wake up, to the reality being planned and do something about it.

The future is shaped by investment choices.  Not by naughty speech, not even by elections, but by investment choices.  For the people to regain power, they must reassert their command over how and for what purposes capital is invested.

And if private capital balks, it must be socialized. This is the only revolution – and it is also the only conservatism, the only way to conserve decent human life. It is what real politics is about.

*

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

Diana Johnstone lives in Paris.  Her latest book is Circle in the Darkness: Memoirs of a World Watcher and is also the author of Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO, and Western Delusions. Her lates book is Queen of Chaos: the Misadventures of Hillary Clinton. The memoirs of Diana Johnstone’s father Paul H. Johnstone, From MAD to Madness, was published by Clarity Press, with her commentary. She can be reached at [email protected].

Diana Johnstone is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

Featured image: Viewing the virtual-reality film “Collisions” at a session of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 2016. (World Economic Forum, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

First published on December 3, 2020

***

A video was released on November 23 2020 by Sandia National Laboratories that shows a US F-35A fighter flying at supersonic speed  3000 meters above sea level, launching a B61-12 nuclear bomb (non-nuclear warhead equipped). The bomb did not fall vertically but glided until the tail section rocket ignition gave a rotational motion and the B61-12 (satellite-guided system) headed for the target and hit 42 seconds after launch. The test was carried out on August 25 at the Tonopah shooting range in the Nevada desert.

An official statement confirmed its full success: it was a real nuclear attack, proof that the fighter carried out at supersonic speed and in stealth attitude (with  nuclear bombs placed in its internal hold) has the capability to penetrate through enemy defenses.

The B61-12 has a nuclear warhead with four selectable power options at launch depending on the target to  hit. It has the ability to penetrate underground, exploding deep to destroy command center bunkers and other underground structures. The Pentagon’s program foresees the construction of about five hundred B61-12 with an estimated cost of roughly 10 billion dollars (so each bomb will cost double what it would cost if it were built entirely of gold).

It has been officially announced that the new nuclear bomb series production  will begin in the fiscal year 2022, beginning October 1, 2021 (i.e. in eleven months). It is  unknown the number of B61-12 bombs that the US will  deploy in Italy, Germany, Belgium and Holland to replace the B61s, whose actual number is secret. Satellite photos show renovations that have been carried out at Aviano and Ghedi bases in preparation for the new nuclear bombs’ arrival, the  US Air Force F-35A,  and Italian Air Force F-35A under US command will be armed with these bombs. The kind of situation Italy will be involved in, once the F-35A aircrafts, ready for a nuclear attack with  B61-12 bombs are deployed on the Italian territory, is easily predictable.

As an advanced base of the US nuclear deployment in Europe directed mainly against Russia, Italy will be in an increasingly dangerous situation. It will depend  more strongly on Washington strategic decisions involving political and economic choices at the expenses of our sovereignty and our own national interests.

According to the plans, Italy will have to increase military spending from the current 26 billion to 36 billion euros per year, over 60 billion to be allocated for military purposes by the  Economic Development Ministry and drawn (plus interest) from the Recovery Fund, and will be added to the previous amount. Italy will violate even more than before the Non-Proliferation Treaty joined in 1975 by pledging “not to receive nuclear weapons from anyone or control over these weapons, directly or indirectly.”

Italy will reject more strongly the recent UN Treaty on  nuclear weapons abolition, which states: “Any State Party that has nuclear weapons on its territory, owned or controlled by another State, must ensure the rapid removal of such weapons.” To throw a stone into the stagnant water of a Parliament that keeps silent on this subject, the Hon. Sara Cunial (Mixed Group) presented a question for written answer to the Prime Minister and the Defense and Foreign Affairs  Ministries.

After having exposed the aforementioned facts, the parliamentary question quotes “does the government intend to respect the Treaty on nuclear weapons non-proliferation, ratified by Italy in 1975; does the government intend to sign and ratify the UN Treaty on Nuclear Weapons Abolition, that enters into force in 2021; does the government intend to ensure, on the basis of what these treaties establish, that the United States immediately remove any nuclear weapons from Italian territory and give up installing the new B61-12 bombs and other nuclear weapons?” While we wait to read the government’s response, in the US  the last bomb tests are carried out,  the bombs will arrive and be set under our feet.

*

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

This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.

Manlio Dinucci is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.


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

The State, the Deep State, and the Wall Street Overworld

November 28th, 2021 by Prof Peter Dale Scott

The concept of the Deep State is at the forefront of today’s news.

In this March 2014 article published by Asia Pacific Journal and Global Research, Professor Peter Dale Scott analyses the role of “Deep State”, namely the shadow government integrated by Wall Street, US intelligence, the military industrial complex, the Washington think tanks, etc.

This secret government overshadows the official government, including the White House and the US Congress.

*** 

In the last decade it has become more and more obvious that we have in America today what the journalists Dana Priest and William Arkin have called:

two governments: the one its citizens were familiar with, operated more or less in the open: the other a parallel top secret government whose parts had mushroomed in less than a decade into a gigantic, sprawling universe of its own, visible to only a carefully vetted cadre – and its entirety…visible only to God.1

And in 2013, particularly after the military return to power in Egypt, more and more authors referred to this second level as America’s “deep state.”2 Here for example is the Republican analyst Mike Lofgren:

There is the visible government situated around the Mall in Washington, and then there is another, more shadowy, more indefinable government that is not explained in Civics 101 or observable to tourists at the White House or the Capitol. The former is traditional Washington partisan politics: the tip of the iceberg that a public watching C-SPAN sees daily and which is theoretically controllable via elections. The subsurface part of the iceberg I shall call the Deep State, which operates according to its own compass heading regardless of who is formally in power.3

At the end of 2013 a New York Times Op-Ed noted this trend, and even offered a definition of the term that will work for the purposes of this essay:

DEEP STATE n. A hard-to-perceive level of government or super-control that exists regardless of elections and that may thwart popular movements or radical change. Some have said that Egypt is being manipulated by its deep state.4

The political activities of the deep state are the chief source and milieu of what I have elsewhere called “deep politics:” “all those political practices and arrangements, deliberate or not, which are usually repressed rather than acknowledged.”5

Others, like Tom Hayden, call the deep state a “state within the state,” and suggest it may be responsible for the failure of the Obama administration to follow the policy guidelines of the president’s speeches:

We have seen evidence of a “state within the state” before, going back as far as the CIA’s operations against Cuba. In Obama’s time, the president correctly named the 2009 coup in Honduras a “coup”, and then seemed powerless to prevent it.6

This development of a two-level or dual state has been paralleled by two other dualities: the increasing resolution of American society into two classes – the “one percent” and the “ninety-nine percent” – and the bifurcation of the U.S. economy into two aspects: the domestic, still subject to some governmental regulation and taxation, and the international, relatively free from governmental controls.7 All three developments have affected and intensified each other – particularly since the

Reagan Revolution of 1980, which saw American inequality of wealth cease to diminish and begin to increase.8 Thus for example we shall see how Wall Street – the incarnation of the “one percent” – played a significant role in increasing the deep state after World War Two, and how three decades later the deep state played a significant role in realigning America for the Reagan Revolution.

In earlier books I have given versions of this America-centered account of America’s shift into empire and a deep state. But another factor to be mentioned is the shift of global history towards an increasingly global society dominated by a few emergent superpowers. This trend was accelerated after the Industrial Revolution by new technologies of transport, from the railroad in the 19th century to the jet plane and space travel in the 20th.9

In the fallout from this rearrangement we must include two world wars, as a result of which Britain ceased to act as the dominant superpower it had been since Napoleon. Not surprisingly, the Soviet Union and the United States subsequently competed in a Cold War to fill the gap. It was not however predetermined that the Cold War would be as thuggish and covertly violent as for decades it continued to be. For that we should look to more contingent causes on both sides of the Iron Curtain – starting with the character of Stalin and his party but also including the partly responsive development of the American deep state.

The Deep State, The Shadow Government and the Wall Street Overworld

The “deep state” was defined by the UK newsletter On Religion as “the embedded anti-democratic power structures within a government, something very few democracies can claim to be free from.”10 The term originated in Turkey in 1996, to refer to U.S.-backed elements, primarily in the intelligence services and military, who had repeatedly used violence to interfere with and realign Turkey’s democratic political process. Sometimes the definition is restricted to elements within the government (or “a state-within-the state”), but more often in Turkey the term is expanded, for historical reasons, to include “members of the Turkish underworld.”11 In this essay I shall use “deep state” in the larger sense, to include both the second level of secret government inside Washington and those outsiders powerful enough, in either the underworld or overworld, to give it direction. In short I shall equate the term “deep state” with what in 1993 I termed a “deep political system:” “ one which habitually resorts to decision-making and enforcement procedures outside as well as inside those publicly sanctioned by law and society.”12

Like myself, Lofgren suggests an ambiguous symbiosis between two aspects of the American deep state:

1) the Beltway agencies of the shadow government, like the CIA and NSA, which have been instituted by the public state and now overshadow it, and

2) the much older power of Wall Street, referring to the powerful banks and law firms located there.

In their words,

It is not too much to say that Wall Street may be the ultimate owner of the Deep State and its strategies, if for no other reason than that it has the money to reward government operatives with a second career that is lucrative beyond the dreams of avarice – certainly beyond the dreams of a salaried government employee.13

I shall argue that in the 1950s Wall Street was a dominating complex. It included not just banks and oil firms but also the oil majors whose cartel arrangements were successfully defended against the U.S. Government by the Wall Street law firm Sullivan and Cromwell, home to the Dulles brothers. This larger complex is what I mean by the Wall Street overworld.

The Long History of the Wall Street Overworld

Lofgren’s inclusion of Wall Street is in keeping with Franklin Roosevelt’s observation in 1933 to his friend Col. E.M. House that “The real truth … is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”14

FDR’s insight is well illustrated by the efficiency with which a group of Wall Street bankers (including Nelson Rockefeller’s grandfather Nelson Aldrich and Paul Warburg) were able in a highly secret meeting in 1910 to establish the Federal Reserve System – a system which in effect reserved oversight of the nation’s currency supply and of all America’s banks in the not impartial hands of its largest.15 The political clout of the quasi-governmental Federal Reserve Board (where the federal Treasury is represented but does not dominate) was clearly demonstrated in 2008, when Fed leadership secured instant support from the successive administrations of a Texan Republican president, followed by a Midwest Democratic one, for public money to rescue the reckless management of Wall Street banks: banks Too Big To Fail, and of course far Too Big To Jail, but not Too Big To Bail.16

Wall Street and the Launching of the CIA

Top-level Treasury officials, CIA officers, and Wall Street bankers and lawyers think alike because of the “revolving door” by which they pass easily from private to public service and back. In 1946 General Vandenberg, as Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), recruited Allen Dulles, then a Republican lawyer at Sullivan and Cromwell in New York, “to draft proposals for the shape and organization of what was to become the Central Intelligence Agency in 1947.” Dulles promptly formed an advisory group of six men, all but one of whom were Wall Street investment bankers or lawyers.17 Dulles and two of the six (William H. Jackson and Frank Wisner) later joined the agency, where Dulles proceeded to orchestrate policies, such as the overthrow of the Arbenz regime in Guatemala, that he had previously discussed in New York at the Council on Foreign Relations.18

There seems to be little difference in Allen Dulles’s influence whether he was a Wall Street lawyer or a CIA director. Although he did not formally join the CIA until November 1950, he was in Berlin before the start of the 1948 Berlin Blockade, “supervising the unleashing of anti-Soviet propaganda across Europe.”19 In the early summer of 1948 he set up the American Committee for a United Europe (ACUE), in support of what became by the early 1950s “the largest CIA operation in Western Europe.”20

The Deep State and Funds for CIA Covert Operations

Wall Street was also the inspiration for what eventually became the CIA’s first covert operation: the use of “over $10 million in captured Axis funds to influence the [Italian] election [of 1948].”21 (The fundraising had begun at the wealthy Brook Club in New York; but Allen Dulles, still a Wall Street lawyer, persuaded Washington, which at first had preferred a private funding campaign, to authorize the operation through the National Security Council and the CIA.)22

Dulles’s friend Frank Wisner then left Wall Street to oversee an enlarged covert operations program through the newly created Office of Policy Co-ordination (OPC). Dulles, still a lawyer, campaigned successfully to reconstruct Western Europe through what became known as the Marshall Plan.23 Together with George Kennan and James Forrestal, Dulles also “helped devise a secret codicil [to the Marshall Plan] that gave the CIA the capability to conduct political warfare. It let the agency skim millions of dollars from the plan.”24

This created one of the earlier occasions when the CIA, directly or indirectly, recruited local assets involved in drug trafficking. AFL member Irving Brown, the assistant of AFL official Jay Lovestone (a CIA asset), was implicated in drug smuggling activities in Europe, at the same time that he used funds diverted from the Marshall Plan to establish

a “compatible left” labor union in Marseilles with Pierre Ferri-Pisani. On behalf of Brown and the CIA, Ferri-Pisani (a drug smuggler connected with Marseilles crime lord Antoine Guerini), hired goons to shellack striking Communist dock workers.25

An analogous funding source for the CIA developed in the Far East: the so-called

“M-Fund,” a secret fund of money of enormous size that has existed in Japan [in 1991] for more than forty years. The Fund was established by the United States in the immediate postwar era for essentially the same reasons that later gave rise to the Marshall Plan of assistance by the U.S. to Western Europe, including the Federal Republic of Germany….. The M-Fund was used not only for the building of a democratic political system in Japan but, in addition, for all of the purposes for which Marshall Plan funds were used in Europe.26

For at least two decades the CIA lavishly subsidized right-wing parties in countries including Japan and Indonesia, possibly still using captured Axis funds.27 (One frequently encounters the claim that the source of the M-fund was gold looted by Japan during World War Two (“Yamashita’s gold”).28

As a general rule the CIA, rather than assimilating these funds into its own budget, appears to have left them off the books in the hands of cooperative allied powers – ranging from other U.S. agencies like the Economic Cooperation Administration (ECA. set up in 1948 to administer the Marshall Plan) to oil companies to powerful drug kingpins.29

The CIA never abandoned its dependency on funds from outside its official budget to conduct its clandestine operations. In Southeast Asia, in particular, its proprietary firm Sea Supply Inc., supplied an infrastructure for a drug traffic supporting a CIA-led paramilitary force, PARU.30 The CIA appears also to have acted in coordination with slush funds from various U.S. government contracts, ranging from the Howard Hughes organization to (as we shall see) the foreign arms sales of U.S. defense corporations like Lockheed and Northrop.31

Lockheed Payoffs and CIA Clients: the Netherlands, Japan, Italy, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia


Kodama Yoshio, war criminal, drug trafficker, and purveyor of deep state US funds to Japanese politicians. Source.

Through the 1950s payouts from the M-fund were administered by Kodama Yoshio, “probably the CIA’s chief asset in Japan;” while ”All accounts say that after the end of the occupation, the fund’s American managers came from the CIA.”32 Kodama also received and distributed millions of funds from Lockheed to secure military contracts – an operation the CIA knew about but has never admitted involvement in.33 Lockheed’s system of payoffs was world-wide; and one sees CIA involvement with it in at least four other countries: the Netherlands, Italy, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. (Lockheed, the builder of the U-2, was a major CIA-cleared contractor.)34

The beneficiary in the Netherlands was Prince Bernhard, a close friend of CIA directors Walter Bedell Smith and Allen Dulles, and the organizer of the Bilderberg Group.35 In the case of Italy, payments were handled through a contact (“Antelope Cobbler”) who turned out to be whoever was the Italian Prime Minister of the moment (always from one of the parties subsidized earlier by the CIA).36

In the revealing instance of Indonesia, Lockheed payments were shifted in May 1965, over the legal objections of Lockheed’s counsel, to a new contract with a company set up by the firm’s long-time local agent or middleman, August Munir Dasaad.86 This was just six months after a secret U.S. decision to have the CIA covertly assist

“individuals and organizations prepared to take obstructive action against the PKI [Indonesian Communist Party].” Over the longer term this meant identifying and keeping tabs on “anti-regime elements” and other potential leaders of a post-Sukarno regime.37

Although Dasaad had been a long-time supporter of Sukarno, by May 1965 he was already building connections with Sukarno’s eventual successor, Gen. Suharto, via a family relative, General Alamsjah, who knew Suharto and was the beneficiary of the new Lockheed account.38 After Suharto replaced Sukarno, Alamsjah, who controlled certain considerable funds, at once made funds available to Suharto, earning him the gratitude of the new President.39

While this was happening, Stanvac (a joint venture of the Standard companies known later as Exxon and Mobil) increased payments to the army’s oil company, Permina, headed by an eventual political ally of Suharto, General Ibnu Sutowo.Alamsjah is said to have been allied with Ibnu Sutowo in plotting against Sukarno, along with a well-connected Japanese oilman, Nishijima Shigetada.40 After Suharto’s overthrow of Sukarno, Fortune wrote that “Sutowo’s still small company played a key part in bankrolling those crucial operations, and the army has never forgotten it.”41

We shall deal later with the special case of Lockheed kickbacks to Saudi Arabia, which were far greater than those to Japan. It is important to note, however, the linkage between Middle East oil and arms sales: as U.S. imports of Middle East oil increased, the pressure on the U.S. balance of payments was offset by increased U.S. arms sales to the region. “In the period 1963-1974, arms sales to the Middle East went from 10 per cent of global arms imports to 36 per cent, half of which was supplied by the United States.”42

Iran in 1953: How an Oil Cartel Operation Became a Job for the CIA or]

Wall Street, the Dulles Brothers, and the International Oil Cartel

The international lawyers of Wall Street did not hide from each other their shared belief that they understood better than Washington the requirements for running the world. As John Foster Dulles wrote in the 1930s to a British colleague,

The word “cartel” has here assumed the stigma of a bogeyman which the politicians are constantly attacking. The fact of the matter is that most of these politicians are highly insular and nationalistic and because the political organization of the world has under such influence been so backward, business people who have had to cope realistically with international problems have had to find ways for getting through and around stupid political barriers.43

This same mentality also explains why Allen Dulles as an OSS officer in 1945 simply evaded orders from Washington forbidding him to negotiate with SS General Karl Wolff about a conditional surrender of German forces in Italy – an important breach of Roosevelt’s agreement with Stalin at Yalta for unconditional surrender, a breach that is regarded by many as helping lead to the Cold War.44 And it explains why Allen, as CIA Director in 1957, dealt summarily with Eisenhower’s reluctance to authorize more than occasional U-2 overflights of the USSR, by secretly approving a plan with Britain’s MI-6 whereby U-2 flights could be authorized instead by the UK Prime Minister Macmillan.45

This mentality exhibited itself in 1952, when Truman’s Justice Department sought to break up the cartel agreements whereby Standard Oil of New Jersey (now Exxon) and four other oil majors controlled global oil distribution. (The other four were Standard Oil Company of New York, Standard Oil of California or Socony, Gulf Oil, and Texaco; together with Royal Dutch Shell and Anglo-Iranian, they comprised the so-called Seven Sisters of the cartel.) Faced with a government order to hand over relevant documents, Exxon’s lawyer Arthur Dean at Sullivan and Cromwell, where Foster was senior partner, refused: “If it were not for the question of national security, we would be perfectly willing to face either a criminal or a civil suit. But this is the kind of information the Kremlin would love to get its hands on.”46

48 Wall Street, the former headquarters of both Sullivan and Cromwell and the J. Henry Schroder Banking Corporation. Source.

At this time the oil cartel was working closely with the British Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC, later BP) to prevent AIOC’s nationalization by Iran’s Premier Mossadeq, by instituting, in May 1951, a successful boycott of Iranian oil exports.

In May 1951 the AIOC secured the backing of the other oil majors, who had every interest in discouraging nationalisation…. None of the large companies would touch Iranian oil; despite one or two picturesque episodes the boycott held.47

As a result Iranian oil production fell from 241 million barrels in 1950 to 10.6 million barrels in 1952.

This was accomplished by denying Iran the ability to export its crude oil. At that time, the Seven Sisters controlled almost 99% of the crude oil tankers in the world for such export, and even more importantly, the markets to which it was going.48

But Truman declined, despite a direct personal appeal from Churchill, to have the CIA participate in efforts to overthrow Mossadeq, and instead dispatched Averell Harriman to Tehran in a failed effort to negotiate a peaceful resolution of Mossadeq’s differences with London.49


Allen and John Foster Dulles, pillars of both the state and the deep state. Source.

All this changed with the election of Eisenhower in November 1952, followed by the appointment of the Dulles brothers to be Secretary of State and head of CIA. The Justice Department’s criminal complaint against the oil cartel was swiftly replaced by a civil suit, from which the oil cartel eventually emerged unscathed.50

Eisenhower, an open friend of the oil industry…changed the charges from criminal to civil and transferred responsibility of the case from the Department of Justice to the Department of State – the first time in history that an antitrust case was handed to State for prosecution. Seeing as how the Secretary of State was John Foster Dulles and the defense counsel for the oil cartel was Dulles’ former law firm (Sullivan and Cromwell), the case was soon as good as dead.51

Thereafter

Cooperative control of the world market by the major oil companies remained in effect, with varying degrees of success, until the oil embargo of 1973-74. That the cooperation was more than tacit can be seen by the fact that antitrust regulations were specifically set aside a number of times during the 1950-1973 period, allowing the major companies to negotiate as a group with various Mideastern countries, and after its inception [in 1960], with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries or OPEC.52

Also in November 1952 CIA officials began planning to involve CIA in the efforts of MI6 and the oil companies in Iran53 — although its notorious Operation TP/AJAX to overthrow Mossadeq was not finally approved by Eisenhower until July 22, 1953.54

The events of 1953 strengthened the role of the oil cartel as a structural component of the American deep state, drawing on its powerful connections to both Wall Street and the CIA.55 (Another such component was the Arabian-American Oil Company or ARAMCO in Saudi Arabia, which increased oil production in 1951-53 to offset the loss of oil from Iran. Until it was fully nationalized in 1980, ARAMCO maintained undercover CIA personnel like William Eddy among its top advisors.)56 The five American oil majors in particular were also strengthened by the success of AJAX, as Anglo-Iranian (renamed BP) was henceforth forced to share 40 percent of the oil from its Iran refinery with them.

Nearly all recent accounts of Mossadeq’s overthrow treat it as a covert intelligence operation, with the oil cartel (when mentioned at all) playing a subservient role. However the chronology, and above all the belated approval from Eisenhower, suggest that it was CIA that came belatedly in 1953 to assist an earlier oil cartel operation, rather than vice versa. In terms of the deep state, the oil cartel or deep state initiated in 1951 a process that the American public state only authorized two years later. Yet the inevitable bias in academic or archival historiography, working only with those primary sources that are publicly available, is to think of the Mossadeq tragedy as simply a “CIA coup.”

The CIA, Booz Allen Hamilton, and the Wall Street Overworld

The “revolving door” also circulates top-level intelligence officials and the chiefs of the cleared contractors referred to by Mike Lofgren as part of the deep state. Tim Shorrock revealed in 2007 that “about 70 percent of the estimated $60 billion the government spends every year on…intelligence” is outsourced to private intelligence contractors like Booz, Allen & Hamilton (now Booz Allen Hamilton) and SAIC.57 For example Mike McConnell “went from being head of the National Security Agency under Bush 41 and Clinton directly to Booz Allen, one of the nation’s largest private intelligence contractors, then became Bush’s Director of National Intelligence (DNI), then went back to Booz Allen, where he is now Executive Vice President.” Intelligence officers in government write the non-competitive contracts for the private corporations that they may have worked for and may work for again.58 And over the years the “revolving door” has also exchanged personnel between Booz Allen and the international oil companies served by the firm.

The original firm of Booz, Allen, & Hamilton split in 2008 into Booz Allen Hamilton, focused on USG business, and Booz & Company in New York, assuming the old company’s commercial and international portfolio. Booz Allen Hamilton is majority owned by the private equity firm the Carlyle Group, noted for its association with political figures like both presidents Bush.59


Booz Allen Hamilton Headquarters. Source.

Lofgren points to the deep state importance of Booz Allen Hamilton, 99 percent of whose business dependent on the U.S. government.60 Booz Allen has been linked in the media to NSA ever since its employee Edward Snowden decamped with NSA records. But Booz Allen, one of the oldest and largest of the “cleared contractors,” has been intertwined with the CIA’s covert operations since Allen Dulles became CIA Director in 1953.61 In the same year, Booz Allen began “to take on several overseas assignments…: a land-registration system in the Philippines, a restructuring of Egypt’s customs operations and textile industries, and work for Iran’s national oil company.”62 All three assignments overlapped with CIA covert ops in 1953, including the Philippine land distribution program which Edward Lansdale promoted in order to fight a Huk insurrection, and the CIA’s operation TP/AJAX (with Britain’s MI6) to rescue the Anglo-Iranian oil company (later BP).63


Miles Copeland, Jr., ex-CIA, ex-Booz Allen @ Hamilton, ex-Khashoggi’s private CIA. Source.

But the most important CIA-Booz Allen cooperation may have been in Egypt. In March 1953 Miles Copeland, having resigned from the CIA to join Booz-Allen, “returned to Cairo under what was, for all practical purposes, a joint CIA-BA&H mission.”64 In addition to offering management advice to the Egyptian government in general, and to a private textile mill, Miles also gave Nasser advice on establishing his intelligence service (the Mukhabarat), and “soon became his closest Western advisor” (as well as his top channel to the USG, more important than either the local US ambassador or CIA chief)65

Copeland’s role with Nasser did not make him a shaper of U.S. policy; his pro-Nasser views were largely subordinated to the pro-British anti-Nasserism of the Dulles brothers. But they did establish a bond between Copeland and the Eisenhower White House. By 1967, when Nixon was preparing to run for president, Copeland had taken a leave of absence from Booz Allen to become a prestigious and well-paid consultant for oil companies.

The CIA, Miles Copeland, and Adnan Khashoggi

In 1966 Copeland, while technically on leave from Booz Allen, made close contact with Adnan Khashoggi, a young Arab who was in the course of becoming both a “principal foreign agent” of the U.S. and also extremely wealthy on the commissions he earned from Lockheed and other military firms on arms sales to Saudi Arabia.66 (“To give some sense of the size of the business, the company acknowledged in the mid-1970s that it had provided $106 million in commissions to Khashoggi between 1970 and 1975, more than ten times the level of payments made to the next most important connection, Yoshi [sic] Kodama of Japan.”67


Adnan Khashoggi, shadowy backer of politicians (Time, Jan. 19, 1987). Source.

By Copeland’s own account in 1989, this encounter with Khashoggi “put the two of us on a ‘Miles-and-Adnan’ basis that has lasted for more than twenty years of business, parties, and a very special kind of political action.”68 Copeland adds that

Adnan and I, separately had been called on by our respective friends in Langley [i.e., CIA] to… have an official [sic], off-the-record exchange of ideas on the emerging crisis in the Middle East, and come up with suggestions that the tame bureaucrats would like to have made but couldn’t.69

Copeland almost immediately flew to Cairo and immersed himself in a series of high-level but ultimately unsuccessful efforts to forestall what soon became the 1967 Six Day Egyptian-Israeli Six Day War. By his account, his mission, though unsuccessful, gave a “tremendous boost” to his reputation, enabling him “to accelerate the attempt I had already started to establish a ‘private CIA’ by use of confidential arrangements with politically astute members of the client companies.”70

Copeland’s self-promoting claims are controversial, and a number of establishment writers have described his books as “unreliable.”71 But eyewitness Larry Kolb corroborates that Copeland was close to Khashoggi, and that the two of them

had written a white paper… proposing that… rich countries, including not only the United States but also the Arab oil states, should establish a “Marshall Plan” for all the needy countries of the Middle East, including Israel.

Rewritten with Kolb’s assistance after consultation with the Reagan White House, the plan would be backed by a “Mideast Peace Fund” to which “Adnan was pledging a hundred million dollars of his own money.”72

The proposal failed, partly because of the Middle East’s resistance to negotiated solutions, but also partly because by the 1980s Khashoggi was no longer as rich and influential as he had once been. His function as an agent of influence in the Middle East and elsewhere had been sharply limited after the United States, by the Corrupt Federal Practices Act of 1978, outlawed direct payments by US corporations to foreign individuals. Henceforward the function of bestowing money and sexual favors on client politicians passed primarily from Khashoggi to another CIA connection, the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI).73 A major shareholder in BCCI was Saudi intelligence chief Kamal Adham, Khashoggi’s friend and business partner and (according to the Senate BCCI Report) “the CIA’s former principal contact in the Arab Middle East.”74

What the story of the failed “Mideast Peace Fund” reveals is first, that Khashoggi (like BCCI after him) was of interest to Washington because of his ability to negotiate with both Israel and Arab countries; and second, that Copeland and what Copeland called his “private CIA,”75 was in a commanding position as lead adviser to

Khashoggi, while still on unpaid leave from Booz Allen Hamilton.

Khashoggi, the CIA’s Asset Edward K. Moss, and Political Corruption

A powerful connection was formed by combining Copeland’s political contacts with Khashoggi’s millions. Copeland may have been responsible for Khashoggi’s inspired choice of the under-recognized Edward K. Moss, another man with CIA connections, as his p.r. agent in Washington.76

Back in November 1962, the CIA, as part of its planning to get rid of Castro, decided to use Moss for the Political Action Group of the CIA’s Covert Action (CA) staff.77 This was more than a year after the FBI had advised the CIA that Moss’s mistress Julia Cellini and her brother Dino Cellini were alleged to be procurers, while “the Cellini brothers have long been associated with the narcotics and white slavery rackets in Cuba.”78

This FBI report suggests an important shared interest between Moss and Khashoggi: sexual corruption. Just as his uncle Yussuf Yassin had been a procurer of women for King Abdul-Aziz, so Khashoggi himself was said to have “used sex to win over U.S. executives.” The bill for the madam who supplied girls en masse to his yacht in the Mediterranean ran to hundreds of thousands of dollars.79 Khashoggi made a practice of supplying those he wished to influence with dollars as well as sex.

Khashoggi’s Superyacht Kingdom 5KR, now owned by Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal. Source.

The CIA of course was forbidden to use sex and money in this way in the United States, or to make in the United States the payments to right-wing politicians that characterized its behavior in the rest of the world. But no such prohibition applied to Khashoggi. According to Anthony Summers,

Khashoggi had courted Nixon in 1967 by putting a plane at his disposal to tour the Middle East after the Six-Day War. Soon afterward, using a proxy, he opened an account at Rebozo’s [Bebe Rebozo, Nixon’s close confidante] in Florida. He did so, he explained to Watergate prosecutors, hoping to “curry favor with Rebozo,” to get an entrée to the man who might become president, and to pursue business deals.80

Khashoggi in effect served as a “cutout,” or representative, in a number of operations forbidden to the CIA and the companies he worked with. Lockheed, for one, was conspicuously absent from the list of military contractors who contributed illicitly to Nixon’s 1972 election campaign. But there was no law prohibiting their official representative, Khashoggi, from cycling $200 million through the bank of Nixon’s friend Bebe Rebozo.81

(Pierre Salinger heard from Khashoggi that in 1972 he had donated $1 million to Nixon, corroborating the often-heard claim that Khashoggi had brought it in a briefcase to Nixon’s western White House in San Clemente, and then “forgotten” to take it away.)82

Khashoggi of course did not introduce such corruption to American politics; he merely joined a milieu where defense companies had used money and girls for years to win defense contracts in Washington and Las Vegas.83 Prominent in this practice was Howard Hughes, whom Khashoggi soon joined in international investments. (After a Senate investigator on Khashoggi’s trail registered at the Hughes-owned Sands Hotel in Las Vegas, a blonde came unexpectedly to his hotel room, and said, “I’m here for your pleasure.”)84

But Khashoggi’s corruption channels and targets overlapped with those of others with CIA connections. In 1972 it was alleged that funds from the Paradise Island casino in the Bahamas were being secretly carried to Nixon and his friend Bebe Rebozo, by a casino employee. This was Seymour (Sy) Alter, who was both “a friend of Nixon and Rebozo since 1962” and also an associate of Edward Moss’s brother-in-law Eddie Cellini, the casino manager at Paradise Island. 85 The funds came from the Paradise Island Bridge Company, a company partly owned by an officer of Benguet International, a firm represented in America by Paul Helliwell. 86 It is likely that Nixon himself had a hidden interest in the Bridge Company, which might explain the revelation through Operation Tradewinds that a “Richard M. Nixon” (not otherwise identified) had an account at Helliwell’s Castle Bank.87

Three facts point to a deep state interest in what might otherwise seem a matter of personal corruption. The first is that Paul Helliwell had set up two companies for the CIA — CAT Inc. (Later Air America) and SEA Supply Inc. in Bangkok — that became the infrastructure of the CIA’s covert operations with drug-trafficking armies in Southeast Asia.88 The second is that Paul Helliwell’s banking partner, E.P. Barry, had been the postwar head of OSS Counterintelligence (X-2) in Vienna, which oversaw the recovery of SS gold in Operation Safehaven.89 The third is that for over four decades persons from Booz Allen Hamilton have been among the very small group owning the profitable Paradise Island Bridge Company. (A recent partner in the Paradise Island Bridge Company is Booz Allen Senior Vice-President Robert Riegle.)90

The Safari Club, now the Fairmont Mount Kenya Safari Club. Source.

Moss, Khashoggi, the Safari Club, and the International Overworld

The power exerted by Khashoggi and Moss was not limited to Khashoggi’s access to funds and women. By the 1970s, Moss was chairman of the elite Safari Club in Kenya, where he invited Khashoggi in as majority owner.91 The exclusive property became the venue for an alliance between intelligence agencies that wished to compensate for the CIA’s retrenchment in the wake of President Carter’s election and Senator Church’s post-Watergate reforms.92

As former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki bin Faisal once told Georgetown University alumni,

In 1976, after the Watergate matters took place here, your intelligence community was literally tied up by Congress. It could not do anything. It could not send spies, it could not write reports, and it could not pay money. In order to compensate for that, a group of countries got together in the hope of fighting Communism and established what was called the Safari Club. The Safari Club included France, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Iran.93

Prince Turki’s candid remarks– “your intelligence community was literally tied up by Congress. …. In order to compensate for that, a group of countries got together … and established what was called the Safari Club.” – made it clear that the Safari Club, operating at the level of the deep state, was expressly created to overcome restraints established by political decisions of the public state in Washington.

Obviously the property owned by Khashoggi and Moss in Kenya should not be confused with the intelligence operation of the same name. But it would be wrong also to make a radical separation between the two: the two men Khashoggi and Moss would appear to be part of this supranational intelligence milieu.

Specifically Khashoggi’s activities of corruption by sex and money, after they too were somewhat curtailed by Senator Church’s post-Watergate reforms, appear to have been taken up by the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), a bank where Khashoggi’s friend and business partner Kamal Adham, the Saudi intelligence chief and Safari Club member, was a part-owner.94


BCCI on the cover of Time, July 6, 1991. Source.

The Safari Club Milieu: George H.W. Bush, Theodore Shackley, and BCCI

The usual account of this super-agency’s origin is that it was

the brainchild of Count Alexandre de Marenches, the debonair and mustachioed chief of France’s CIA. The SDECE (Service de Documentation Extérieure et de Contre-Espionnage)…. Worried by Soviet and Cuban advances in postcolonial Africa, and by America’s post-Watergate paralysis in the field of undercover activity, the swashbuckling Marenches had come to Turki’s father, King Faisal, with a proposition…. [By 1979] Somali president Siad Barre had been bribed out of Soviet embrace by $75 million worth of Egyptian arms (paid for… by Saudi Arabia)….95

Joseph Trento adds that “The Safari Club needed a network of banks to finance its intelligence operations,… With the official blessing of George Bush as the head of the CIA, Adham transformed… the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), into a worldwide money-laundering machine.”.96

Trento claims also that the Safari Club then was able to work with some of the controversial CIA operators who were then forced out of the CIA by Turner, and that this was coordinated by perhaps the most controversial of them all: Theodore Shackley.

Shackley, who still had ambitions to become DCI, believed that without his many sources and operatives like [Edwin] Wilson, the Safari Club—operating with [former DCI Richard] Helms in charge in Tehran—would be ineffective. … Unless Shackley took direct action to complete the privatization of intelligence operations soon, the Safari Club would not have a conduit to [CIA] resources. The solution: create a totally private intelligence network using CIA assets until President Carter could be replaced.97

Kevin Phillips has suggested that Bush on leaving the CIA had dealings with the bank most closely allied with Safari Club operations: the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). In Phillips’ words,

After leaving the CIA in January 1977, Bush became chairman of the executive committee of First International Bancshares and its British subsidiary, where, according to journalists Peter Truell and Larry Gurwin in their 1992 book ‘False Profits’ [p. 345], Bush ‘traveled on the bank’s behalf and sometimes marketed to international banks in London, including several Middle Eastern institutions.’98

Joseph Trento adds that through the London branch of this bank, which Bush chaired, “Adham’s petrodollars and BCCI money flowed for a variety of intelligence operations”99

It is clear moreover that BCCI operations, like Khashoggi’s before them, were marked by the ability to deal behind the scenes with both the Arab countries and also Israel.100

It is clear that for years the American deep state in Washington was both involved with and protected BCCI. Acting CIA director Richard Kerr acknowledged to a Senate Committee “that the CIA had also used BCCI for certain intelligence-gathering operations.”101

Later, a congressional inquiry showed that for more than ten years preceding the BCCI collapse in the summer of 1991, the FBI, the DEA, the CIA, the Customs Service, and the Department of Justice all failed to act on hundreds of tips about the illegalities of BCCI’s international activities.102

Far less clear is the attitude taken by Wall Street banks towards the miscreant BCCI. The Senate report on BCCI charged however that the Bank of England “had withheld information about BCCI’s frauds from public knowledge for 15 months before closing the bank.”103

Of course the scope and influence of BCCI reflected changes in the global superstructure of finance since the oil price hikes of the 1970s. A recent study of the dangerously unstable concentration of ownership in the world showed only four recognizable Wall Street institutions among the top twenty: JPMorgan Chase & Co, the Goldman Sachs Group, Bank of New York Mellon Corp, and Merrill Lynch.104 Of these, Bank of New York, the bank heavily involved in the 1990s looting of Russia, interlocked with BCCI through the Swiss banking activities of the international banker Bruce Rappaport, “thought to have ties to US and Israeli intelligence.” (Alfred Hartmann, a board member of BCCI, was both vice-chairman of Rappaport’s Swiss bank, Bank of New York-Intermaritime, and also head of BCCI’s Swiss subsidiary, the Banque de Commerce et de Placements).105

The collapse of BCCI in 1991 did not see an end to systematic Saudi-financed political corruption in the U.S. and elsewhere. After a proposed major arms sale in the 1980s met enhanced opposition in Congress from the Israeli lobby, Saudi Arabia negotiated a multi-billion pound long-term contract with the United Kingdom – the so-called al-Yamamah deal. It developed much later that overpayments for the purchased weapons were siphoned off into a huge slush fund for political payoffs, including “hundreds of millions of pounds to the ex-Saudi ambassador to the US, Prince Bandar bin Sultan.”106 According to Robert Lacey, the payments to Prince Bandar were said to total one billion pounds over more than a decade, including “a suitcase containing more than $10 million” that went to a Vatican priest for the CIA’s long-time clients, the Christian Democratic Party.107

As we saw earlier. the CIA had “laundered over $10 million in captured Axis funds to influence the [Italian] election [of 1948].”108 These practices, in other words, survived the legal efforts to end them.

Conclusion: A Supranational Deep State

The complex milieu of Khashoggi, the BCCI, and the Safari Club can be characterized as a supranational deep state, whose organic links to the CIA may have helped consolidate it. It is clear however that decisions taken at this level by the Safari Club and BCCI were in no way guided by the political determinations of those elected to power in Washington. On the contrary, Prince Turki’s candid remarks revealed that the Safari Club (with the alleged participation of two former CIA Directors, Bush and Helms) was expressly created to overcome restraints established by political decisions in Washington.

A former Turkish president and prime minister once commented that the Turkish deep state was the real state, and the public state was only a “spare state,” not the real one.109 A better understanding of the American deep state is necessary, if we are to prevent it from assuming permanently the same role.

Peter Dale Scott, a former Canadian diplomat and English Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of Drugs Oil and WarThe Road to 9/11, and The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War. His most recent book is American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection and the Road to Afghanistan. His website, which contains a wealth of his writings, is here

Notes

1 Dana Priest and William Arkin, Top Secret America: The Rise of the New American Security State (New York: Little Brown, 2011), 52.

2 E.g. Marc Ambinder and D.G. Grady, Deep State: Inside the Government Secrecy Industry (New York: Wiley, 2013); cf. John Tirman, “The Quiet Coup: No, Not Egypt. Here,” HuffingtonPost, July 9, 2013: “Now we know: the United States of America is partially governed by a deep state, undemocratic, secret, aligned with intelligence agencies, spying on friend and foe, lawless in almost every respect.”

3 Mike Lofgren, “ A Shadow Government Controls America,” Reader Supported News, February 22, 2014.

4 Grant Barrett, “A Wordnado of Words in 2013,” New York Times, December 21, 2013.

5 Peter Dale Scott, Deep politics and the death of JFK (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 7.

6Tom Hayden discussing the crisis in Venezuela,” Tikkun, February 25, 2014.

7 To take a single telling example, six of Sam Walton’s heirs are now reportedly wealthier than the bottom 30% of Americans, or 94.5 million people (Tim Worstall, “Six Waltons Have More Wealth Than the Bottom 30% of Americans,” Forbes, December 14, 2011). Cf. the devastating picture of a disintegrating America in George Packer, The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013).

8 See Kevin Phillips, The politics of rich and poor: wealth and the American electorate in the Reagan aftermath (New York: HarperCollins, 1991). Cf. John T. Stinson, The Reagan Legacy (Bloomington, IN: iUniverse, 2009), 146; Timothy Noah, The great divergence: America’s growing inequality crisis and what we can do about it (New York: Bloomsbury, 2012).

9 For the impact of railroads on expanded social awareness, see Benedict Anderson, Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (London: Verso, 1991).

10What is the Deep State?” On Religion [2013].

11 Gareth Jenkins, “Susurluk and the Legacy of Turkey’s Dirty War,” Terrorism Monitor, May 1, 2008; quoted in Peter Dale Scott, “9/11, Deep State Violence and the Hope of Internet Politics,” Global Research, June 11, 2008. For the Susurluk incident, see also Scott, American War Machine, 19-20, etc.

12 Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, xi-xii.

13 Lofgren, “ A Shadow Government Controls America.”

14 Quoted in Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America, 1.

15 Forbes magazine founder Bertie Charles Forbes wrote six years later: “Picture a party of the nation’s greatest bankers stealing out of New York on a private railroad car under cover of darkness, stealthily riding hundred[s] of miles South, embarking on a mysterious launch, sneaking onto an island [the appropriately named Jekyll Island] deserted by all but a few servants, living there a full week under such rigid secrecy that the names of not one of them was once mentioned, lest the servants learn the identity and disclose to the world this strangest, most secret expedition in the history of American finance. I am not romancing; I am giving to the world, for the first time, the real story of how the famous Aldrich currency report, the foundation of our new currency system, was written (B.C. Forbes, Leslie’s Weekly, October 19, 1916; in T. Cushing Daniel, Real money versus false money-bank credits; the most important factor in civilization and least understood by the people. Washington, D.C., The Monetary educational bureau, 1924], 169; cf. B.C. Forbes, Men who are making America [New York: Forbes Publishing Co., 1922], 398; cf. G. Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve [Westlake Village, CA: American Media, 1994]). Paul Warburg later wrote that “Though eighteen years have since gone by, I do not feel free to give a description of this most interesting conference, concerning which Senator Aldrich pledged all participants to secrecy” (Paul Warburg, The Federal Reserve System: Its Origin and Growth [New York, Macmillan, 1930], ZZ). 

16 Congress was persuaded to provide perfunctory support of the bailout, under an alleged mysterious threat of martial law. See Peter Dale Scott, “Martial Law, the Financial Bailout, and War,” Global Research, January 8, 2009; reprinted in Michel Chossudovsky and Andrew Gavin Marshall, eds., The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century (Montreal, Global Research Publishers. Centre for Research on Globalization, 2010), 219-40; Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., “Sen. Inhofe: [Henry] Paulsen [Secretary of the Treasury and former Chief Executive Officer of Goldman Sachs] Threatened Martial Law To Pass Bailout,” LewRockwell.com, November 20, 2008.

17 Richard Helms with William Hood A look over my shoulder: a life in the Central Intelligence Agency (New York: Random House, 2003), 82-83. Cf. Scott, American War Machine, 26-28.

18 Laurence H Shoup and William Minter, Imperial brain trust: the Council on Foreign Relations and United States foreign policy (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1977).

19 Gordon Thomas, Secret Wars: One Hundred Years of British Intelligence Inside MI5 and MI6 (New York: Thomas Dunne Books/ St. Martin’s Press, 2009), 98. This may have occurred during Dulles’s visit to Europe in the spring of 1947 (James Srodes, Dulles: Master of Spies [Washington: Henry Regnery, 1999], 392).

20 Richard Aldrich, The Hidden Hand: Britain, America, and Cold War secret intelligence (Woodstock, NY: Overlook Press, 2001), 343. Dulles also chaired the executive committee of the companion National Committee for a Free Europe (behind the Iron Curtain), whose legal affairs were handled by Sullivan and Cromwell (Wilson D. Miscamble, George F. Kennan and the Making of American Foreign Policy, 1947-1950 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), 204.

21 Amy B. Zegart, Flawed by Design: The Evolution of the CIA, JCS, and NSC (Stanford: Stanford UP, 1999), 189; citing Christopher Andrew, For the President’s Eyes Only (New York: HarperCollins, 1995), 172; see also Church Committee, Final Report, Book 4, 28-29.

22 David Wise and Thomas B. Ross, The Espionage Establishment (New York: Random House, 1967), 166; Scott, Road to 9/11, 13.

23 “In January 1946 Dulles outlined in some detail a reconstruction plan that is one of the earliest notions of what would, a year later, be known as the Marshall Plan” (Srodes, Allen Dulles: Master of Spies, 374).

24 Tim Weiner, Legacy of ashes: the history of the CIA (New York: Doubleday, 2007), 28.

25 Douglas Valentine, “The French Connection Revisited: The CIA, Irving Brown, and Drug Smuggling as Political Warfare,” Covert Action.

26 Norbert Schlei, “Japan’s ‘M-Fund’ Memorandum, January 7, 1991,“ JPRI [Japan Policy Research Institute] Working Paper No. 11: July 1995: “Incident to the revision of the Security Treaty [in 1960], Vice President Nixon agreed to turn over exclusive control of the M-Fund to Japan. It has been alleged that this action by Nixon was part of a corrupt political bargain, whereby it was agreed that if Japan would assist him to become President of the United States, Nixon would agree to release control of the Fund to Japan and, if he became President, would return Okinawa to Japan.”

27 “C.I.A. Spent Millions to Support Japanese Right in 50’s and 60’s,” New York Times, October 9, 1994. Cf. Scott, American War Machine, 93-94, 298-99; citing Chalmers Johnson, “The 1955 System and the American Connection: A Bibliographic Introduction,” JPRI [Japan Policy Research Institute] Working Paper No. 11: July 1995.

28 Sterling Seagrave and Peggy Seagrave, Gold warriors: America’s secret recovery of Yamashita’s gold (London: Verso, 2003). Cf. Richard Hoyt, Old Soldiers Sometimes Lie (New York: Forge, 2002), 80.

29 Scott, American War Machine, 94, etc.

30 Scott, American War Machine,

31 Norman Mailer, “A Harlot High and Low: Reconnoitering Through the Secret Government,” New York, August 16, 1976 (Hughes); Michael Schaller, Altered states: the United States and Japan since the occupation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 294 (Lockheed).

32 Johnson, “The 1955 System and the American Connection.”

33 David E. Kaplan and Alec Dubro, Yakuza: Japan’s Criminal Underworld (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), 89-90. Cf. Jonathan Marshall, in William O. Walker, III, ed., Drug control policy: essays in historical and comparative perspective (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992), 108:

“Yoshio Kodama’s fortune, built of profits from tungsten and opium, established the party that today rules Japan…. Kodama contributed to the pervasive corruption of Japanese politics by steering huge corporate contributions into the coffers of favored LDP members. This pattern culminated in the Lockheed scandal, which revealed that multi-million-dollar payoff by American aerospace firms had swayed key procurement decisions by Japan’s national airline and defense establishment and raised the possibility that the CIA had used Kodama and corporate funds to influence Japanese politics. The money-laundering channel used for Lockheed’s bribes was favored both by the CIA and international drug traffickers.”

34 Thomas Fensch, ed. The C.I.A. and the U-2 Program: 1954-1974 (The Woodlands, TX: New Century Books, 2001).

35 William D. Hartung, Prophets of war: Lockheed Martin and the making of the military-industrial complex (New York: Nation Books, 2011), 121; David Boulton, The Grease Machine (New York: Harper & Row, 1978), 97 (friends).

36 Andrew Feinstein, The shadow world: inside the global arms trade (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011), 265; Anthony Sampson, The Arms Bazaar (New York: Viking, 1977), 135-36.

37 Bradley R. Simpson, Economists with guns: authoritarian development and U.S.-Indonesian relations, 1960-1968 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2008), 142;

quoting from CIA, “Political Action Project,”, November 19, 1964; FRUS, 1964-1968, 26:181-84.

38 In addition there was “a US deal to deliver 200 light aircraft to the Indonesian Army in July 1965.” The aircraft went to the army’s Diponegoro division, which “ as well as supplying the bulk of the [September 30] “coup” personnel in Java, … also provided the bulk of the personnel for its suppression” (Nathaniel Mehr, Constructive bloodbath’ in Indonesia: the United States, Britain and the mass killings of 1965-66 [Nottingham: Spokesman Books, 2009], 36).

39 Peter Dale Scott, “The United States and the Overthrow of Sukarno, 1965-1967,” Pacific Affairs, 58, Summer 1985,; citing United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations, Multinational corporations and United States foreign policy, hearings before the Subcommittee on Multinational Corporations (Washington: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1973-1976).

40 Masashi Nishihara, The Japanese and Sukarno’s Indonesia: Tokyo-Jakarta relations, 1951-1966 (Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1976), 171, 194, 202; Scott, “The United States and the Overthrow of Sukarno.”

41 Fortune, July 1973, 154, cf. Wall Street Journal, April 18, 1967.

42 John Dumbrell and Axel R Schäfer (eds.), America’s ‘special relationships’: foreign and domestic aspects of the politics of alliance (London: Routledge, 2009), 187.

43 John Foster Dulles to Lord McGowan, Chairman of Imperial Chemical Industries; in Nancy Lisagor and Frank Lipsius, A law unto itself: the untold story of the law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell (New York: Morrow, 1988), 127.

44 Charles T. O’Reilly, Forgotten Battles: Italy’s War of Liberation, 1943-1945 (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2001), 288; Peter Dale Scott, “How Allen Dulles and the SS Preserved Each Other,” Covert Action Information Bulletin, 25 (Winter 1986), 4-14. Dulles’s plans to use SS resources in post-war Germany cab be seen as part of a successful plan to frustrate the implementation of Roosevelt’s so-called Morgenthau Plan to deindustrialize Germany.

45 Stephen Dorril, MI6, 659-660.

46Ovid Demaris, Dirty Business: The Corporate-Political Money-Power Game (New York: Avon, 1974), 213-14.

47 J.P.D. Dunbabin, International relations since 1945 : a history in two volumes

(London: Longman, 1994), Vol 2, 344. The boycott is denied without argumentation in Exxon’s corporate history (Bennett H. Wall et al., Growth in a changing environment: a history of Standard Oil Company (New Jersey), Exxon Corporation, 1950-1975 (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988), Vol. 4, 476: “Despite oft-printed statements to the contrary, the oil majors did not conspire to boycott NIOC oil.”

48 Robert Palmer Smith, Darkest truths of black gold: an oil industry executive breaks the industry’s code of silence (New York: iUniverse, 2007), 256. In July 1952 Mossadeq attempted to break the embargo by contracting to sell oil to a small private Italian oil firm. The manoeuver was frustrated by the British Royal Navy, which in July 1952 intercepted the Italian tanker Rose Mary and redirected it to Aden. The news dissuaded other tankers from trying to reach Abadan (Mary Ann Heiss, Empire and Nationhood: The United States, Great Britain, and Iranian Oil, 1950-1954 [New York: Columbia University Press, 1997], 130; Stephen Kinzer, All the Shah’s men: an American coup and the roots of Middle East terror Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2003], 136).

49 Mostafa Elm, Oil, Power, and Principle: Iran’s Oil Nationalization and Its Aftermath (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1992), 198-99 (Churchill); Robert Moskin, American Statecraft: The Story of the U.S. Foreign Service (New York: Thomas Dunne Books/ St. Martin’s Press, 2013), 627-28 (Harriman).

50 Demaris, Dirty Business, 214-25: “The incoming Eisenhower Administration… quickly dropped the criminal case. The civil suit that was instituted alleged that the five American oil companies violated the Sherman Antitrust and the Wilson Tariff Acts by conspiring to divide and control foreign production and distribution…. An inadequate staff was assigned to the case and the action finally petered out a decade later with a couple of meaningless consent decrees.”

51 Robert Sherrill, The oil follies of 1970-1980: how the petroleum industry stole the show (and much more besides) (Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1983), 221).

52 William R. Freudenburg and Robert Gramling, Oil in troubled waters: perceptions, politics, and the battle over offshore drilling (Albany : State University of New York Press, 1994); 17; citing Shukri Mohammed Ghanem, OPEC, the Rise and Fall of an Exclusive Club (London : KPI, 1986); Mira Wilkins, “The Oil Companies in Perspective,” in Raymond Vernon (ed.), The Oil Crisis (New York: Norton, 1976).

53 William Roger Louis, “Britain and the Overthrow of Mossadeq,” in Mark J. Gasiorowski and Malcolm Byrne (eds.), Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 coup in Iran (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2004), 168. Cf. William R. Clark, Petrodollar warfare: oil, Iraq and the future of the dollar (Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers, 2005), 125: “[T]he Dulles brothers had already conceived a plot when Eisenhower became president in January 1953.”

54 Scot Macdonald, Rolling the iron dice : historical analogies and decisions to use military force in regional contingencies (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000), 98. Cf. Richard H. Immerman, John Foster Dulles: Piety, Pragmatism, and Power in U.S. Foreign Policy (Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources, 1999), 67. Allen Dulles played a personal role in TP/AJAX, by flying to Italy and persuading the frightened Shah to return to Tehran.

55 In the past, wishing to dissociate the term “deep state” from organizational connotations, I have written of the American “deep state” as “a milieu both inside and outside government with the power to steer the history of the public state and sometimes redirect it” (“William Pawley, the Kennedy Assassination, and Watergate,” Global Research, November 29, 2012. But because there are extra-governmental structural components to the deep state, it might be better to think of it as not just a milieu, but more analogous to an oligopolistic market.

56 See Chalmers A Johnson, The Sorrows of Empire: Militarism, Secrecy, and the End of the Republic (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2004), 218-19; Timothy Mitchell, Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil (New York: Verso Books, 2011), 212.

57 Tim Shorrock, Spies for Hire (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008), 6.

58 Glenn Greenwald, “Mike McConnell, the WashPost & the dangers of sleazy corporatism,” Salon, March 29, 2010.

59 George H. W. Bush was an adviser to Carlyle, which in its early days “backed a management-led buyout of Caterair and appointed George W Bush to the board” (Jamie Doward, “Bush Sr’s Carlyle Group Gets Fat On War And Conflict,”

The Observer, March 25, 2003.)

60 Lofgren, “ A Shadow Government Controls America.”

61 Booz Allen Hamilton’s headquarters is now in McLean, Virginia, close to the HQ of the CIA.

62 Art Kleiner, Booz Allen Hamilton: Helping Clients Envision the Future

(Old Saybrook, CT: Greenwich Publishing, 2004), 43.

63 John Prados, Safe for Democracy: The Secret Wars of the CIA (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2006.), 139. Cf. Christine N. Halili, Philippine History (Manila: Rex Book Store, 2004), 258 (Philippines land distribution).

64 Miles Copeland, The Game Player: the confessions of the CIA’s original political operative (London: Aurum Press, 1989), 158.

65 Ephraim Kahana and Muhammad Suwaed, Historical dictionary of Middle Eastern intelligence (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2009), 65 {“advisor”); Jack O’Connell, King’s Counsel: A Memoir of War, Espionage, and Diplomacy in the Middle East

(New York : W.W. Norton & Co., 2011), 20 (channel).

66 The BCCI Affair: BCCI, the CIA and Foreign Intelligence, Report to the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations by John Kerry and Hank Brown, December 1992; 102nd Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Print 102-140 (“agent”).

67 William D. Hartung, Prophets of war: Lockheed Martin and the making of the military-industrial complex (New York: Nation Books, 2011), 126.

68 Copeland, The Game Player, 231.

69 Copeland, The Game Player, 233.

70 Copeland, The Game Player, 239.

71 E.g. Evan Thomas, The Very Best Men: Four Who Dared: The Early Years of the CIA

(New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995), 380.

72 Larry J. Kolb, Overworld: The Life and Times of a Reluctant Spy [New York: Riverhead/Penguin, 2004], 237-38. Cf. Copeland, The Game Player, 230, 262-63; Ronald Kessler, The Richest Man in the World: The Story of Adnan Khashoggi (New York: Warner Books), 300-01: “[O]n May 17, 1983, [Khashoggi] submitted to President Reagan a confidential ‘yellow paper’ [which] proposed an economic aid program similar to the 1949 Marshall Plan developed by the U.S. for Europe. Called a Peace Fund, it would provide up to $300 billion in regional economic aid from the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to Israel and any Arab country that signed a peace treaty with it.”

73 Peter Dale Scott, “Deep Events and the CIA’s Global Drug Connection,” 911truth.org, October 12, 2008; American War Machine, 160-65.

74The BCCI Affair.” Khashoggi’s status had declined, but by no means vanished. As late as 2003, Khashoggi was negotiating with Richard Perle, a member of the Cheney-Rumsfeld clique who at the time was still Chairman of the U.S. Defense Policy Board, to invest considerable Saudi money in Perle’s company Trireme (Seymour Hersh, New Yorker, 3/17/03).

75 Copeland, Game Player, 239; cf. 2128.

76 Kessler, The Richest Man in the World, 84, 188, etc.; Scott, American War Machine, 158-62.

77 “Moss, Edward K. #172 646,” CIA Memo of 19 April 1967, NARA #104-10122-10006; CIA Inspector General’s Report on CIA-Mafia Plots to Assassinate Fidel Castro, NARA # 104-10213-10101, p. 38. Cf. memo of 7 November 1962 in CIA’s Edward K. Moss folder, p. 26, NARA #1994.05.03.10:54:53:780005.

78 “Manuel Antonio Varona,” FBI Memorandum of January 16, 1961 to A. H. Belmont, p. 2, 105-76826-20; NARA #124-90055-10139. Cf. “Moss, Edward K. #172 646,” CIA Memo of 14 May 1973, in Meyer Lansky Security File, p. 9, NARA #1993.08.13.17:42:12:560059; CIA letter of 16 December 1960 to FBI, FBI file 105-76826-18; NARA #124-90055-10133. The CIA itself had notified the FBI on December 16, 1960, that Julia “Cellino” had advised that her brothers “have long been associated in the narcotics and white slavery rackets in Cuba (CIA letter of 16 December 1960 to Director, FBI, FBI File 105-76826-18; NARA #124-90055-10133; apparently no copy of this letter has been released from CIA files).

79 Kessler, Richest Man in the World, 29 (Yassin), 275–78 (Khashoggi). A friend of Khashoggi’s, Larry Kolb, reports that Khashoggi himself essentially corroborated the story that Khashoggi and John Kennedy had a friendship in the 1950s that “evolved primarily out of whoring together” (Larry J. Kolb, Overworld: The Life and Times of a Reluctant Spy [New York: Riverhead/Penguin, 2004], 236). The woman who destroyed the presidential aspirations of Senator Gary Hart in 1987 was one of Khashoggi’s many girls.

80 Anthony Summers with Robbyn Swan, The Arrogance of Power: The Secret World of Richard Nixon (New York: Viking, 2000), 283. Cf. Kessler, The Richest Man in the World, 171: Khashoggi told the prosecutors “that he churned millions through the tiny [Rebozo] bank to win favor with the president.”

81 Investigative reporter Jim Hougan reports the incredulity of congressional investigators that Lockheed was the only large corporation not to have made a contribution to Nixon’s 1972 election campaign (Hougan, Spooks, 457–58.

82 Scott, Road to 9/11, 35; citing Summers, Arrogance of Power, 283; Robert Baer, Sleeping with the Devil (New York: Crown, 2003), 43. (Baer reports the year of the briefcase as 1968, not 1972.) Kolb (“unequivocally, and from personal experience”) denies the briefcase story (Overworld, 299).

83 Scott, Deep politics and the death of JFK, 234-39.

84 Kessler, Richest Man in the World, 129, 160-61. When Hughes flew from Las Vegas to the Paradise Island casino in the Bahamas (where Edward Moss’s brother-in-law Eddie Cellini was casino manager, he did so on a Khashoggi plane. (Kessler, Richest Man, 149-50).

85 Summers with Swan, The Arrogance of Power, 242, 252; Jim Hougan, Spooks, 398. Cf. Denny Walsh, New York Times, January 21, 1974; Gerth, in Government by Gunplay, 137-39.

86 Block, Masters of Paradise, 94-96; Summers with Swan, The Arrogance of Power, 244-45. Benguet Mines have also been associated with Yamashita’s gold (Seagrave, Gold Warriors, 147; Scott, American War Machine, 322n15).

87 Summers with Swan, The Arrogance of Power, 244-45, 253-54.

88 Scott, American War Machine, 71-72. Cf. Wall Street Journal, April 18, 1980: “In 1951, Mr. Helliwell helped set up and run Sea Supply Corp., a concern controlled by the CIA as a front. For almost 10 years, Sea Supply was used to supply huge amounts of weapons and equipment to 10,000 Nationalist Chinese [KMT] troops in Burma as well as to Thailand’s police.”

89 In the course of Operation Safehaven, the U.S. Third Army took an SS major “on several trips to Italy and Austria, and, as a result of these preliminary trips, over $500,000 in gold, as well as jewels, were recovered” (Anthony Cave Brown, The Secret War Report of the OSS New York: Berkeley, 1976], 565-66).

90 Who’s who in Finance and Industry, Marquis Who’s Who, 1979, 568.

91 Kessler, Richest Man in the World, 238-41; Scott, American War Machine, 161-62.

92 The operation kept the name “Safari Club” even after moving from Khashoggi’s Club to a permanent headquarters in Cairo.

93 Ibrahim Warde, The price of fear: the truth behind the financial war on terror (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), 133. Cf. Lacey, Inside the Kingdom, 66, 72, 76.

94 Christopher Byron, “The Senate look at BCCI,” New York Magazine, October 28, 1991, 20–21.

95 Lacey, Inside the Kingdom, 66. Cf. John Cooley, Unholy Wars (London: Pluto Press, 1999), 24-27.

96 Joseph J. Trento, Prelude to terror: the rogue CIA and the legacy of America’s private intelligence network (New York: Carroll & Graf, 2005), 104-05. Kevin Phillips also notes that “Bush cemented strong relations with the intelligence services of both Saudi Arabia and the shah of Iran. He worked closely with Kamal Adham, the head of Saudi intelligence” (Kevin Phillips, “The Barrelling Bushes,” Los Angeles Times, January 11, 2004).

97 Trento, Prelude to terror, 113-14.

98 Phillips, “The Barrelling Bushes,” Los Angeles Times, January 11, 2004.

99 Trento, Prelude to Terror, 139.

100 There is no published evidence that Copeland was involved in the Safari Club covert operations. But it may be significant that Copeland’s activity of advising the Egyptian Army became after the creation of the Safari Club a franchise of a “private” U.S. firm, J.J. Cappucci and Associates, owned by Theodore Shackley (Trento, Prelude to Terror, 150, 247).

101 Kerry-Brown Report, Part 11, “BCCI, the CIA and Foreign Intelligence.”

102 Dan Bawley, Corporate Governance and Accountability: What Role for the Regulator, Director, and Auditor? (Westport, CT: Quorum, 1999). 37.

103 Bawley, Corporate Governance and Accountability, 37.

104Revealed – the capitalist network that runs the world.” New Scientist, October 24, 2011.

105 Scott, American War Conspiracy, 163; quoting from Peter Truell and Larry Gurwin, False Profits: The Inside Story of BCCI, the World’s Most Corrupt Financial Empire (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992), 384 (“ties”).

106Saudi prince ‘received arms cash’,” BBC, June 7, 2007. It is unclear whether payments continued after 2001, when the UK signed the OECD’s Anti-Bribery Convention, making such overpayments illegal.

107 Robert Lacey, Inside the Kingdom: Kings, Clerics, Modernists, Terrorists, and the Struggle for Saudi Arabia (New York: Penguin Books, 2009), 108.

108 Amy B. Zegart, Flawed by Design: The Evolution of the CIA, JCS, and NSC (Stanford: Stanford UP, 1999), 189; citing Christopher Andrew, For the President’s Eyes Only (New York: HarperCollins, 1995), 172; see also Church Committee, Final Report, Book 4, 28-29.

109 Former Turkish President and Prime Minister Suleyman Demirel commented that “In our country… there is one deep state and one other state…. The state that should be real is the spare one, the one that should be spare is the real one” (Jon Gorvett, “Turkey’s ‘Deep State’ Surfaces in Former President’s Words, Deeds in Kurdish Town,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 2006);, quoted in Scott, American War Machine, 24.

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on The State, the Deep State, and the Wall Street Overworld

First published by Global Research on August 18, 2016. The 2016 insights of Joachim Hagopian shed light on what is unfolding today. A diabolical movement towards World Governance?

***

New World Order propaganda rules and shapes the world. And there’s no more powerful propagator of propaganda that rules and shapes US global hegemony, world events and major geopolitical developments than the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). On its own website, the CFR describes itself as “an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher.”Two weeks ago the powerful organization celebrated its 95thanniversary since it’s been the most influential force dictating US foreign policy throughout the 20th century chauvinistically called “the American century” right into the present 21st aptly called the New World Order century. The CFR is financed by highly endowed, tax exempt Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie foundations.

The Bilderberg and CFR’s chosen member to become America’s next presidential puppet – Hillary Clinton – [2016] made no bones about whom she takes her NW Orders from:

I [Hillary Clinton] am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mother ship in New York City, but it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing and how we should think about the future.  (emphasis added)

In 1950 the son of one of the Council on Foreign Relations’ founders, James Warburg emphatically decreed to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,

 “We shall have world government whether or not you like it – by conquest or consent.”

From its very outset the CFR as the US elite’s most public face subversively promoting New World Order has always maintained one explicit purpose – to bring about a one world government. In 1975 powerful CFR insider and former Judge Advocate General of the US Navy Admiral Chester Ward wrote in his book entitled Kissinger on the Couch about the ultimate aim of the Council on Foreign Relations:

[The CFR has as a goal] submergence of US sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government… this lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of the United States is pervasive throughout most of the membership… In the entire CFR lexicon, there is no term of revulsion carrying a meaning so deep as ‘America First.’

Nearly all the top military generals (two active members were my West Point roommates) and admirals, major corporate CEO’s and numerous government leaders in all three branches have been circulating through the revolving turnstile in and out of the public sector as prominent Council on Foreign Relations members. They represent the shadowy government where secrecy rules from behind the scenes. That said, it’s a matter of public record that virtually every Secretary of Defense has been a CFR lifer.

Since 1940 every Secretary of State but one has been on the CFR and/or Trilateral Commission, and a majority of Secretaries of Treasury as well. Multiple CIA directors have been in the CFR. For eight decades nearly every key National Security and Foreign Policy Advisor are/were members. And of course a significant number of US presidents and VP’s have been CFR members. Regardless of what party happens to occupy the White House, an intransigent fixture operating at the highest echelons of power in Washington over the last century has been strategically assigned CFR plants.The CFR’s interlocking marriage between the private corporate sector and the public government sector is largely responsible for today’s lopsided world of harsh gross disparities.

As cases in point, the 62 richest people on earth possess more wealth than the majority of the 7.3 billion humans currently inhabiting the planet. The wealthiest 1% own more than the rest of the world combined and the global inequality gap between the rich and poor is widening at the fastest rate seen since the 19th century.

These alarming facts bear the result that the ruling elite owns and controls all the Fortune 500 transnational corporations, through backroom bribery deals owns and controls virtually every national government on earth, and only six oligarchs own the six top mega-media corporations controlling the outflow of over 90% of the world’s news and information.

Through monopolizing a centralized banking system of debt-based theft and global enslavement while plundering the Third World for its precious natural resources, consolidation of power into fewer and fewer hands has eliminated competition in a closed, thoroughly insulated, anything but free, now stagnating global market. As an example, over the last two decades alone the number of publicly traded companies listed on the US stock exchange has been decimated in half, from7,300 to 3,700. With the globalists wielding more power than ever before in human history, their centuries old, long sought after scheme of a one world government has never been closer at hand.

The means by which our planetary rulers plan to attain their long prized agenda is through such Rockefeller-Rothschild created entities as the Council on Foreign Relations. Indeed CFR members calling themselves the Informal Agenda Group drafted the UN proposal that FDR signed the next day establishing the UN as a world governance precursor in 1945.

CFR PR Video

Assembling a diverse all-star cast of CFR members, the Council on Foreign Relations just released an infomercial video touting how significant and valuable its expertise role is in solving the complex challenges and problems facing humanity in the twenty-first century. In under three and a half minutes multiple sound bites delivered in rapid fire by strategically anointed elitists hailing from various walks of life are seen pontificating the need for CFR architects to masterfully craft such sound US foreign policy recommendations that promote peace, prosperity and New World Order wisdom.

to view:  https://youtu.be/mRBdV9bbgeo 

In order of appearance are CFR president Richard Haass, CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem, former Treasury Secretary and CFR co-chair Robert Rubin, ABC news anchor Juju Chang, global head of Impact Investing at Goldman Sachs Dina Habib Powell, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Oscar winning actress Angelina Jolie, the world’s largest book publisher Random House CEO Jon Meacham, Interfaith Center of New York Rev. Chloe Breyer, Park Avenue Synagogue Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove, HBO CEO Richard Plepler, President of Jigsaw (formerly Google Ideas) Jared Cohen, actor-producer Kalpen Modi, Time Magazine assistant managing editor Rana Foroohar, CNN GPS host Fareed Zakaria and Yahoo news anchor Bianna Golodryga.

An A-team of 16 dynamos are perfectly divided evenly along every demographic – from gender to racial ethnicity to represented industry to religion. This over-the-top, “feel good” commercial showcasing the elite is obviously designed to make us all feel safer trusting their benevolent wisdom. A neatly, fine-tuned grooming of elitism at its public face best, expounding propaganda that reassures us lowly, uninformed regular folks that the world’s in very skilled, capable hands with such intelligent, gifted, well-spoken movers and shakers when these elitists are in control at the helm solving all the world’s biggest problems and most pressing issues. The sample of represented powerhouse industries showcased in the video underscores the CFR’s sheer far-reaching tentacles of elitist dominance and power.

The PR video attempts to pass the CFR off as a benign humanitarian group out to both enlighten and save the world. Its featured CFR cheerleaders claim the organization is unbiased having no political ideology nor any agenda, which again is fiction as ever since 1921 its actions speak louder than their favorably biased words. The fact is the Council on Foreign Relations has been controlling US foreign policy for almost a century, and chief among its most obvious agendas has been building and maintaining US Empire’s global unipolar hegemony and military strength at all cost.

This refusal to share power with Russia and China in a bipolar world has humanity today teetering on the brink of WWIII and self-annihilation. History has also proven that the CFR has long carried an aggressive war agenda responsible for virtually unending US military conflict. As the most warring nation on earth, 93% of its time in existence America’s been at war killing fellow humans somewhere on the planet. A Gallup poll several years ago showed that the rest of the world views the US as the greatest threat to world peace in no small measure due to CFR’s role shaping foreign policy. Of course part and parcel of this war agenda is the unprecedented buildup of the arms industry and military industrial complex that Eisenhower gravely warned us against in vain largely due to CFR’s misguided influence. Enormous defense contractor giants like Lockheed, Raytheon, Boeing and General Electric have been direct fat cat beneficiaries of the CFR war agenda making trillions in profit over the years thanks to the mutually self-serving Council on Foreign Relations.

And finally, the most glaring treasonous agenda of all that the Council on Foreign Relations has consistently maintained for near an entire century is the destruction of the United States as an independent, sovereign nation. The CFR has always envisioned and been working persistently towards a totalitarian one world government. Like so much corporate sponsored advertising, this CFR ad features powerful liars once again promising one thing and then betraying their promise by doing another. They clearly state that CFR has no agenda, yet the historical facts prove that the Council on Foreign Relations has always maintained the New World Order agenda of a one world government.

The elitist propaganda machine is obviously working overtime, engaged in a thinly veiled political ad campaign, a sleek glossy facelift designed to upgrade its Mr. Burns-David Rockefeller, rule-the-world image by appeasing and trying to win over a riled up American public ready to turn on its elite masters. After all, this year US citizens are fast realizing that everything we’ve been taught to believe is fiction, and that in reality a full blown oligarchy has been masquerading as a propped up fake democracy.

Americans are just now starting to realize that the glorious US history taught in our whitewashed schoolbooks has brainwashed multiple generations into wrongly believing America’s always been God’s gift and savior to humanity and the rest of the world. Tell that to all the darker skinned peoples around the globe who’ve been bombed, raped and murdered, starting on US soil with the Native Americans and kidnapped African slaves and their descendants.

The public is just now finally coming to terms with recognizing that the system’s been rigged against them for a long time. With Hillary’s criminal exposure, presidential elections are blatantly rigged, the two-tiered justice system is horrendously in-our-face rigged, the stock market’s rigged, gold prices are rigged.

The dumbed down education system that extends even to higher learning is rigged, having turned generations of college grads intolifetime indentured servants now unemployed or working minimum wage jobs. While college grad wages increased only 1.6% in the last quarter century, the student debt burden has skyrocketed 163.8%. The US meritocracy work ethic that preaches working hard all your life eventually pays off is rigged because the entire Ponzi schemed economy’s been rigged ever since the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. Placing privatized central banksters in charge of the nation’s money supply manufacturing paper fiat out of thin air while charging interests off invisible reserves that don’t even exist has given the elite unlimited power to infiltrate and hijack our government through organizations like the Federal Reserve and CFR that have systematically degenerated our once vibrant democratic republic into a fascist totalitarian police state on the verge of utter collapse.

The fact is that in this highly polarized, explosive culture of growing violence, fear, hate, distrust has favored Donald Trump, one angry, “politically incorrect”, racist billionaire-showman promising delusions of grandeur to bring back America’s long lost “greatness”. This is upsetting the elite’s apple cart, threatening to throw a monkey wrench into the status quo of the rigged power structure.

This unpredictable, recklessly volatile dynamic currently gripping America has the divided populace ever more agitated, unstable and angry over facing the cold hard reality that the nation so many of us grew up loving has been thoroughly fleeced and destroyed by the treasonous Clinton-Bush-Obama international crime cabal that governs the world employing the same bloody, lawless thuggery as organized crime. Their ruthlessly violent, demonically motivated tactics are one and the same, only the ruling elite and their political and corporate puppets have historically enjoyed a deceptive, undeserved legitimacy not afforded the mafia.

Despite what the CFR infomercial claims, history explicitly exposes the Council on Foreign Relations’ relentless real agenda of one world governance that from behind the scenes is already informally operating, and how its promotion of global warming, global scarcity, global overpopulation, global terrorism, global refugee crises, global war and global economic collapse, all have been covertly contrived, manipulated and engineered by the ruling elite.

The elite’s not so secret, final objective is to finalize a cashless, RFID microchipped society under the absolute tyranny and control of an entrenched one world government.  As a war machine maker, the Council on Foreign Relations should remain an enemy to every citizen of the world who values and desires peace and freedom.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is at: http://empireexposed.blogspot.co.

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on One World Governance and the Council on Foreign Relations. “We Shall have World Government… by Conquest or Consent.”

The Elephant in the Room: Cell Phones

November 28th, 2021 by Edward Curtin

Important article first published by GR on June 13, 2021

***

It is difficult to talk to addicts about addictions and it is even harder to do so when their embrace of the drug of choice has dire consequences.

I once asked the ether if God had a cell phone, and although God didn’t reply, it was a rhetorical question, so I didn’t expect an answer since I knew God understood grammar and punctuation and had other ways of communicating.

The elites who consider themselves gods, such as those at the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Google, and their ilk throughout governments, corporations, media, etc., know that cell phones are fundamental to their plan for a fully digitized world.

They have promoted them for decades.  Without cell phones their plan can’t work, a plan whose end is a trans-human world where AI, cyborgs, technology, and biology are melded for their authoritarian control.  Their non-vaccine “vaccines” are also necessary.  Penetrating cells of both sorts are means to their ends and the stories we are told are meant to infect our minds with a sick way of thinking that will allow them to exert more and more control.

Most people have fallen for their PR.  It’s called the-easy-life.  The stay-in-touch life. The never-be-out-of-touch-life.  The you’ll-be-lost-without-it-life.  The smart life.  The free life.

In reality it is a prisoner’s life.  The miracle of the cell phone, the mystery of a virus and its “antidote,” and the authority of authoritarians are being used to try to quell the spirit of rebellion we were all born with – the promise of freedom.  Mystery, miracle, and authority – “vaccines” against freedom.  Like the Grand Inquisitor in Dostoevsky’s legend, these sick elites are relying on the assumption that “man is tormented by no greater anxiety than to find some one quickly to whom he can hand over that gift of freedom with which the ill-fated creature is born.”

They may be in store for a big surprise.  People are starting to wake up to an attack on their fundamental freedoms.

Like the non-vaccine vaccines that they are promoting to exert more control with their plan to digitize existence with the Great Reset, those who presently control so much of the world they own, know that cell phones are moving shackles.  And they know they have created billions of addicts who can’t help themselves.

So much of the world has been hoodwinked into a trap, a prison.  It’s been a slow process that is approaching a climax.

There are no cells in cell phones, but their towers are arranged to form cells with each having a central tower in its geographical zone that keep users prisoners, as with the round Panopticon prisons with their central guard tower.  Cells in heads, heads in cells, cells everywhere.  The U.S.A. also has more prisoners in cells than any country in the world.  There are Towers of Babel all across the land, listening, watching, recording, as the prisoners gleefully scroll their black magic machines that have corralled their freedom. Machines that are likely ruining their health as well, but that is not my main focus here.

Unlike the nearly 2 million people in American jails, cell phone prisoners can roam, for their cells are mobile.  That is their key.  “Smart” phones for gullible people, or androids – “a mobile robot usually with human form” – are necessary, for they allow the authorities to follow and track your every move while you think you are skipping down easy street while carrying the equivalent of a GPS ankle monitor like digital jail prisoners.  In this case, it is voluntary incarceration.  And there is far more to it than having your location tracked.

Perhaps it is unfair to say that people’s embrace of cell phones are acts of freely giving up their freedoms, for the propagandists work has long softened up many minds to the idea of salvation through technology.  Like the technology of pharmaceutical drugs run by criminal Big Pharma, users of cell phones have been induced to consider convenience over conscience and the quick “fix” over slow deliberation.  Yes, you can message your friends and even call them, but your enemies have your number now. And when they ask you for your papers, your freedom vaccines, all you need to do is flash that screen in your hand. After getting shot first.  To paraphrase Kris Kristofferson: Freedom’s just another word for everything left to lose.  But few are counting.

“What we got here is a failure to communicate,” says the Captain to the prisoner Luke in the classic movie Cool Hand Luke.  “Some men you just can’t reach…which is the way he wants it.”

I’m afraid that’s how it is with owners of cell phones. It’s very hard to admit you have been had.  People want their cell phones but don’t want to hear that they are the phone’s prisoners. But to say phone is too abstract.  Phones can’t imprison and manipulate you.  Only people can. The truth is hard to swallow.  The cell phone is the key, and most people are in the cell without a key or clue.  They have it and it has them.

But then aren’t cells inside us?  I’ve heard it said that spike proteins teach cells to make a protein that triggers an immune response inside our bodies.  But how do the cells get inside our bodies.  I thought they were hand held.  You see I am getting confused, for this kind of language is beyond my ken.  I’m still trying to figure out how my computer can get a virus.  Everything’s  gone viral. Cells, viruses – what’s next?  I’m one of those idiots who still thinks Cat Scans are used to see if you like cats.  Well I don’t know if that’s all true, ‘cause it’s got me, and baby, it’s got you.  Sonny and Cher sung those words more than fifty years ago.  Words stick.  Ideas stick.  Thinking and behaving in certain ways become habits.  Linguistic mind control needs repetition – words like cells and viruses.

The medium is the message and the messenger is the m in the mRNA experimental non-vaccine vaccines.  It’s so simple; all you need to do is get the message and get your experimental shot and wait for the consequences, just as with cell phones.  Don’t worry about the price to be paid in health or freedom.  Those are incidentals.  Let the operating systems do their invisible work.

The way the story is framed controls the story.  As with cell phones and vaccines, most people do not see Donald Trump as a pseudo-event. A pseudo-event being, as described by Daniel Boorstin in his classic book, The Image: A Guide to Pseudo- Events in America, a planned, dramatic, costly invention of a counterfeit story that is repeated and planned for its intelligibility and ability to capture the public’s attention since it conforms to stereotypes.  In this case, Trump as a big-mouthed, uncouth bad guy who just happened to become the American President. Like I happen to be a man.  Like you just happen to be reading this.  Just happenings. Trump in the role of the ignorant outsider who can be played off against the smart insider even when the fundamentals of the system that supports them barely change an iota while the bad guy runs the show.  Straight from the Tube to the Tube as part of the Spectacle. Obama and Biden’s anti-doppelganger. The story is told in a manner that the obvious is missed: That Trump was never an outsider.  He was one of the establishment’s performers from the start.  A perfect foil from the Tube for apprentices learning about reality.  You know, like the CDC says: “MRNA vaccines teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies.”  Very simple, teacher.  I see it now.

Are you immune to Trump?  Biden?   They are not the disease.  They are its symptoms.  They are a twin heads of the Hydra.  Now Trump has been “fired” with Biden’s turn to come.  Cut them off and the monster will grow more heads unless by miracle a true leader arises with the courage of JFK or RFK.  One who can avoid their assassins.

In January of 2021, the outsider Trump while still president, the anti-vaccine guy, the anti-Fauci guy, the anti-everything that’s good guy, the anti-science guy, the anti-China Wuhan lab Chinese virus guy, quietly got his Pfizer BioNTech vaccine, the same one Biden got.  He didn’t announce it, but said, “We took care of a lot of people — including, I guess … Joe Biden, because he got his shot, he got his vaccine. It shows you how unpainful that vaccine shot is … So everybody, go get your shot.”

Of course Trump was the guy who fast-tracked the experimental vaccines through a program called Operation Warp Speed that funneled billions of dollars to vaccine manufacturers through a non-governmental third party, a defense contract management firm called Advanced Technologies International, Inc.  This avoided much public disclosure.

I say all this about Trump to make a rather simple point about cell phones and how the obvious is staring us in the face if we choose to see it.  Trump and cell phones should have long been obvious.  Yes, cell phones are convenient, but that is a minor part of the story.  They are very dangerous for our freedoms and health.  Yes, it is very convenient to see Trump as the bad guy but much harder to see the larger story in which Trump is a chosen player on the large chessboard created by the interconnected power elites.  But Trump and the cell phone serve their functions.  They didn’t just happen.

To abandon your cell phone or to abandon the false narrative that Trump is an outlier is very difficult.  But these are difficult times.

Can you see the elephant in the room?  Join with those like Robert Kennedy, Jr. and other lovers of truth and freedom and fight back now.  Everyone must seize their freedom now before it is too late.  Cast fear aside; it is another of their key tools.  Hope lies in group actions.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Elephant in the Room: Cell Phones
  • 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.

***

 

This carefully researched scientific report was first published by Global Research on October 26, 2021


Nature of the COVID Era Public Health Disaster in the USA.

From All-cause Mortality and

Socio-geo-economic and Climatic Data

by 

Denis Rancourt, Marine Baudin and Jérémie Mercier


Abstract 

We investigate why the USA, unlike Canada and Western European countries, has a sustained exceedingly large mortality in the “COVID-era” occurring from March 2020 to present (October 2021). All-cause mortality by time is the most reliable data for detecting true catastrophic events causing death, and for gauging the population-level impact of any surge in deaths from any cause.

The behaviour of the USA all-cause mortality by time (week, year), by age group, by sex, and by state is contrary to pandemic behaviour caused by a new respiratory disease virus for which there is no prior natural immunity in the population. Its seasonal structure (summer maxima), age-group distribution (young residents), and large state-wise heterogeneity are unprecedented and are opposite to viral respiratory disease behaviour, pandemic or not. We conclude that a pandemic did not occur.

We infer that persistent chronic psychological stress induced by the long-lasting government-imposed societal and economic transformations during the COVID-era converted the existing societal (poverty), public-health (obesity) and hot-climate risk factors into deadly agents, largely acting together, with devastating population-level consequences against large pools of vulnerable and disadvantaged residents of the USA, far above preexisting pre-COVID-era mortality in those pools.

We also find a large COVID-era USA pneumonia epidemic that is not mentioned in the media or significantly in the scientific literature, which was not adequately addressed. Many COVID-19-assigned deaths may be misdiagnosed bacterial pneumonia deaths. The massive vaccination campaign (380 M administered doses, 178 M fully vaccinated individuals, mainly January-August 2021 and March-August 2021, respectively) had no detectable mitigating effect, and may have contributed to making the younger population more vulnerable (35-64 years, summer-2021 mortality).

***

Table of Contents

Abstract

Summary

List of figures

Table of abbreviations and definitions

1. Introduction

2. Data and methods

3. Results, analysis and discussion

3.1. All-cause mortality per year, USA, 1900-2020

3.2. ACM by week (ACM/w), USA, 2013-2021

3.3. ACM by week (ACM/w), USA, 2013-2021, by state

3.4. Late June 2021 heatwave event in ACM/w for Oregon and Washington

3.5. ACM-SB/w normalized by population (ACM-SB/w/pop), by state

3.6. ACM-SB by cycle-year (winter burden, WB) by population (WB/pop), USA and state-to-state variations

3.7. Geographical distribution and correlations between COVID-era above-SB seasonal deaths: cvp1 (spring 2020), smp1 (summer 2020), and cvp2 (fall-winter 2020-2021)

3.8. Associations for COVID-era mortality outcomes with socio-geo-economic and climatic variables

  • Obesity
  • Poverty
  • Climatic temperature
  • Obesity, poverty, and climatic temperature
  • Age structure of the population
  • Population density
  • All-cause mortality by week (ACM/w) by age group
  • Comparing all-cause excess mortality and COVID-assigned mortality
  • Vaccination

4. Comparison with Canada, and implications

5. Mechanistic causes for COVID-era deaths

6. Conclusion

7. References

Appendix: ACM/w 2013-2021, with color-differentiated cycle-years, for all the individual states of continental USA


About the Authors

Dr. Denis Rancourt is a former tenured Full Professor of Physics, University of Ottawa, Canada. During his 23-year career as a university professor, he taught over 2000 students in Science, Engineering, and Arts. He supervised more than 80 junior researchers including post-doctoral fellows, graduate students, and undergraduate researchers with over 100 research publications in leading peer-reviewed scientific journals in physics, chemistry, geology, bio-geochemistry, measurement science, soil science, and environmental science.

Dr. Marine Baudin is an independent French researcher. She got her PhD in microbiology within CentraleSupélec and École Normale Supérieure Paris-Saclay in 2017. She also holds a Magister in Biology and Biotechnology from University Paris-Saclayduring which she was trained at Pasteur Institute (Paris, France), at Institute of Medical and Biological Engineering(University of Leeds, UK) and at Institute of Food Research (Norwich, UK).

Dr. Jérémie Mercier is a French researcher and health educator. He was a normalien in chemistry at École Normale Supérieure deLyon and holds a PhD in environnemental research from Imperial College London (2011). Concerned with the “Covid-crisis”, he’s conducted multiple interviews of physicians and independent researchers to understand the ins and outs ofthe situation. This paper is the 3rd he co-publishes with Denis Rancourt and Marine Baudin.

 


Summary

We studied all-cause mortality (ACM) by time (week, year) 2013-2021 for the USA, resolved by state, or by age group, in relation to several socio-geo-economic and climatic variables (poverty, obesity, climatic temperature, population density, geographical region, and summer heatwaves).

We calculate “excess” mortality, by calendar-year or (summer to summer) cycle-year or selected ranges of weeks, as the week-by-week ACM above a summer baseline (SB) ACM, which has a monotonic and linear variation on the decadal timescale, 2013-2019, extrapolated into 2021.

Unlike Canada and Western European countries, the USA has a dramatic anomalous increase in both ACM by year and “excess” ACM by year in 2020 and 2021, which started immediately following the World Health Organization (WHO) 11 March 2020 declaration of a pandemic. Nothing of this magnitude occurs in other nations. The USA’s yearly mortality in 2020-2021 is equal to (2020) and greater than (2021) the mortality by year occurring in its domestic population just after the Second World War.

Regarding geo-temporal variations in ACM by week (ACM/w) and in excess (above‑SB) ACM by week (ACM-SB/w), we find that there are two distinct periods: the “COVID‑era” (March 2020 to present), and the “pre-COVID-era” (prior to March 2020). Normal epidemiological variations occur in the pre-COVID-era, as has been observed for more than a century, in all mid-latitude Northern hemisphere jurisdictions having reliable data; whereas there is unprecedented state-wise jurisdictional and regional geographical heterogeneity in ACM by time in the COVID-era, which is contrary to theoretical pandemic behaviour caused by a new virus for which there is no prior natural immunity in the population.

COVID-era time-integrated seasonal and yearly features of ACM-SB/w significantly correlate with poverty (PV), obesity (OB), and climatic temperature (Tav), by state; and differ by age group. The correlations account for the state-to-state heterogeneity, with notable outliers in one feature (March-June 2020) of the ACM-SB/w; and such correlations do not occur in pre-COVID-era cycle-year excess mortality. The co-associations of excess deaths with PV, OB and Tav occur only in the COVID-era. We show that normal (pre-COVID) excess (winter season) deaths — largely attributed to viral respiratory diseases occurring in the elderly — occur irrespective of PV, OB and climate, and that there is solely a correlation to age structure of the population in the state.

An example of a co-correlation is the relation between the summer-2020 excess mortality normalized by population (smp1/pop) and the product of OB and PV (OB.PV), state-by-state (see article for details):

A similar large excess of deaths occurred in the summer 2021, which is also strongly co‑correlated with poverty, obesity and regional climate. In addition, we showed that these 2020 and 2021 summer mortalities and massive fall-winter-2020-2021 mortality, unlike with viral respiratory disease deaths, occur in younger people, over broad age categories.

In the correlations that we identified, the 2020 and 2021 summer excess (above-SB) mortalities extend to zero values for sufficiently small values of poverty, obesity or summer temperatures, or their combinations, such as the product of poverty and obesity.

We also found, for example, that the onset of the COVID-era is associated with an increase in deaths of 15-34 year olds to a new plateau in ACM/w (approximately 400 more deaths per week), which does not return to normal over the period studied.

The behaviour of all-cause mortality in the COVID-era is irreconcilable with a pandemic caused by a new virus for which there is no prior natural immunity in the population.

On the contrary, we concluded that the COVID-era deaths are of two types:

  • A large narrow peak (in ACM/w) occurring immediately after the WHO declaration of a pandemic apparently caused by the aggressive novel government and medical responses that were applied in certain specific state jurisdictions, against sick elderly populations (34 states do not significantly exhibit this feature).
  • Summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021, and summer-2021 peaks and excesses (in ACM/w), which co-correlate with poverty, obesity and regional climate, presumably caused by chronic psychological stress induced by the government and medical responses, which massively disrupted lives and society, and affected broad age groups, as young as 15 year olds.

Therefore, a pandemic did not occur; but an unprecedented systemic aggression against large pools of vulnerable and disadvantaged residents of the USA did occur. We interpret that the persistent chronic psychological stress induced by the societal and economic transformation of the COVID-era converted the existing societal (poverty), public-health (obesity) and hot-climate risk factors into deadly agents, largely acting together, with devastating population-level consequences, far beyond the deaths that would have occurred from the pre-COVID-era background of preexisting risk factors.

Scroll down for Introduction 


List of figures

Figure 1. All-cause mortality by calendar-year in the USA from 1900 to 2020

Figure 2a. All-cause mortality by year in the USA for the 1-4, 5-14, 15-24 and 25-34 years age groups, from 1900 to 2016

Figure 2b. All-cause mortality by year in the USA for the 35-44 and 45-54 years age groups, from 1900 to 2016

Figure 2c. All-cause mortality by year in the USA for the 55-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85+ years age groups, from 1900 to 2016

Figure 3a. Population of the USA from 1900 to 2020

Figure 3b. Population of the USA by age group from 1900 to 2016

Figure 4a. All-cause mortality by year normalized by population for the USA from 1900 to 2020

Figure 4b. All-cause mortality by year normalized by population for the USA for the 15-24 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 1900 to 1997

Figure 4c. All-cause mortality by year normalized by population for the USA for the 25-34 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 1900 to 1997

Figure 5. All-cause mortality by week in the USA from 2013 to 2021

Figure 6. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality for the USA from 2013 to 2021

Figure 7. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality for the USA from 2018 to 2021

Figure 8. Map of COVID-era features pattern in the USA

Figure 9a. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9b(i). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9b(ii). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania from 2019 to 2021

Figure 9c. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Dakota from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9d. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9e. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Oregon and Washington from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9f. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California and Georgia from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9g. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9h(i). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Louisiana and Michigan from 2013 to 2021

Figure 9h(ii). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Louisiana and Michigan from 2019 to 2021

Figure 10a. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and South Dakota from 2013 to 2021

Figure 10b. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and South Dakota from 2013 to 2019

Figure 10c. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and South Dakota from 2019 to 2021

Figure 11a. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York from 2013 to 2021

Figure 11b. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York from 2013 to 2019

Figure 11c. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York from 2019 to 2021

Figure 12a. Winter burden normalized by population in the USA for cycle-years 2014 to 2021

Figure 12b. Winter burden normalized by population for each of the continental states of the USA for cycle-years 2014 to 2021

Figure 12c. Winter burden normalized by population in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas for cycle-years 2014 to 2021

Figure 12d. Winter burden normalized by population in Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York for cycle-years 2014 to 2021

Figure 13. Frequency distributions of state-to-state values of WB/pop for each cycle-year, 2014-2021

Figure 14. Statistical parameters of the WB/pop distributions of the 49 continental states of the USA for cycle-years 2014 to 2021

Figure 15. Map of the intensity of the cvp1 mortality normalized by population for the continental USA

Figure 16. Map of the intensity of the smp1 mortality normalized by population for the continental USA

Figure 17a. smp1/pop versus cvp1/pop

Figure 17b. cvp2/pop versus cvp1/pop

Figure 17c. cvp2/pop versus smp1/pop

Figure 17d. smp2/pop versus smp1/pop

Figure 18. cvp2/pop versus smp1/pop, with the radius size determined by cvp1/pop

Figure 19a. cvp1/pop versus obesity

Figure 19b. smp1/pop versus obesity

Figure 19c. cvp2/pop versus obesity

Figure 19d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2019 versus obesity

Figure 19e. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2020 versus obesity

Figure 19f. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2021 versus obesity

Figure 20a. cvp1/pop versus poverty

Figure 20b. smp1/pop versus poverty

Figure 20c. cvp2/pop versus poverty

Figure 20d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2019 versus poverty

Figure 20e. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2020 versus poverty

Figure 20f. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2021 versus poverty

Figure 21. Mean daily average temperature: Mean of daily minimum and maximum, averaged over the year, and for three decades (1970-2000)

Figure 22. Average temperature, per state of the continental USA, for August 2020

Figure 23. smp1/pop versus average daily maximum temperature over July and August 2020, Tmax Jul-Aug 2020

Figure 24. Obesity versus poverty

Figure 25. smp1/pop versus the product of obesity and poverty, with the radius size determined by Tmax Jul-Aug 2020

Figure 26. Tav 2020 versus the product of obesity and poverty, with the radius size determined by smp1/pop

Figure 27a. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2014

Figure 27b. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2015

Figure 27c. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2016

Figure 27d. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2017

Figure 27e. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2018

Figure 27f. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2019

Figure 28a. cvp1/pop versus 85+/pop

Figure 28b. smp1/pop versus 85+/pop

Figure 28c. cvp2/pop versus 85+/pop

Figure 28d. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2020

Figure 28e. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2021

Figure 29a. WB/pop for cycle-year 2014 versus population density

Figure 29b. WB/pop for cycle-year 2015 versus population density

Figure 29c. WB/pop for cycle-year 2016 versus population density

Figure 29d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2017 versus population density

Figure 29e. WB/pop for cycle-year 2018 versus population density

Figure 29f. WB/pop for cycle-year 2019 versus population density

Figure 30a. cvp1/pop versus population density

Figure 30b. smp1/pop versus population density

Figure 30c. cvp2/pop versus population density

Figure 30d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2020 versus population density

Figure 30e. WB/pop for cycle-year 2021 versus population density

Figure 31. All-cause mortality by week, fully vaccinated individuals by day and COVID vaccine doses administered by day, in the USA, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 32a. All-cause mortality by week in the USA for the 18-64 and 65+ years age groups, from 2014 to 2021

Figure 32b. Difference in all-cause mortality by week in the USA between the 65+ years and the rescaled 18-64 years age groups, from 2014 to 2021

Figure 33a. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 14 years and less age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33b. All-cause mortality by week for the USA for the 15-34 years age group, both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33c. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for females of the 15-34 years age group, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33d. All-cause mortality by week for the USA for the 35-54 years age group, both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33e. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for females of the 35-54 years age group, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33f. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 55-64 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33g. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 65-74 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33h. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 75-84 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figure 33i. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the age group 85 years and older, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021

Figures 34a. All-cause, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia and PIC mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021

Figure 34b. All-cause, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia and PIC mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021

Figure 34c. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia and PIC mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021

Figure 34d. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia and PIC mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021

Figure 34e. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia‑pSB and PIC-pSB mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021

Figure 34f. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia‑pSB and PIC-pSB mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021

Figure 34g. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia‑pSB and ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021

Figure 34h. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza, pneumonia‑pSB and ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021

Figure 34i. All-cause above-SB, COVID-19, influenza and pneumonia‑pSB mortality by week, and the ratio of COVID-19 deaths with pneumonia to all COVID-19 deaths by week, for the USA in the COVID-era (March-2020 into 2021)

Figure 35. All-cause mortality by week in Canada from 2010 to 2021

Figure 36a. All-cause mortality by cycle-year for Canada, cycle-years 2011 to 2021

Figure 36b. Winter burden for Canada for cycle-years 2011 to 2021

Figure 37. All-cause mortality by calendar-year, calendar-years 2010 to 2020, shown with all-cause mortality by cycle-year, cycle-years 2011 to 2021, for Canada

Figure 38a. Map of life expectancy at birth for USA states, from census tracts 2010-2015

Figure 38b. Antibiotic prescriptions per 1,000 persons by state (sextiles) for all ages, United States, 2019

Figure 39. Estimated number of outpatients with dispensed antibiotic prescriptions, USA, 2019-2020

 

Table of abbreviations and definitions

1 Also called “all-cause above-SB” or “excess” deaths in the text

2 Also called “March-June 2020 peak” or “covid peak” or “spring-2020 peak” or “spring-2020 excess mortality” in the text

3 Also called “fall-winter-2020-2021 excess mortality” in the text

4 Also called “summer-2020 excess mortality” in the text

5 Also called “summer-2021 excess mortality” in the text

6 If a year is placed in front, it means it’s the WB of this cycle-year

7 If a year is placed in front, it means it’s the WB/pop of this cycle-year

N/A stands for not applicable


1. Introduction

A small but growing number of researchers are recognizing that it is essential to examine all-cause mortality (ACM), and excess deaths from all causes compared with projections from historic trends, to make sense of the events surrounding COVID-19 (Jacobson and Jokela, 2021) (Kontopantelis et al., 2021) (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021) (Woolf et al., 2021).

In our prior analyses of ACM by time (by day, week, month, year) for many countries (and by province, state, region or county), we showed that the data in the COVID-era (March 2020 to present) is inconsistent with a viral respiratory disease pandemic, in that the mortality is highly heterogeneous between jurisdictions, with no anomalies in most places, and hot spots or hot regions with deaths that are synchronous with aggressive local or regional responses, both medical and governmental (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

The surges in all-cause deaths are highly localized geographically (by jurisdiction) and in time, which is contrary to pandemic behaviour; but is consistent with the surges being caused by the known government and medical responses (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

In particular, Canada shows no evidence of a pandemic, since ACM by year (ACM/y) in the COVID-era is squarely on the linear trend of the previous decade. In addition, the ACM by week (ACM/w) data for Canada shows large province-level heterogeneity of temporal and seasonal changes in ACM, by sex and by age group, that must be ascribed to the impacts of medical and governmental measures (Rancourt et al., 2021).

We have also extensively studied ACM by time (day, month, year) for France, at many jurisdictional levels (regions, departments, communes), in comparison to high-resolution data for institutional occupancies and drug use (Rancourt et al., 2020) (and unpublished), and examined data for European countries, to various degrees of detail.

We reported on the USA in our prior articles about ACM, concentrating on the spectacular hot-spot anomalies that occurred in March through May 2020 (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020). Here, we extend our analysis for the USA, up to presently available data, and include socio-geo-economic and climatic data.

The ACM data for the USA in the COVID-era has shocking features, unlike anything else in the world. The USA is unique in this regard. Above-decadal-trend deaths in the COVID-era are massive. Nothing like this occurs in neighbouring Canada. Nothing like this occurs in Western European countries. Similar surges occur in Eastern European countries, but are not of the same large magnitudes as in the USA.

Our goal was to describe the most that can be rigorously inferred from ACM by time, jurisdiction, age group, and sex, in order to elucidate the nature of the massive excess mortality that occurred in the USA in the COVID-era, and delimit its likely causes, with an eye to known mechanisms of disease vulnerability (psychoneuroimmunology, and stress-immune-survival relationships for humans). Therefore, we examined socio-geo-economic data, including:

  • Age structure of the population
  • Population density
  • Racial considerations
  • Obesity
  • Poverty (also median household income)
  • Climatic temperatures
  • Vaccination status (COVID-19 and flu vaccines)
  • Antibiotic prescription rates

2. Data and methods

Table 1 describes data used in this work and the sources of the data.

Table 1. Data retrieved. USA means continental USA, composed of 49 states, including the District of Columbia and excluding Alaska and Hawaii, unless otherwise stated in the text.

*At the date of access, data were available from week-40 of 2013 to week-40 of 2021. Usable data are until week-37 of 2021, due to insufficient data in later weeks, which gives a large artifact (anomalous drop in mortality, see Appendix). For the work on USA at the state level, we could add the missing weeks of 2013 (week-1 of 2013 to week-39 of 2020) thanks to a previously downloaded file (downloaded on June 24, 2020) from the same website (CDC, 2021a), which was including those weeks back then.

**At the date of access, data were available from week-1 of 2020 (week ending on January 4, 2020) to week-40 of 2021 (week ending on October 9, 2021). Usable data are until week-37 of 2021 (week ending on September 18, 2021), due to insufficient data in later weeks, which gives a large artifact (anomalous drop in mortality).

***At the date of access, data were available until August 2021.

  • These data are a combination of the data found in CDC 2021a, CDC 2021c and CDC 2021d.
  • § These data are a combination of the data found in CDC 2021c, CDC 2021d and US Census Bureau 2021b.

#In our work, we use the population data of the year 2020 (census estimate).

##In our work, we use the population density data of the year 2020.

+At the date of access, data were available from December 14, 2020 (week-51 of 2020) to September 27, 2021 (week-39 of 2021).

++At the date of access, data were available from week-1 of 2010 (week ending on January 9, 2010) to week-30 of 2021 (week ending on July 31, 2021). Usable data are until week-20 of 2021 (week ending on May 22, 2021) due to not consolidated data in later weeks, which gives a large artifact (anomalous drop in mortality).

13 age groups: <18, 18-64, 65+

211 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-14, 15-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+

312 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-14, 15-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+, unknown

414 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85+, not stated

519 age groups: <1, 1-4, 5-9, 10-14, 15-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, 45-49, 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, 80-84, 85+

686 age groups: by 1 year age group, from 0 to 85+

7Temperatures are not available for the District of Columbia.

StatCan (2021) defines a death as “the permanent disappearance of all evidence of life at any time after a live birth has taken place” and excludes stillbirths. StatCan specifies that the ACM for 2020 and 2021 is provisional and subject to change, and that the counts of deaths “have been rounded to a neighbouring multiple of 5 to meet the confidentiality requirements of the Statistics Act”.

According to CDC (CDC, 2021a):

  • “[…] pneumonia, influenza and/or COVID-19 (PIC) deaths are identified based on ICD-10 multiple cause of death codes.”
  • “NCHS Mortality Surveillance System data are presented by the week the death occurred at the national, state, and HHS Region levels, based on the state of residence of the decedent.”
  • “Not all deaths are reported within a week of death therefore data for earlier weeks are continually revised and the proportion of deaths due to P&I or PIC may increase or decrease as new and updated death certificate data are received by NCHS.”
  • “The COVID-19 death counts reported by NCHS and presented here are provisional and will not match counts in other sources, such as media reports or numbers from county health departments. COVID-19 deaths may be classified or defined differently in various reporting and surveillance systems. Death counts reported by NCHS include deaths that have COVID-19 listed as a cause of death and may include laboratory confirmed COVID-19 deaths and clinically confirmed COVID-19 deaths. Provisional death counts reported by NCHS track approximately 1-2 weeks behind other published data sources on the number of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. These reasons may partly account for differences between NCHS reported death counts and death counts reported in other sources.”
  • “In previous seasons, the NCHS surveillance data were used to calculate the percent of all deaths occurring each week that had pneumonia and/or influenza (P&I) listed as a cause of death. Because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 coded deaths were added to P&I to create the PIC (pneumonia, influenza, and/or COVID-19) classification. PIC includes all deaths with pneumonia, influenza, and/or COVID-19 listed on the death certificate. Because many influenza deaths and many COVID-19 deaths have pneumonia included on the death certificate, P&I no longer measures the impact of influenza in the same way that it has in the past. This is because the proportion of pneumonia deaths associated with influenza is now influenced by COVID-19-related pneumonia. The PIC percentage and the number of influenza and number of COVID-19 deaths will be presented in order to help better understand the impact of these viruses on mortality and the relative contribution of each virus to PIC mortality.”

For all the scatter plots presented in this article, the following colour-code is applied for the 49 continental states of the USA (including District of Columbia, excluding Alaska and Hawaii).

The main points of our methodology are as follows.

We work with all-cause mortality (ACM), deaths from all causes, in order to avoid the uncertainty and bias in attributing a cause of death, in this context of COVID-19 in which cause of death is not simple nor obvious. ACM data is available by jurisdiction (state, country, county), by age group, by race, by sex, and by time (day, week, year). We can normalize group-specific ACM totals by the respective populations of the relevant groups, in order to allow comparisons between jurisdictions or different groups, on a per-population basis.

Generally, in jurisdictions that exhibit seasonal winter maximums of mortality, the bottom-values of mortality in the summer troughs follow a straight-line trend on a decadal or shorter timescale. We call this trend-line the “summer baseline” (SB), and we use it to count above-SB deaths, when we wish to thus quantify “excess deaths”.

In other words, we are following our previous methodology in which we argued that mortality by time (day, week, month) is best analyzed using a SB, and winter burden (WB) deaths above the SB, over a (natural) cycle-year from summer to following summer, rather than use assumed underlying sinusoidal seasonal variations of any presumed component(s), since such sinusoidal theoretical curves fail to represent the data or any of its inferred principle components (e.g., Simonsen et al., 1997). Although the summer trough mortality values follow a linear local trend by time (in normal, pre-COVID-era, circumstances), above-SB features have significant randomness in their season to season variations, suggesting that summer baseline mortality is representative of “stable” mortality not influenced by the many different and seasonally variable winter-time life-threatening health challenges (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

SB estimation at the state level

The linear summer baseline (SB) is a least-squares fit to the summer troughs for summer-2013 through summer-2019, using the summer trough weeks 27 to 36, included, for all the states of the continental USA, except for Alabama and Wisconsin for summer-2014 and summer-2015, respectively, and corrected by 1 % (see below). For Alabama, only the weeks [30-32] were used for summer-2014 as drops in data are seen for weeks [27-29] and weeks [33-36] of 2014 (see Appendix). For Wisconsin, only the weeks [27-29] and [33-36] were used for summer-2015 as a drop in data is seen for weeks [30-32] of 2015 (see Appendix). We corrected the SB by 1 % so as to lower the SB and make it match the bottoms of the summer troughs. We also estimated the SB taking different summer periods, from the shortest to the largest: weeks [30-32], weeks [29-33], weeks [28-35] and weeks [27-36], to determine our 1 % correction. We found that the larger the period, the better the estimate of the SB slope, but also the higher the estimate of the SB intercept, as the last weeks towards the previous winter season and the first weeks towards the next winter season are included. We thus decided to estimate the SB with the largest summer period (weeks [26-37]) and lower the intercept by 1 % (no correction leading to a too high intercept and a correction factor of 2 % leading to a too low intercept). The SB is so estimated between the weeks 26 and 37 (inclusively) of each summer of the pre-COVID-era (summers 2013 to 2019), which corresponds to the weeks laying from the beginning of July to the beginning of September.

SB estimation at the national level

  • For work involving the states, the SB estimate of the USA is a sum of the SB estimates of each individual state.
  • For work not involving the states, the SB is a least-squares fit to the summer troughs for summer-2014 through summer-2019, using the summer trough weeks 27 to 36, included, for the whole USA (including Alaska and Hawaii) with no correction, since none was needed.

In the same way that we thus quantify a winter burden of deaths in a given cycle-year, we can also quantify an excess (above-SB) of deaths over any period of time, such as over a period that captures any prominent features in ACM by time. We defined such periods of interest occurring in the COVID-era: a spring-2020 peak (cvp1), summer‑2020 (smp1), the fall-winter-2020-2021 maximum (cvp2), and summer-2021 (smp2), as specified in the text.

 

3. Results, analysis and discussion

3.1. All-cause mortality per year, USA, 1900-2020

We start by examining ACM/y (per calendar-year) in the USA, for the years 1900 through 2020. This is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. All-cause mortality by calendar-year in the USA from 1900 to 2020. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

The ACM/y 1900-2020 has the following main features. First, it has a generally increasing trend over the entire period, with a slope of approximately 16K deaths per year per year (16K/y/y) in the region 1920-2010. The overall increasing trend is due to population growth. One needs to normalize by population to remove this dominant effect (see below). Second, there is a large increase in 1918, which corresponds to the so-called “1918 Flu Pandemic”. Third, there is a large increase in 2020, which corresponds to the first year of the COVID-era. Fourth, there are notable increases in the late-1920s and mid-1930s, which correspond to the hardships associated with The Great Depression and the accompanying decade-long Dust Bowl droughts of the Midwest. Fifth (by omission), there are no detected increases that would correspond to any of the major 20th-21st century influenza pandemics that are described to have occurred in 1957-58, 1968, and 2009 (Doshi, 2008) (Doshi, 2011).

These main features in ACM/y are clarified and enhanced on examining ACM/y by age group (available for 1900-2016). This is shown for all the ages, excluding <1 year, divided into 10 age groups in Figure 2.

Figure 2a. All-cause mortality by year in the USA for the 1-4, 5-14, 15-24 and 25-34 years age groups, from 1900 to 2016. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

Figure 2b. All-cause mortality by year in the USA for the 35-44 and 45-54 years age groups, from 1900 to 2016.Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

Figure 2c. All-cause mortality by year in the USA for the 55-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85+ years age groups, from 1900 to 2016. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

The ACM/y 1900-2016 by age-group data allows the following observations to be made.

Regarding 1918, the event was devastating for the age groups 15-24 years and 25-34 years, much less so for the age groups 35-44 years and 45-54 years, and virtually undetected for those 55 years and older, which would be very surprising for influenza. In fact, we know that most of the deaths were associated with massive bacterial lung infections (Morens et al., 2008) (Chien et al., 2009) (Sheng et al., 2011), in an era predating antibiotics, in a period massively perturbed by a world war, and that the event was concomitant with typhoid epidemics in Europe and Russia.

Regarding The Great Depression and the Dust Bowl devastation, the late-1920s and mid-1930s increases in ACM/y are prominent for the 15-24, 25-34, 35-44 and 45-54 years age groups, but are not detected for 55 year olds and older.

Regarding 20th-21st century purported influenza pandemics, there is no trace of increased mortality for 1957-58, 1968, and 2009, in any age group, including the older age groups of 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, and 85+ years. Clearly, these 20th century declared pandemics had negligible impacts on all-cause mortality; not comparable to the large impacts of the events of 1918, late-1920s-mid-1930s, <1945, and 2020, which are associated with major socio-economic upheavals (the First World War, The Great Depression and Dust Bowl, the Second World War, and the medical and government response to the declared COVID-19 pandemic, respectively).

The ACM/y by age group has long-period (decadal) variations with notable broad minima occurring at approximately:

~1975-1980: 35-44 years age group

~1985-1990: 45-54 years age group

~1995-2000: 55-64 years age group

~2005-2010: 65-74 years age group

~2010-2015: 75-84 years age group

These variations are due to the post Second World War baby boom effects on population.

The population of the USA varied from 1900 to 2020 as shown in Figure 3 (and from 1900 to 2016 for the age groups).

Figure 3a. Population of the USA from 1900 to 2020. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

Figure 3b. Population of the USA by age group from 1900 to 2016. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

Here (Figure 3a), we see a large dip in population at 1943-1945, related to the Second World War. The slope to population versus time also changes dramatically at 1943-1945, increasing after the war, in accordance with the known baby boom. The population by age group (Figure 3b) confirms that the dip at 1943-1945 is solely from the 15-24 and 25-34 years age groups, especially 15-24 years. This figure (Figure 3b) also shows the dramatic consequences of the baby boom, showing itself, age group after age group, as the baby boomers age. The monotonic increase in the 85+ years population (Figure 3b) is directly the cause of the monotonic increase in 85+ years deaths (Figure 2c).

Next, we normalize ACM/y (Figure 1) by population (Figure 3a), 1900-2020, to obtain ACM/y/pop shown in Figure 4a.

Figure 4a. All-cause mortality by year normalized by population for the USA from 1900 to 2020. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

This allows us to see ACM/y expressed as a fraction of population. We again see the gigantic catastrophe that was the 1918 event (pneumonia/typhoid, wartime upheaval), peaks in the late-1920s and mid-1930s (Great Depression, Dust Bowl), a peak in the Second World War period (young men, 15-24 and 25-34 years age groups, as per Figure 3b), relatively uneventful mortality after 1945 (no public health catastrophes detected), no sign of the announced pandemics of 1957-58, 1968, and 2009, and the COVID-era increase of 2020 (a subject of this article).

The mortality events of the late 1920s, mid-1930s and <1945, and the >1945 uneventful period, are elucidated further by examining ACM/y/pop resolved by age group and by sex, as per the following.

Figure 4b. All-cause mortality by year normalized by population for the USA for the 15-24 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 1900 to 1997. The population of the specific age group and sex is used for each normalization. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

Figure 4c. All-cause mortality by year normalized by population for the USA for the 25-34 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 1900 to 1997. The population of the specific age group and sex is used for each normalization. Data are displayed per calendar-year. Data were retrieved as described in Table 1.

Figures 4b and 4c show that both young men and women were impacted by the hardships of the late-1920s and mid-1930s, but that only young men were impacted to death by the Second World War. Interestingly, 15-24 year old men had relatively high mortality between the mid-1960s and the early-1980s.

The 2020 value of ACM/y/pop brings us back to a mortality equal to the mortality by population that prevailed in 1945 (Figure 4a), which suggests that the socio-economic upheavals from COVID-19 response are comparable to the upheavals from the last major war period, with an albeit much older population presently, and possibly greater class disparity, since The New Deal had already been implemented in 1945, in response to the hardships of the 1930s.

3.2. ACM by week (ACM/w), USA, 2013-2021

The ACM/w for the USA from 2013 to 2021 is shown in Figure 5, with a straight-line trend for the bottoms of the summer troughs for 2013 through 2019 (of the pre-COVID-era). We call this trend-line the “summer baseline” (SB), and we use it to count above-SB deaths (“excess” deaths).

We are following our previous methodology in which we argued that mortality by time (day, week, month) is best analyzed using a SB, and winter burden deaths (WB) above the SB, over a (natural) cycle-year from summer to following summer, rather than use assumed underlying sinusoidal seasonal variations of any presumed component(s), since such sinusoidal theoretical curves fail to represent the data or any of its inferred principle components (e.g., Simonsen et al., 1997). It is a general feature with seasonal mortality data that SB trends are typically linear on the timescale of one decade or so, whereas above-SB features have significant randomness in their season to season variations, suggesting that summer baseline mortality is representative of “stable” mortality not influenced by the many different and seasonally variable winter-time life-threatening health challenges (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

Figure 5. All-cause mortality by week in the USA from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The linear summer baseline (SB) is a least-squares fit to the summer troughs for summer-2013 through summer-2019, using the summer trough weeks 27 to 36, included, except for Alabama and Wisconsin for summer-2014 and summer-2015, respectively, and corrected by 1 % (see section 2). Data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a), as described in Table 1.

Next, for the sake of visualization, we can remove the SB from the ACM, week by week, to obtain ACM-SB/w. This is shown for the USA from 2013 to 2021, in Figure 6, where we have used different colours for the different cycle-years.

Figure 6. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality for the USA from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The different colours are for the different cycle-years. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). ACM data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Many striking features occur in ACM/w (or ACM-SB/w) in the COVID-era period for the USA (Figures 5 and 6):

  • The WB (total above-SB deaths per cycle-year) is much greater in cycle-years 2020 (summer-2019 to summer-2020) and 2021 (summer-2020 to summer-2021) than in cycle years 2014 through 2019, which is consistent with ACM/y already discussed above (Figures 1 and 4).
  • The 2020 cycle-year exhibits a sharp and intense feature spanning weeks 11 through 25 of 2020, starting when the pandemic was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 11 March 2020, lasting three months, and which we have called “the COVID peak” and amply described in our previous articles (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021). In this article, we refer to this feature and its integrated intensity as “cvp1”.
  • There is “no summer”, in terms of lower mortality, in the summer-2020. The ACM/w does not descend down to the SB. In fact, the summer of 2020 exhibits a broad mid-summer peak in ACM/w, spanning weeks 26 through 39 of 2020 (approximately mid-June to mid-September), which is unprecedented in any ACM by time data that we have examined, for data since 1900 for dozens of countries and hundreds of jurisdictions. In this article, we refer to this feature and its integrated intensity as “smp1”.
  • The 2021 cycle-year exhibits a massive peak, spanning from week-40 of 2020 through to week-11 of 2021 (approximately late-September 2020 to mid-March 2021). The peak extends to 35K deaths per week above SB. It is anticipated that the ACM/y for 2021 will be larger than for 2020, which in turn brought us back to mortality of the magnitude that was occurring just after the Second World War, on a per population basis (Figure 4a). In this article, we refer to this winter 2020-2021 feature and its integrated intensity as “cvp2”.
  • Finally, there is a summer-2021 upsurge of mortality (ACM/w) in the last weeks of the usable data set, starting in mid-July 2021. This upsurge in ACM/w is particularly large for Florida, for example. We refer to this feature as “smp2”, which is interrupted by the end of the data set (week-37 of 2021 for consolidated data, as described in section 2).

To be clear, the three uninterrupted prominent features in the USA ACM/w for the COVID-era (cvp1, smp1, and cvp2) are shown, according to their operational definitions in Figure 7. For each feature, its quantification is achieved by summation of ACM-SB/w over the weeks spanned by the feature. The late-summer-2021 feature “smp2” is also indicated.

Figure 7. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality for the USA from 2018 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2018 to week-37 of 2021. The cvp1, smp1, cvp2 and smp2 features discussed in the text are indicated. The light-blue vertical lines represent the weeks 11, 25, 40 of 2020 and 11 of 2021, emphasizing the delimiting weeks of the cvp1, smp1 and cvp2 features. The constant zero line is in black. ACM data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Although these features in USA ACM (cvp1, smp1, cvp2, smp2; highlighted in Figure 7) are unprecedented in recent decades and are shocking in themselves; an equally striking aspect is only seen on examining ACM/w (or ACM-SB/w) by state, for individual states. The later examination shows (below) that the said features in the COVID-era, unlike anything previously observed in epidemiology, are often dramatically different, in both relative and absolute magnitudes, and in shape and position, in going from state to state. The next section is devoted to illustrating this remarkable state-to-state variability in COVID‑era ACM by time.

3.3. ACM by week (ACM/w), USA, 2013-2021, by state

Graphs of ACM/w, from 2013 to 2021, with colour-differentiated cycle-years, for all the individual states of continental USA (excluding Alaska and Hawaii) are shown in Appendix (attached below).

In these graphs (Appendix), note that the pre‑COVID-era seasonal pattern (2013-2019) is essentially identical from state to state (more on this further below), whereas there are large state to state changes in the COVID-era patterns. This concurs with our previous findings that COVID-era behaviour in ACM by time is abnormally heterogeneous on a jurisdictional basis, which is the opposite of past seasonal epidemiological behaviour (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021). Woolf et al. (2021) also report large USA regional differences in all-cause excess mortality by time patterns during the COVID-era.

Some comparative and systematic features in these curves (Appendix) are as follows.

  • L0M / North-Easterly coastal states: Several of the North-Easterly coastal states exhibit a pattern in cvp1‑smp1‑cvp2 (an “L0M” pattern) in which cvp1 is very large, smp1 is essentially zero (ACM/w comes down to the SB values) and cvp2 is of medium magnitude: New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and Maryland and District of Columbia to some degree.
  • LSL / North-Central-Easterly non-coastal states: A group of neighbouring North-Central-Easterly non-coastal states exhibit a pattern in cvp1‑smp1‑cvp2 (an “LSL” pattern) in which cvp1 is large, smp1 is small (near-zero) and cvp2 is large: Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, although Michigan has a unique extra peak in ACM/w.
  • LSLx / Michigan: Michigan has an LSL pattern and belongs to the latter group, however its LSL pattern is followed by a unique late peak occurring in March through May 2021, centered in mid-April. Therefore, we refer to Michigan’s pattern as “LSLx”.
  • 00L / prairie states: Seven of the ten prairie or Great Plains states, states that experienced the Dust Bowl drought of the 1930s, saw no anomalous mortality whatsoever until late into the COVID-era, until the fall of 2021. Here, cvp1 and smp1 are essentially zero or near-zero, and the only large feature is cvp2 (“00L” pattern). Easterly neighbouring states of Iowa, Missouri and Wisconsin also have this 00L pattern: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. The prairie states of New Mexico and Wyoming have a similar pattern, 0SL; whereas Texas has 0LL, and Colorado has LSL.
  • 0SL / Central-Westerly and Central-Easterly states: The cluster of adjacent states of Arkansas, Idaho, Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming, Nevada and Utah, and the prairie state of New Mexico, exhibit a “0SL” pattern. The 00L and 0SL patterns are similar: in 00L we characterize smp1 as “near-zero”, whereas in 0SL we characterize smp1 as “small”.
  • 0SL / North-Westerly coastal states: The North-Westerly coastal states of Oregon and Washington also have the 0SL pattern; and a sharp (one-week) heatwave signal discussed below (section 3.4).
  • SBL / North-Easterly states: Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Virginia exhibit an “SBL” pattern, intermediate between SSL and S0L.
  • SSL / California and Georgia: California and Georgia exhibit similar patterns to each other, in which both cvp1 and smp1 are distinct but small or medium, and cvp2 is very large. We refer to this as an “SSL” pattern. The SSL pattern occurs in populous states but is otherwise similar to the 00L and 0SL patterns, in that relatively small or near-zero excess mortality occurs until late into the COVID‑era, until the fall of 2021 when cvp2 starts and becomes a large feature in ACM/w.
  • 0LL / Southern states: Both Florida and Texas exhibit a “0LL” pattern in cvp1-smp1-cvp2 in which cvp1 is essentially zero, whereas smp1 and cvp2 are both large. Most of the most southerly states exhibit this pattern: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas; whereas Louisiana exhibits a pattern in which all three features are large, an “LLL” pattern. Thus, the Southern states are generally characterized and distinguished by large mortalities in the summer of 2020, which is exceptional for these states, followed by large mortalities in the fall and winter of 2020-2021.
  • LLL / Louisiana: Louisiana is the only state that has all three main features in ACM/w (cvp1, smp1, cvp2) being comparable and large. It is the only Southern state that experienced a large cvp1 mortality at the start of the COVID-era.
  • The remaining states, Vermont and Maine, have borderline patterns to those described above, which could be characterized as 00S and 0SS, respectively.
  • The summer-2021 feature “smp2” occurs in virtually all the states (see Appendix).

This distribution of cvp1-smp1-cvp2 pattern type is shown, colour coded, on a map of the USA, in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Map of COVID-era features pattern in the USA. The different colours represent the different pattern groups discussed in the text: black = L0M, gray = LSL, dark blue = 00L, blue = 0SL, light blue = SSL, purple = SBL, red = 0LL, yellow = LLL, white = 00S and 0SS. The first character of the pattern characterizes the cvp1 feature, the second the smp1 feature and the last the cvp2 feature. L stands for large, M for medium, S for small, B for borderline and 0 for zero / near-zero.

3.4. Late-June 2021 heatwave event in ACM/w for Oregon and Washington

There are sharp peaks (a single week or so) in the ACM/w data for Oregon and Washington, occurring at week-26 of 2021, which is the week of 28 June 2021 (Appendix).

The increased deaths coincide with an extraordinary weather event: The two states and British Columbia (Canada) experienced a short but record-breaking summer heatwave. NASA Earth Observatory (2021) described the heatwave as follows:

Taking peak-to-local-baseline values, we estimate excess deaths from the heatwave to have been 246 and 475 deaths, respectively for Oregon and Washington.

This is a reminder of the deadliness of stress from atmospheric heat, which is relevant to our discussion about the COVID-era anomalies in the USA (below). We previously quantified such a heat-wave mortality event that occurred in France in 2003 (Rancourt et al., 2020).

3.5. ACM-SB/w normalized by population (ACM-SB/w/pop), by state

The different state-wise patterns of mortality in the USA during the COVID-era are best examined using ACM-SB/w normalized by population, ACM-SB/w/pop, and by reference to the cvp1-smp1-cvp2 patterns identified above. Normalization by population allows direct comparisons of the data for states with different populations.

In the following figures, normalization was done as follows:

Normalization of a cycle-year N was done with the population estimated just before the start of the cycle-year. Population estimates are each year on July 1st. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August). At the date of access, population estimates were from 2010 to 2020, so the cycle-year 2022 (last weeks of the data set) was normalized by the last available population estimate, the one for 2020.

When at the state level, the population used for normalization is the population of the specific state.

ACM-SB/w/pop curves are shown by groups of similar behaviours in Figure 9, as:

  • L0M / North-Easterly coastal states: Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York.
  • LSL / North-Central-Easterly non-coastal states: Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan (LSLx), and Pennsylvania.
  • 00L / prairie states: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. (Wisconsin is excluded because of bad data points for 2015, see Appendix.)
  • 0SL / Central-Westerly non-coastal states: Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming.
  • 0SL / North-Westerly coastal states: Oregon and Washington. (With June-2021 heatwave peak.)
  • SSL / California and Georgia: California and Georgia.
  • 0LL / Southern states: Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas (Alabama is excluded because of bad data points for 2014, see Appendix).
  • LLL / Louisiana: Louisiana, shown with Michigan.

Figure 9a. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9b(i). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9b(ii). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Pennsylvania from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9c. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Dakota from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9d. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9e. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Oregon and Washington from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9f. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California and Georgia from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9g. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Arizona, Florida, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9h(i). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Louisiana and Michigan from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 9h(ii). Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Louisiana and Michigan from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figures 8 and 9 show that there are large state-to-state differences in COVID-era mortality by time, and that these differences approximately group into four (4) types, by geographical region, as:

  • L0M : North-East coastal states
  • LSL : North-East non-coastal states
  • 00L / 0SL / SSL / SBL : Central and Western-Eastern states
  • 0LL : Southern states

Louisiana is unique, with an LLL pattern, and large mortality in all three periods (cvp1, smp1, cvp2). Michigan (LSLx) has a unique late peak, occurring in March through May 2021, centered on mid-April 2021. Oregon and Washington have unique June-2021 single-week heatwave peaks.

This description is “coarse grain” and is simplified. For example, California has a distinct cvp1 feature even though it is much smaller than that occurring in the North-East states. Also, what happened in New York City is literally off-the-charts regarding cvp1 (Rancourt, 2020).

A most striking aspect of mortality during the COVID-era is precisely the state-wise heterogeneity in ACM by time, which we have described and illustrated above, and in the Appendix. This is striking because the seasonal cycle of all-cause deaths is usually remarkably uniform from state to state, from country to country, from province to province, from county to county… through all the inferred and declared epidemics and pandemics of viral respiratory diseases. Although the shapes of ACM by time change from season to season, the shapes for a given year are nonetheless synchronous and essentially the same across regions, over a global hemisphere, since good data has been available, since the end of the Second World War in most Western countries (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

Indeed, as an aside, we consider that this empirical fact (geographic homogeneity of synchronous mortality by time curves) represents a hard challenge against the theory that viral respiratory diseases spread person-to-person by proximity or “contact” and that such spread drives epidemics and pandemics, at the population level.

We quantify the said geographical heterogeneity of the COVID-era mortality by time below, but first we illustrate it further with direct comparisons of the ACM-SB/w/pop curves for states in different regions, with different cvp1-smp1-cvp2 patterns.

Figure 10 shows ACM-SB/w/pop for one state from each of the following cvp1‑smp1‑cvp2 patterns: California (SSL), Florida (0LL), Michigan (LSLx), Nevada (0SL), New York (L0M), South Dakoda (00L).

Figure 10a. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and South Dakota from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 10b. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and South Dakota from 2013 to 2019. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-52 of 2019. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 10c. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for California, Florida, Michigan, Nevada, New York and South Dakota from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 11 makes the same kind of comparison for states that have large cvp1 features: Colorado (LSL), Connecticut (L0M), Illinois (LSL), Louisiana (LLL), New Jersey (L0M), New York (L0M).

Figure 11a. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 11b. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York from 2013 to 2019. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-52 of 2019. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 11c. Difference between all-cause mortality and summer baseline mortality by week normalized by population for Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

3.6. ACM-SB by cycle-year (winter burden, WB) by population (WB/pop), USA and state-to-state variations

Next, we analyse ACM-SB/w in terms of integrated intensities over cycle-years. By definition, the said integrated intensity is the “winter burden”, WB, for the given cycle-year. WB is the excess (above-SB) mortality per cycle-year. We normalize WB by population, WB/pop, in order to make state-to-state and state-to-nation comparisons.

Figure 12a shows the WB/pop, for cycle-years 2014 to 2021 (cycle-year 2021 contains and is approximately centered on January 2021, and so on), for the entire continental USA (49 states). We see the seasonal (year to year) variations 2014-2019, followed by the large COVID-era increase 2020-2021, which echoes the large 2020 calendar-year increase shown in Figures 1 and 4.

Figure 12a. Winter burden normalized by population in the USA for cycle-years 2014 to 2021. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated and WB calculated as described in section 2.

Figure 12b shows WB/pop versus cycle-year (2014-2021), for all the continental USA states on the same graph.

Figure 12b. Winter burden normalized by population for each of the continental states of the USA for cycle-years 2014 to 2021. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). The 49 continental states include the District of Columbia and exclude Alaska and Hawaii. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated and WB calculated as described in section 2.

Figure 12c shows WB/pop versus cycle-year (2014-2021) for the “0LL” group of Southern states (having a cvp1-smp1-cvp2 0LL pattern), and for Louisiana, which has the cvp1-smp1-cvp2 “LLL” pattern, on the same graph. We note a larger 2020 WB/pop value for Louisiana, than would be expected for a Southern state, because its large LLL‑pattern cvp1 feature increases its 2020 WB/pop value.

Figure 12c. Winter burden normalized by population in Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Texas for cycle-years 2014 to 2021. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated and WB calculated as described in section 2.

Figure 12d shows WB/pop versus cycle-year (2014-2021) for the “L0M” group of North-East coastal states (having a cvp1-smp1-cvp2 L0M pattern), including Maryland, which has a limit behaviour to be included in this group. Since this group has exceptionally large cvp1 features, we see that generally the WB-2020 is larger than the WB-2021.

Figure 12d. Winter burden normalized by population in Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York for cycle-years 2014 to 2021. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated and WB calculated as described in section 2.

Figure 12b shows that, like the ACM-SB/w/pop curves themselves would suggest (Figures 10 and 11), the state-to-state spread in WB/pop values is much larger in the COVID-era than in the previous decade or so. We can illustrate this pre-COVID/COVID-era difference by plotting the frequency distribution of state-to-state values of WB/pop for each cycle-year. These distributions are shown together in Figure 13.

Figure 13. Frequency distributions of state-to-state values of WB/pop for each cycle-year, 2014-2021, as indicated by the colour scheme. Each distribution is normalized to 49, the number of continental USA states (including District of Columbia, excluding Alaska and Hawaii). A bin-width of 2.5E−4 deaths/pop was used. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated and WB calculated as described in section 2.

Here (Figure 13), it is interesting to note that the six pre-COVID-era cycle-years (2014-2019) fall into two distinct distribution types, with the same widths but positions differing by a set amount, corresponding to “light” (2014, 2016, 2019; less deadly winter) and “heavy” (2015, 2017, 2018; deadlier winter) years that are also recognized in the ACM/w or ACM-SB/w patterns themselves (e.g., Figures 5 and 6).

By comparison, the distribution for cycle-year 2020 has larger WB/pop values and a tail that extends far towards even larger values. The distribution for cycle-year 2021 is exceedingly wide and extends to extremely large values.

Properties of the frequency distributions (Figure 13) can be quantified as follows. For each distribution (for a given cycle-year) we calculate: the average (“av”), the median (“med”), the standard deviation (“sd”), and the difference “av-med”. The latter difference av-med is related to the magnitude of the asymmetry of the distribution, and its sign indicates whether any extended tail extends toward small (negative) or large (positive) WB/pop values. These four parameters (av, med, sd, av-med) are shown versus cycle-year in Figure 14.

Figure 14. Statistical parameters of the WB/pop distributions of the 49 continental states of the USA for cycle-years 2014 to 2021. The 49 continental states include the District of Columbia and exclude Alaska and Hawaii. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated and WB calculated as described in section 2.  

Here (Figure 14), the variations of “av” and “med” are generally those expected, given the behaviour of WB/pop versus cycle-year for the entire continental USA (Figure 12a).

The “sd” (Figure 14) has a remarkably constant pre-COVID-era (prior to 2020) value of approximately 1.6(1.2—1.9 range)E−4 deaths/pop, and then shoots up to 4.3E−4 (2020) and 6.1E−4 (2021) deaths/pop. In other words, the COVID-era is characterized by an anomalously large state-to-state heterogeneity in WB/pop values, an approximately 4-fold increase in absolute magnitude.

In fact, using WB/pop masks the actual state-wise heterogeneity, since the COVID-era features cvp1 and smp1 have a much larger intrinsic (relative) heterogeneity than WB. The said large heterogeneity is evident in the ACM-SB/w/pop data itself (Figures 10 and 11), but let us quantify it, and let us examine “asymmetry” (presence of tails) as well. We use the dimensionless parameters sd/av and (av-med)/av, which are as follows.

Table 2. Breadth and asymmetry of state-wise distributions of integrated deaths for the pre-COVID-era WB/pop, and for features in the COVID-era. Features in the COVID-era include 2020 WB/pop, cvp1/pop, smp1/pop, cvp2/pop and 2021 WB/pop.

The state-wise heterogeneity of cvp1 is massive (sd/av: 0.79 compared to ~0.25) ((av‑med)/av: +0.27 compared to ~+0.01), since cvp1 consists of essentially one extreme region in the North-East coastal states. The state-wise heterogeneity of smp1 is large (sd/av: 0.67 compared to ~0.25) ((av‑med)/av: +0.17 compared to ~+0.01), since smp1 consists of essentially an extreme region in the Southern states.

We have observed such COVID-era jurisdictional heterogeneity in many countries, and country-wise in Europe, and we have argued that it is contrary to pandemic behaviour, and contrary to any (1945-2021) season of viral respiratory disease burden in the Northern hemisphere, and arises mainly from jurisdictional differences in applied medical and government responses to the pronouncement of a pandemic (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

In contrast, cvp2, which is entirely within the 2021 cycle-year and is the cycle-year’s main (winter) feature, has normal pre-COVID-era state-wise homogeneity (sd/av: 0.28 compared to 0.20—0.31) ((av‑med)/av: 0.00 compared to -0.03—+0.04). This suggests that cvp2 is not affected by any widely different state-to-state applied responses, but rather is the result of a broad, sustained, and state-wise homogenous stress on the USA population.

3.7. Geographical distribution and correlations between COVID-era above-SB seasonal deaths: cvp1 (spring-2020), smp1 (summer-2020) and cvp2 (fall-winter-2020-2021)

Recall that Figure 7 shows how we integrate to obtain the total above-SB deaths in each of the operationally defined features cvp1, smp1 and cvp2. Since the peak positions are operationally the same for all states (barring the extra peak for Michigan), we use the same delimiting weeks throughout, those shown in Figure 7. We normalize the state-wise deaths by state-wise population, in order to allow state-to-state comparisons.

Figure 15 shows a map of cvp1/pop for the continental states of the USA.

Figure 15. Map of the intensity of the cvp1 mortality normalized by population for the continental USA. Continental USA includes the District of Columbia and excludes Alaska and Hawaii. The cvp1 feature is the integrated deaths of ACM-SB between week-11 of 2020 and week-25 of 2020, inclusively. The darker the blue, the more intense the cvp1/pop. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Here, we see that a cluster of North-East coastal states were essentially the only intense hot spot; and notable other states, including Louisiana, Illinois and Michigan, to a lesser degree. In fact, some 34 of the USA states do not have a resolved or detectable or significant cvp1 feature. We have described this previously (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020). We have argued that the cvp1 feature (the “covid peak”) is highly jurisdictionally heterogeneous, has a start synchronous with the 11 March 2020 WHO declaration of a pandemic, and is present throughout the mid-latitude Northern hemisphere, because it is caused by the medical and government responses to the declaration of a pandemic, especially in hospitals and care homes (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021). One can say with certainty that there was no detectable or significant “first wave” in most of the USA, a phenomenon which is contrary to the very concept of a pandemic (Rancourt et al., 2021).

Figure 16 shows a map of smp1/pop for the continental states of the USA.

Figure 16. Map of the intensity of the smp1 mortality normalized by population for the continental USA. Continental USA includes the District of Columbia and excludes Alaska and Hawaii. The smp1 feature is the integrated deaths of ACM-SB between week-26 of 2020 and week-39 of 2020, inclusively. The darker the red, the more intense the smp1/pop. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021a) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021a), as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

This is a remarkable map, which shows that the above-SB deaths in the summer of 2020 were concentrated in the Southern states of Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida and South Carolina. These results can be understood in terms of climatic, socio-economic and population health effects, as shown below. The results (Figure 16) are inconsistent with the theoretical concept of a viral respiratory disease pandemic. Furthermore, no previous large anomalous burden of all-cause mortality has ever been concentrated in the Southern states, in one season, in the modern history of epidemiology for the USA.

There is no point showing a map of cvp2/pop for the continental states of the USA, because we showed above that the state-wise distribution of cvp2/pop is essentially homogeneous (Table 2). A map of cvp2/pop does not show any recognizable pattern.

Next, we examine whether there are any correlations or anti-correlations between the outcomes cvp1, smp1 and cvp2; and also smp2. Plots of one versus the other are as follows, in Figure 17.

Figure 17a. smp1/pop versus cvp1/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 17b. cvp2/pop versus cvp1/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 17c. cvp2/pop versus smp1/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 17a shows that near-zero values of smp1/pop occur for the largest values of cvp1/pop, and that most large values of smp1/pop occur for small values of cvp1/pop. Similarly, Figure 17b shows that near-zero values of cvp2/pop occur for the largest values of cvp1/pop, and that most large values of cvp2/pop occur for small values of cvp1/pop.

This shows that the states with extremely large values of cvp1/pop (New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts… mainly the L0M pattern) had small (cvp2) or near-zero (smp1) values of mortality in the seasons that followed (summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021). Possible explanations include: the so-called “dry tinder” effect, in which those likely to die would have already died in the first “wave”, or socio-geo-economic and climatic factors that give large smp1 and cvp2 are absent in those states that have the largest cvp1 peaks. Our analysis shows that the latter explanation is more likely. Indeed, different age groups, social classes (poverty, obesity) and state jurisdictions predominantly contribute to cvp1 versus smp1 and cvp2. A dry tinder effect interpretation for cvp1/smp1-cvp2 is not compatible with the many observed correlations.

A notable exception (outlier) in the smp1-cvp1 relation (Figure 17a) is Louisiana, which has both large cvp1 and large smp1. We have interpreted large values of cvp1 (“covid peak”), occurring heterogeneously and synchronously around the world, as being due to local-jurisdictional aggressive immediate medical and government responses to the 11 March 2020 WHO pronouncement of a pandemic (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021). New York City and New York state directives are the defining examples of such aggression. There is circumstantial evidence that Louisiana has a medico-government culture approaching that of New York: “Louisiana’s largest hospital system will impose fee on employees if their spouse is unvaccinated”, Blaze media, 01 October 2021, https://archive.ph/sDfL2.

Figure 17c shows that there is a correlation between cvp2/pop and smp1/pop. Such a correlation, as opposed to an anti-correlation, is contrary to a “dry tinder” effect occurring between summer-2020 and fall-winter-2020-2021. Rather, it suggests that some or all of the same socio-geo-economic and climatic effects impact the mortality in both seasons.

The summer-2021 feature smp2 behaves similarly to smp1 (summer-2020) in many regards, although it starts later in the summer, and smp2/pop is correlated to smp1/pop, as shown in Figure 17d.

Figure 17d. smp2/pop versus smp1/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. Connecticut, North Carolina and West Virginia are removed from the graph as there are not enough consolidated data points in ACM/w for smp2 for those states (see Appendix). The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 18 shows the same data as in Figure 17c, but with added circle-symbol-size (radius) determined by cvp1/pop.

Figure 18. cvp2/pop versus smp1/pop, with the radius size determined by cvp1/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

We note that the largest values of cvp1/pop (by state) are clustered at small values of both smp1/pop and cvp2/pop, with Louisiana as the main exception, followed by Mississippi.

3.8. Associations of COVID-era mortality outcomes with socio-geo-economic and climatic variables

The data, in which quantitative mortality outcomes (cvp1, smp1, cvp2, WB) are known by state, can be compared with state-wise or state-specific socio-geo-economic and climatic variables, in a search for correlations or relations, since all 49 diverse continental USA states can be used. This is a unique opportunity to identify factors which may cause or contribute to the excess (above-SB) USA mortality during the COVID-era.

We found three variables that appear to be determinative of COVID-era summer‑2020 (smp1) and fall-winter-2020-2021 (cvp2) excess (above-SB) mortality in the USA. These are:

  1. Climatic temperature (summer-period heatwave effect) (smp1)
  2. Poverty (smp1 and cvp2)
  3. Obesity (smp1 and cvp2)

The variables are somewhat correlated to each other, but have a significant degree of independence (one can be obese and rich, etc.). We found that using the product “OB.PV” of obesity (OB) and poverty (PV) gives a stronger correlation than either variable alone (being both obese and poor is deadlier than being either obese or poor).

We found that climatic temperature — evaluated using either maximum temperature (Tmax) or average temperature (Tav), either averaged in July-August-2020 or averaged over a calendar-year — is highly predictive of the geographical location of smp1 mortality (the hottest states were the most deadly in summer-2020, and dramatically so).

None of the variables (OB, PV, Tmax) that correlate with smp1 and cvp2 correlate with cvp1, which shows distinctly different death-causing phenomena in the two periods (cvp1 versus smp1-cvp2) in the COVID-era. We interpret cvp1 as being due to the immediate aggressive medical and government measures, whereas later deaths are apparently due to accumulated social and psychological chronic stress, combined with climatic stress, and affect younger individuals in broader age groups.

The latter age-dependence was shown by examining correlations between mortality outcomes and population age structure, by state. The smp1 feature (above-SB deaths in summer-2020) is uniquely anti-correlated with age of the state-wise population, which is contrary to WB mortality behaviour in all studied pre-COVID-era cycle-years, 2014-2019, and contrary to viral respiratory disease epidemiology.

Throughout this study, we compare our COVID-era results with a similar search for correlations in WB/pop mortality outcome in given cycle-years occurring prior to the COVID-era. Contrary to deaths in the COVID-era, normal epidemiology of the unperturbed society shows no state-to-state correlations of winter burdens with obesity, poverty or climatic temperature, whatsoever, in any of the six specific cycle-years 2014-2019. The only “normal era” correlation we find is with age structure, and it is persistent from year to year. The same is true for many more cycle-years for France, and so on. It seems clear to us that the variables obesity, poverty and climatic temperature become determinative, and have a disproportionate and immediate deadly impact, only in the significantly socio-economically perturbed and stressed population of the COVID-era measures.

Here are the details, as follows.

Obesity

Figure 19 shows the scatter plots for obesity (OB), defined as the prevalence of self-reported obesity among U.S. adults (CDC, 2021e).

Figure 19a. cvp1/pop versus obesity. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is no discernable trend between cvp1/pop and OB.

Figure 19b. smp1/pop versus obesity. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is a positive trend between smp1/pop and OB.

Figure 19c. cvp2/pop versus obesity. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is a positive trend between cvp2/pop and OB.

Figure 19d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2019 versus obesity. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is no correlation whatsoever. This is true for all pre-COVID-era cycle-years, 2014-2019 (data not shown). “Normal-era” winter burden deaths above-SB have no relation to obesity, on a state-wise basis.

Figure 19e. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2020 versus obesity. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Excluding the six states with highest 2020 WB/pop values and OB < 31 % (Connecticut, District of Columbia, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island), there is a positive trend for the remaining states. This is consistent with the fact that 2020 cycle-year includes both cvp1 and approximately half of smp1, and that the excluded states have extremely large cvp1/pop values in mostly wealthy states.

Figure 19f. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2021 versus obesity. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is a positive trend between WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2021 and OB.

Poverty

Figure 20 shows the scatter plots for poverty (PV), defined as the estimated percent of people of all ages in poverty (US Census Bureau, 2021d).

Figure 20a. cvp1/pop versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is no discernable trend between cvp1/pop and PV.

Figure 20b. smp1/pop versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2. 

There is a positive trend between smp1/pop and PV.

Figure 20c. cvp2/pop versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is a positive trend between cvp2/pop and PV.

Figure 20d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2019 versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is no correlation whatsoever. This is true for all pre-COVID-era cycle-years, 2014-2019 (data not shown). “Normal-era” winter burden deaths above-SB have no relation to poverty, on a state-wise basis.

Figure 20e. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2020 versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Excluding the four states with highest 2020 WB/pop values (Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York), there is a positive trend for the remaining states. This is consistent with the fact that 2020 cycle-year includes both cvp1 and approximately half of smp1, and that the excluded states have extremely large cvp1/pop values in mostly wealthy states.

Figure 20f. WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2021 versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is a positive trend between WB/pop for COVID-era cycle-year 2021 and PV. The outlier at 13.6 % poverty is North Carolina, which is an artifact of incomplete data for the final weeks for this state (see Appendix).

Climatic temperature

One of the most striking results of our study is that the summer-2020 excess (above‑SB) mortality is concentrated in Southern states (Figure 16). Excess summer mortality is striking in itself because viral respiratory diseases barely transmit in humid summer climates (aerosol particles are not stable in high absolute humidity: Harper, 1961; Shaman et al., 2010), and summers “always” exhibit seasonal lows of mortality in mid-latitude regions, seasonally inverted in the Southern hemisphere. Yet, here in the USA, there was an actual peaked maximum in ACM/w in the summer-2020 (Figures 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, and Appendix).

The geographical pattern of summer-2020 excess (above-SB) mortality, on a map of the USA (Figure 16), is remarkably well predicted by climatic temperature, shown in Figure 21.

Figure 21. Mean daily average temperature: Mean of daily minimum and maximum, averaged over the year, and for three decades (1970-2000). This represents “climatic mean temperature” for the continental USA (spatial average is achieved using weighted cells, with the available surface air weather stations). Source: Climate Atlas of the United States, developed by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, NC., Version 2.0, CD-ROM, released September 2002. Figure accessed at http://www.virginiaplaces.org/climate/ on 26 September 2021. (Typo: “< 70.0” should be “> 70.0”).

We illustrate this on a state-by-state basis, using the state-wise average August-2020 temperature, shown in Figure 22.

Figure 22. Average temperature, per state of the continental USA, for August 2020. Continental USA excludes Alaska and Hawaii. The darker the red, the higher the average temperature. Climatic temperature data were retrieved from the NOAA (NOAA, 2021), as described in Table 1. (The reader is asked to compare this map with the map shown in Figure 16.)

Essentially the same pattern occurs for July 2020, or for any month, or for yearly averages, or using daily maximum temperatures rather than daily average temperatures. Basically, all the average temperatures (averages of daily averages, or averages of daily maxima; on July or August, or on July and August, or on any calendar-year or cycle-year) chosen to represent climatic temperature are highly correlated to each other. For our purpose, these different averages are interchangeable.

The correlation between climatic temperature and summer-2020 excess (above-SB) mortality (smp1/pop, by state) is illustrated in Figure 23, using the July-August 2020 average daily maximum temperature (averaged by state and over the two-month period).

Figure 23. smp1/pop versus average daily maximum temperature over July and August 2020, Tmax Jul-Aug 2020. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, for which no temperature data were available (NOAA, 2021). The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

There is a clear positive trend. Here (Figure 23), the four main high-smp1/pop-value outliers are Mississippi, South Carolina, Alabama and Louisiana; whereas the three main low-smp1/pop-value outliers are Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey.

Such a trend between an excess (above-SB) mortality and mean temperature, per state, does not exist, whatsoever, in the winter burden mortality (WB/pop) for any of the pre-COVID-era cycle-years, 2014-2019 (data not shown).

Obesity, poverty, and climatic temperature

Next, we examine the above correlations further. Figure 24 shows that obesity (OB) and poverty (PV) are somewhat correlated to each other.

Figure 24. Obesity versus poverty. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved as described in section 2.

Given the above, we decided to try using the product of obesity and poverty (OB.PV) as a variable. Figure 25 shows smp1/pop versus OB.PV, with added circle-symbol-size (radius) determined by the July-August 2020 average daily maximum temperature (averaged by state and over the two-month period).

Figure 25. smp1/pop versus the product of obesity and poverty (OB.PV), with the radius size determined by Tmax Jul-Aug 2020. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, for which no temperature data were available (NOAA, 2021). The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

The correlation is excellent. Climatic temperature (circle size) also appears to be correlated to OB.PV (Figure 25). Figure 26 shows the average of daily average temperatures over the calendar-year 2020 (Tav 2020) versus OB.PV, with added circle-symbol-size (radius) determined by the outcome smp1/pop.

Figure 26. Tav 2020 versus the product of obesity and poverty (OB.PV), with the radius size determined by smp1/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, for which no temperature data were available (NOAA, 2021). The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved as described in section 2.

Figure 26 shows two things.

First, climatic temperature is correlated to the product OB.PV.

Second, a diagram of climatic temperature versus OB.PV provides a strong predictor of whether there will be large summer mortality following an extended period of chronic psychological stress applied to the population.

Age structure of the population

More than 60 % of COVID-assigned deaths in the USA occur in the 85+ years age group (Kostoff et al., 2021; their Figure 1). The same is generally true of all viral respiratory diseases in Western nations.

Figure 27 shows WB/pop versus percent of population consisting of 85+ year olds (“85+/pop”), for each pre-COVID-era cycle-year, 2014-2019. The latter percentage more than doubles across all states, from approximately 1.2 % to approximately 2.6 %. Whereas the illustrated correlation is weak, it is persistently positive, having similar slope magnitudes, across all cycle-years, except for cycle-year 2016 (Figure 27c) where the nominally positive correlation (not shown) is not statistically meaningful.

Figure 27a. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2014. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2. Outliers: Utah (bad data point in 2014), Wyoming (less populous state, poor statistics, underestimation of SB).

Figure 27b. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2015. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2. The outlier Wisconsin is due to bad data points in 2015 for this state (see Appendix).

Figure 27c. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2016. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 27d. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2017. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2. Outlier: Wyoming (less populous state, poor statistics).

Figure 27e. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2018. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2. Outliers: West Virginia (underestimation of SB, overestimation of WB), Montana (reverse).

Figure 27f. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2019. Each point is for one continental USA state. Outlier: District of Columbia (small state, poor statistics).

The same phenomenon (positive correlation of WB/pop with population fraction of the age group, in the pre-COVID-era cycle-years) occurs for all the older age groups: 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, and 85+ ages. The correlation is then negative (anti-correlation) for 35-44 years, and not discernable for younger age groups (data not shown).

This age-dependence of winter burden mortality was expected, and is well known. Young people do not generally die of viral respiratory diseases that are prevalent in the winter.

In the COVID-era, cvp1/pop does not have a statistically meaningful correlation with 85+/pop, as shown in Figure 28a. It might best be described as no correlation whatsoever for states having essentially zero-magnitude cvp1/pop values, and several randomly placed outliers above the group having near-zero values of cvp1/pop. This is consistent with the idea that the cvp1 feature is predominantly due to the jurisdiction-specific response to the declaration of a pandemic.

Surprisingly, however, the summer‑2020 excess (above-SB) mortality (smp1/pop) has an anti-correlation (“neg‑cor”) with 85+/pop, again with significant outliers, as shown in Figure 28b; and the fall-winter-2020-2021 mortality (cvp2/pop) has no discernable correlation with 85+/pop, as shown in Figure 28c. Correspondingly, the WB/pop versus 85+/pop has a positive correlation for cycle-year 2020 (Figure 28d), and a uniquely strong negative (anti‑)correlation for cycle-year 2021 (Figure 28e).

Figure 28a. cvp1/pop versus 85+/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 28b. smp1/pop versus 85+/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 28c. cvp2/pop versus 85+/pop. Each point is for one continental USA state. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 28d. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2020. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 28e. WB/pop versus 85+/pop for cycle-year 2021. Each point is for one continental USA state. The trend line is meant merely to illustrate the correlation discussed in the text. It results from the usual least squares fit, using all the points in the graph. The colour-code of the 49 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

The same types of state-wise correlations for smp1 and cvp2 occur for other age groups also (data not shown). In summary, as follows.

  • smp1/pop: pos-cor with -18/pop, neg-cor with 55-64/pop, neg-cor with 85+/pop
  • cvp2/pop: pos-cor with -18/pop, neg-cor with 45-54/pop, neg-cor with 55-64/pop

Population density

The USA state-wise data offers a unique opportunity to examine the relation between population density (“popD”) (number of inhabitants per unit surface area) and excess (above-SB) mortality, since popD varies by more than two orders of magnitude, from Wyoming to New Jersey.

Figure 29 shows WB/pop versus popD, for each pre-COVID-era cycle-year, 2014-2019. Here (Figure 29), there is no detectable, statistically significant, correlation between winter burden mortality (WB/pop) and popD, in any of the years studied.

Given the synchronous mortality patterns, state-to-state (Figures 10 and 11, for the pre-COVID-era cycle-years), and given present theoretical understanding of contagious disease transmission (Hethcote, 2000) (McCallum et al., 2001), our results (Figure 29) impose constraints on models of the phenomenon of seasonal mortality, and strongly suggest that the seasonal preponderance of viral respiratory diseases is not the result of transmission and spread by person-to-person “contact”.

Figure 29a. WB/pop for cycle-year 2014 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 29b. WB/pop for cycle-year 2015 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 29c. WB/pop for cycle-year 2016 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 29d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2017 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 29e. WB/pop for cycle-year 2018 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 29f. WB/pop for cycle-year 2019 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

This result (Figure 29) is in contrast to correlations observed for the COVID-era, where mortality has strong correlations and anti-correlations with popD. In the COVID-era, cvp1/pop has a large positive correlation with popD, although the New York outlier is significant, as shown in Figure 30a. While, on the other hand, both the summer‑2020 excess (above-SB) mortality (smp1/pop) and the fall-winter-2020-2021 mortality (cvp2/pop) have anti-correlations with popD (Figures 30b and 30c, respectively). Correspondingly, the WB/pop versus popD has a large positive correlation for cycle-year 2020, with New York outlier (Figure 30d), and a strong negative (anti-)correlation for cycle-year 2021 (Figure 30e).

Figure 30a. cvp1/pop versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 30b. smp1/pop versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 30c. cvp2/pop versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 30d. WB/pop for cycle-year 2020 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

Figure 30e. WB/pop for cycle-year 2021 versus population density. Each point is for one continental USA state, excluding District of Columbia, which has an extreme density. The colour-code of the other 48 continental states is shown in section 2. Data were retrieved and calculations made as described in section 2.

We do not believe that a new virus causes the unprecedented correlations of mortality with popD, in the COVID-era. Rather, we interpret the results to mean that high-population-density states, with large urban centers would have had similar institutional structures and policy responses, generally different from those in low-population-density states. Also, the Southern states with large smp1 mortality due to climatic temperature, poverty and obesity are lower population-density states.

One pair of states, New York and Florida, strikingly demonstrates that population density in itself is not a controlling factor. Whereas these two states have essentially identical values of popD, they have diametrically opposed values of cvp1 mortality (Figure 30a), and, in the opposite order, of summer-2020 (smp1) mortality (Figure 30b).

Indeed, the correlations with popD in the COVID-era are an indication that the mortality is not the result of viral respiratory diseases, and rather that the mortality is tied to institutional, governmental, socio-economic and climatological differences.

All-cause mortality by week (ACM/w) by age group

The age dependencies of mortality in the pre-COVID and COVID-eras are shown more directly than only examining state-wise correlations, by examining ACM/w itself for the USA (no state-wise resolution is available) by age group, as follows.

We represent the ACM/w for the USA (Figure 5) by age group, for the two age groups 18-64 and 65+ ages, in Figure 32a. Here (Figure 32a), we have multiplied the ACM/w for the 18-64 years age group by a factor sufficient to make the ACM/w equal to that for the 65+ years age group, in the summer-2014 trough. This is equivalent to multiplying the population of the 18-64 years age group until the deaths per week are equal to the deaths per week in the 65+ years age group, in the summer-2014 trough. This is done to better visualize and compare the relative seasonal changes in mortality between the two age groups.

Figure 32a. All-cause mortality by week in the USA for the 18-64 and 65+ years age groups (light blue and dark blue lines, respectively), from 2014 to 2021. The ACM/w for the 18-64 years age group is rescaled (multiplied), as explained in the text, to make the number of deaths per week of both age groups equal in the summer-2014 trough, for comparison purposes. Data are displayed from week-40 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. Data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a), as described in Table 1.

Figure 32a shows that, in the pre-COVID-era, the elderly group (65+ years) is always approximately 2-3 times more susceptible to the additional challenges and stress of winter than the younger group (18-64 years). This rule is not followed in the COVID-era. In the COVID-era, the relative summer-2020 and summer-2021 mortalities are greater for the younger age group than for the elderly group (Figure 32a), which is reversed compared to known age-dependent vulnerability to dying from viral respiratory diseases.

This reversal in the COVID-era is more explicitly illustrated in Figure 32b, which shows the difference by week of the two curves depicted in Figure 32a.

Figure 32b. Difference in all-cause mortality by week in the USA between the 65+ years and the rescaled 18-64 years age groups, from 2014 to 2021. The ACM/w for the 18-64 years age group was rescaled (multiplied), as explained in the text, to make the number of deaths per week of both age groups equal in the summer-2014 trough, for comparison purposes. Data are displayed from week-40 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. Data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a), as described in Table 1.

Here (Figure 32b), we see that the younger age group (18-64 years) has moderately more (rescaled) deaths in summer-2020, and significantly more (rescaled) deaths in summer-2021. Two possible interpretations come to mind: either the integrated cumulative long-term stress from the government measures takes longer to affect more tolerant younger individuals than older individuals, or the massive vaccination campaign administered between the two summers (Figure 31, below) has had a disproportionate negative impact on the younger age group.

A more detailed examination of the COVID-era is possible thanks to more age-group resolution being publicly available for that time period (CDC, 2021b), at the national level (not state-resolved), as follows. A selection of these data is shown in Figure 33.

Figure 33a. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 14 years and less (“-14 years”) age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.

Figure 33b. All-cause mortality by week for the USA for the 15-34 years age group, both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1. 

Figure 33c. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for females of the 15-34 years age group, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.  

Figure 33d. All-cause mortality by week for the USA for the 35-54 years age group, both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1. The horizontal line at “5 500” is a visual aide of the plateau of mortality discussed in the text.

Figure 33e. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for females of the 35-54 years age group, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.  

Figure 33f. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 55-64 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.  

Figure 33g. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 65-74 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.

Figure 33h. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the 75-84 years age group, for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.   

Figure 33i. All-cause mortality by week normalized by population for the USA for the age group 85 years and older (“85+ years”), for each of both sexes, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The population used for normalization is the population of the specific age group and sex. ACM data were retrieved from the CDC (CDC, 2021b) and population data were retrieved from the US Census Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2021b), as described in Table 1.    

Figure 33 shows the following:

  • (Figure 33a) In the -14 years age group there is no evidence for any summer/winter seasonality, or any COVID-era anomalies. The ACM/w/pop is essentially flat over the time period. Young (-14 years) residents of the USA are essentially not killed by viral respiratory diseases or COVID-19 or any cause of death having a strong seasonal variation in its effect.
  • (Figures 33b and 33c) Figure 33b shows that the onset of the COVID-era (March 2020) is associated with an increase in deaths of 15-34 year olds to a new plateau in ACM/w (approximately 400 more deaths per week), which does not return to normal over the period studied. The rise to a COVID-era plateau of increased mortality occurs for both males and females (Figure 33c).
  • (Figures 33d and 33e) The 35-54 years age group, like the 15-34 years age group, also experiences a high essentially uniform baseline plateau of mortality, which does not return to normal values over the period studied, but the ACM/w for this age group (35-54 years) also shows distinct cvp1, smp1, cvp2 and smp2 features superposed on the said plateau. This age group (35-54 years) has a disproportionately large smp2 feature (summer-2021 mortality), compared to the other features, and using the smp1 and cvp2 features as references, which holds for both males and females (Figure 33e).
  • (Figures 33f, 33g, 33h and 33i) The age groups 55-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85+ years do not exhibit the COVID-era increased baseline plateau mortalities seen in the 15-34 and 35-54 years age groups. Summer mortality for both 2020 (smp1) and 2021 (smp2) monotonically decrease in relative magnitude, compared to the cvp1 and cvp2 features, as age increases in the sequence 55-64, 65-74, 75-84 and 85+ years.

The results regarding dependence of mortality on state-to-state age structure of the population (Figures 27 and 28) show that the summer-2020 excess (above-SB) deaths were not predominantly due to viral respiratory diseases, and impacted younger people. Likewise, we deduce that the excess (above-SB) deaths in fall-winter-2020-2021 must predominantly be due to causes other than viral respiratory diseases, and impacted younger people. The inferred impacts on younger residents are corroborated by the age-group-specific mortalities at the national level (Figures 32 and 33).

Comparing all-cause excess mortality and COVID-assigned mortality

COVID-19-assigned deaths cannot be trusted to be deaths actually caused by COVID‑19 (Borger et al., 2021). Furthermore, it is likely that the COVID-19 assignation of cause of death captures far too many deaths (Elsoukkary et al., 2021). Nonetheless, we can compare the total number of COVID-19-assigned deaths in the USA to excess (above-SB) all-cause mortality.

For the two cycle-years 2020 and 2021 (July 2019 to July 2021), the total WB is 1.071 M deaths, compared to total CDC-reported COVID-assigned deaths up to July 2021 (up to the last week of the 2021 cycle-year, week-30 of 2021, which is the week of 26 July 2021) equal to 613 K deaths (CDC, 2021a, as described in the Table 1). Both numbers include Alaska and Hawaii. This leaves some 458 K above-SB deaths, up to July 2021, which are not accounted for by COVID-19 according to the relevant CDC statistics.

The difference of 458 K deaths, if the COVID-19-assignations could be trusted (they cannot), would be consistent with a large number of deaths (458 K) of younger residents whose deaths are not assigned to COVID-19 (Kostoff et al., 2021; their Figure 1). In addition to our results, above, Jacobson and Jokela (2021) also found that large numbers of individuals, too young to have died from COVID-19, died in the COVID-era.

To examine this difference (458 K deaths) more closely, we compare the all-cause mortality by week to assigned-cause deaths by week for pneumonia (P), influenza (I) and COVID-19 (C), reported by the CDC (2021a), in Figure 34; for 2014-2021 (Figure 34a) and on the expanded scale 2019-2021 (Figure 34b). PIC by week is also shown, which is the deaths assigned by the CDC as “pneumonia, influenza, and/or COVID-19”, which means that the death certificate includes pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19 listed as cause(s) of death.

Figures 34a. All-cause (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia (green) and PIC (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-40 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1.  

Figure 34b. All-cause (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia (green) and PIC (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week‑1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1.

We interpret the similarity in patterns of temporal variation between CDC-reported weekly COVID-19-assigned or PIC deaths and the all-cause mortality (ACM/w) as arising because many or most of the COVID-19-assigned deaths are drawn from our above-SB deaths; that is, are drawn from deaths induced by the government measures, via the combined poverty, obesity and climatic factors, made potent by sustained chronic psychological stress, and from the deaths resulting from the direct assault against the elderly in March-June 2020 (cvp1) (Rancourt, 2020).

Let us examine these relations further. Figure 34c shows the P, I, C and PIC by week CDC data with our ACM-SB/w, 2014-2021, while Figure 34d shows the same data for the period 2019-2021.

Figure 34c. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia (green) and PIC (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-40 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 34d. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia (green) and PIC (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

We note (Figures 34c and 34d) that pneumonia contributes significantly to summer deaths and that its summer-trough values are on a linear trend that is essentially horizontal for the years shown (approximately 2,680 pneumonia deaths per week, baseline). The same is true for PIC. Next, we therefore remove the “pneumonia‑SB” (“pSB”) from the pneumonia data, and from the PIC data, in order to visualize solely deaths above summer-normal mortality.

The result is shown in Figure 34e (2014-2021) and Figure 34f (2019-2021).

Figure 34e. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia‑pSB (green) and PIC-pSB (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-40 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. pSB, the summer-trough pneumonia mortality, is removed from each week of pneumonia, and of PIC deaths. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 34f. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia‑pSB (green) and PIC-pSB (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The dashed line emphasizes the zero.pSB, the summer-trough pneumonia mortality, is removed from each week of pneumonia, and of PIC deaths. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figures 34g and 34h show some of the same data as above but also the difference (residual) “ACM-SB” minus “PIC-pSB”, by week (black curve), for the USA. This difference (ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB) shows deaths that are not assigned to a respiratory disease (viral or any pneumonia) as a contributing cause of death.

Figure 34g. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia‑pSB (green) and ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2014 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-40 of 2013 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. pSB, the summer-trough pneumonia mortality, is removed from each week of pneumonia, and of PIC deaths. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figure 34h. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow), pneumonia‑pSB (green) and ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB (black) mortality by week for the USA from 2019 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2019 to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. pSB, the summer-trough pneumonia mortality, is removed from each week of pneumonia, and of PIC deaths. PIC is the deaths assigned to pneumonia and/or influenza and/or COVID-19. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

Figures 34a through 34h show that, in addition to COVID-19-associated deaths, there was a massive increase in pneumonia-associated deaths in the COVID-era in the USA, which had the same temporal pattern as both ACM and COVID-19-assigned deaths.

Figure 34i shows that COVID-19-assigned deaths were consistently associated with pneumonia as a contributing cause of death, some 40 to 60 % of the cases, throughout the COVID-era. Also, virtually all the above-pSB pneumonia assignations had COVID-19 co-assignations. That is, in number, all the excess pneumonia assignations in the COVID-era had COVID-19 co-assignations.

Figure 34i. All-cause above-SB (ACM-SB) (blue), COVID-19 (red), influenza (yellow) and pneumonia‑pSB (green) mortality by week, and the ratio of COVID-19 deaths with pneumonia to all COVID-19 deaths (black, right Y-scale) by week, for the USA in the COVID-era (March-2020 into 2021). Data are displayed from week-11 of 2020 (week of March 11 2020, date of the WHO pronouncement of the pandemic) to week-37 of 2021 for the whole continental USA, including Alaska and Hawaii. The dashed line emphasizes the zero. pSB, the summer-trough pneumonia mortality, is removed from each week of pneumonia deaths. ACM and cause-assigned deaths data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a) as described in Table 1. SB was estimated as described in section 2.

The difference (ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB) shown in Figures 34g and 34h shows that excess (above-SB) deaths not assigned to a respiratory disease (viral or any pneumonia) as a contributing cause of death are approximately the same in number during the COVID-era as in previous years. Known causes of death for excess (above‑SB, winter burden) deaths include heart disease, Alzheimer disease/dementia, and diabetes (Woolf et al., 2021). However, the difference (ACM-SB minus PIC-pSB) does show anomalies in the COVID-era: a sharp peak in March-May 2020, and a consistently large value in the summer-2020 period. A striking feature is that, unlike summer-2020, the rise in ACM-SB in summer-2021 is entirely assigned as PIC, virtually without any non-respiratory assignation.

The result that there were essentially no excess deaths (in number) assigned to non-respiratory causes in the COVID-era in the USA (Figure 34g) is surprising in that, for England and Wales, Kontopantelis et al. (2021) found, looking at excess deaths above historical trends, that in the first 30 weeks of the declared pandemic there were 62,321 excess deaths: 46,221 (74 %) attributable to respiratory causes, and 16,100 (26 %) to other causes.

Some authors have argued that COVID-19 deaths may be vastly underestimated by failing to correctly assign respiratory deaths to COVID-19 (Stokes et al., 2021) (IHME, 2021). We find this highly implausible for the USA. Acknowledging similar numbers of non-respiratory excess (above-SB) deaths in the COVID-era as in the pre-COVID-era (Figure 34g), leads one to conclude that virtually all other excess (above-SB) deaths (in number) in the COVID-era have been assigned as COVID-19, consistently including pneumonia as a jointly assigned cause of death in approximately 40-60 % of the thus COVID-19-assigned cases (Figure 34i). There is no room for more COVID-19 deaths in the USA accounting of mortality. Indeed, how could COVID-19-assignations be undercounted in the middle of the most mediatized, tested and medical-protocol regulated declared pandemic in memory, in a country that has some of the best medical statistics gathering in the world?

Respiratory causes appear to have been the main agent of death, regarding excess (above-SB) deaths in the USA in the COVID-era; however COVID-19 assignment remains suspect (Borger et al., 2021).

Shockingly, there was a massive epidemic or co-epidemic of pneumonia in the USA in the COVID-era, according to CDC data (CDC, 2021a) (Figure 34), which is never mentioned in the media and essentially not on the radar in the medical research literature. To the extent that there is COVID-19 over-assignation, it may represent up to 100 % of the COVID-era excess deaths from respiratory causes. It would not be the first time that the actual cause of a large epidemic is bacterial infection rather than the presumed viral pathogen (Morens et al., 2008) (Chien et al., 2009) (Sheng et al., 2011). In the words of Ginsburg and Klugman (2020):

Data regarding bacterial superinfections in COVID-19 pneumonia are still emerging, but an association has been made between the detection of bacterial products in blood with disease severity in COVID-19 patients.[ref] Diagnosing coinfections is complex in the best of circumstances and because there is a desire to avoid diagnostic procedures and minimise the exposure of COVID-19 to health-care workers, diagnosing potential bacterial superinfections during COVID-19 has been challenging.

[…] Although many serum biomarkers lack specificity, increased procalcitonin concentrations have been investigated as a specific bacterial differentiation from viral response to bacterial respiratory tract infection.[refs] From accumulating data and reports, there appears to be a clear association between elevated concentrations of procalcitonin and increasing COVID-19 disease severity, despite a variety of cutoffs chosen.[refs]

Most bacterial pneumonias caught early enough can be safely and effectively treated with antibiotics […]

Vaccination

It is important to examine whether the large COVID vaccination campaign has had any influence on mortality and on the phenomena that we describe in this article. Figure 31 shows all-cause mortality by week (ACM/w), the number of total (all manufacturers) administered vaccines (doses/day) and the number of fully vaccinated individuals (vaccinated/day), on the same time axis, in the COVID-era (CDC, 2021a; CDC, 2021f).

An individual is considered fully vaccinated when second dose of a two-dose vaccine or one dose of a single-dose vaccine is completed (CDC, 2021f).

Figure 31. All-cause mortality by week (light blue), fully vaccinated individuals by day (dark blue) and COVID vaccine doses administered by day (orange), in the USA, from 2020 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2020 to week-37 of 2021. For data by day, only one day a week is represented on the graph (Monday). An individual is considered fully vaccinated when second dose of a two-dose vaccine or one dose of a single-dose vaccine is completed. USA means 49 continental states, including the District of Columbia and excluding Alaska and Hawaii. Data were retrieved from CDC (CDC 2021a, CDC 2021f), as described in Table 1.

The total number of doses in the period illustrated is approximately 380 M and the total number of people being fully vaccinated is approximately 178 M. Therefore, the large hump in vaccinations per day constitutes the majority of the planned vaccination campaign (Figure 31).

Here (Figure 31), we note that our interpretations concerning cvp1 and smp1 mortality cannot be impacted whatsoever by vaccination because the vaccination injections and the fully vaccinated status started later, beyond the week of the inflection point on the rise of the cvp2 feature and towards the end of the cvp2 feature, respectively.

Readers who would be tempted to ascribe the downturn in the cvp2 peak to the vaccination campaign should note that the downturn coincides with the expected seasonal downturn of every seasonal winter maximum that has ever been observed by epidemiologists in the last century or more.

More importantly, the largely completed vaccination campaign did not prevent a second surge of summer deaths (2021, “smp2”) (Figure 31). The mortality in the said second surge appears to be comparable to or more than the mortality for summer-2020. Furthermore, the COVID-19-assigned deaths (CDC, 2021a) are significantly greater in number in summer-2021 than in summer-2020 (Figure 34), and, unlike at any other time in the COVID-era, account for virtually all the excess (above-SB) deaths, in the summer-2021 feature (smp2) (Figure 34), following the vaccination campaign.

There is no sign in the ACM/w that the vaccination campaign has had any positive effect. However, given that the vaccination campaign starts well after the 2020 summer and essentially ends mid-summer-2021 prior to the start of the smp2 feature, given that the 2021 excess (above-SB) summer deaths (smp2) occur in significantly younger individuals than the excess summer-2020 deaths, and given that the smp2 feature is significantly larger than the smp1 feature for the said younger individuals (35-54 years, Figures 33d and 33e; and 55-64 years, Figure 33f, to a lesser degree), it is possible that vaccination made 35-54 year olds and others more vulnerable to death, especially summer death in disadvantaged individuals in hot-climate states (Montgomery et al., 2021) (Simone et al., 2021).

 

4. Comparison with Canada, and implications

One of the most striking aspects about mortality in the USA is that total yearly mortality in Canada is completely normal in the COVID-era: it lies precisely on the decadal trend established since 2010. We elaborated this fact about Canada in our recent article (Rancourt et al., 2021). At the time of publication, there was only enough weekly data to complete cycle-year 2020 for Canada. More data is now available, such that we can now obtain cycle-year 2021, by implementing a short (10-week) reliable extrapolation to complete the needed summer-2021 trough section.

The latest Canadian data is shown in Figure 35.

Figure 35. All-cause mortality by week in Canada from 2010 to 2021. The linear summer baseline (SB) is a least-squares fit to the summer troughs for summer-2013 through summer-2019, using the following summer trough weeks: 2013-weeks [24-37], 2014-weeks [28-33], 2015-weeks [27-37], 2016-weeks [24-34], 2017-weeks [25-34], 2018-weeks [28-35], 2019-weeks [26-38]. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2010 (week ending on January 9, 2010) to week-20 of 2021 (week ending on May 22, 2021) for the ACM and to week-30 of 2021 (week ending on July 31, 2021) for the SB. That way, the SB extends to the end of the 2021 cycle-year (week-30 of 2021), thereby showing the segment needing extrapolation discussed in the text. Data were retrieved from StatCan (StatCan, 2021), as described in Table 1.

The said extrapolation is performed as follows. We work with ACM-SB/w, average the values for 2021 weeks 10 through 20, which is a relatively flat region in ACM-SB/w, in the summer 2021 “trough” (week 20 is the last usable week in the data), and this average value is adopted for weeks 21 through 30 in ACM-SB/w (week 30 is the last week of the 2021 cycle-year). We then take this ACM-SB/w (including the thus extrapolated 10‑week segment) and transform back to an ACM/w by adding the SB. The total mortalities per cycle-year are then calculated from sums on this ACM/w data, which now is extended to complete the last (2021) cycle-year. The extrapolation is an accurate representation of the last 10 weeks in the 2021 cycle-year, unless something unexpected and significant occurs in those 10 weeks in mid-summer-2021, beyond the already higher summer-trough values occurring in the COVID-era for Canada (Figure 35).

The resulting ACM per cycle-year versus cycle-year for Canada is shown in Figure 36, with a best-line fit to illustrate the trend.

Figure 36a. All-cause mortality by cycle-year for Canada, cycle-years 2011 to 2021. The dashed line is a least-squares fitted straight line. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). The ACM over the weeks 21 to 30 of 2021 was extrapolated, as described in the text, in order to complete the 2021 cycle-year. Raw data were retrieved from StatCan (StatCan, 2021), as described in Table 1.

Figure 36a is the same as Figure 2 in our prior article (Rancourt et al., 2021), except for the addition of one more cycle-year (2021). This further confirms that “there was no pandemic in Canada” (Rancourt et al., 2021).

We also calculated the WB of deaths for cycle-years 2011 through 2021, which is shown in Figure 36b. A slight increase by year is expected because the population of those most vulnerable to winter-time deaths is increasing. Again, as with ACM itself, nothing in the values of WB deaths indicates any pandemic or any unusual additional cause of yearly mortality in cycle-years 2020 or 2021.

Figure 36b. Winter burden (WB) for Canada for cycle-years 2011 to 2021. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). The ACM-SB over the weeks 21 to 30 of 2021 was extrapolated, as described in the text, in order to complete the WB of the cycle-year 2021. Raw data were retrieved from StatCan (StatCan, 2021), as described in Table 1.

The ACM/w can also be used to calculate ACM by calendar-year, which is shown, compared to ACM by cycle-year, in Figure 37 for Canada.

Figure 37. All-cause mortality by calendar-year (dark blue), calendar-years 2010 to 2020, shown with all-cause mortality by cycle-year (light blue), cycle-years 2011 to 2021, for Canada. Cycle-year N means the period from mid-summer of calendar-year N-1 to mid‑summer of calendar-year N. The ACM over the weeks 21 to 30 of 2021 was extrapolated, as described in the text, in order to complete the 2021 cycle-year. Raw data were retrieved from StatCan (StatCan, 2021), as described in Table 1.

In Figure 37 the ACM by calendar-year for 2020 is higher than the visible trend because of an accident in the positions of ACM/w peaks: there is a large late peak in cycle-year 2020 (the March-June 2020 so-called “covid” peak, or “cvp1”) and a large early rise in the winter peak of cycle-year 2021. In this figure, recall that cycle-year N means the period from mid-summer of calendar-year N-1 to mid‑summer of calendar-year N.

Clearly, there is no sign of a pandemic in Canada, or of a COVID-era anomaly, in terms purely of ACM by cycle-year and WB (Figure 36), which is at odds with the dramatic increase seen for the neighbouring USA: Figure 1, by calendar-year up to 2020; Figure 5, in the ACM/w data itself; Figure 12a, expressed as WB versus cycle-year.

If a new pathogen caused the havoc that we have described for the USA during the COVID-era, then how could such a virulent and contagious pathogen not have crossed the world’s longest international land border (8,890 km) between two major trading partners? Did Canada apply effective mitigation strategies, completely different from those applied in the major states of the USA, which reduced the mortality impact of the new pathogen to zero on the Canadian territory? The answers must be “that would be impossible” and “no”, respectively.

Viral respiratory diseases, in particular, are believed to be very contagious, and more so for presumed pandemic-causing new viruses for which there is no prior immunity in the world populations. Either the presumed new virus was not able to cross the USA-Canada border or Canadians of heterogeneous origins are genetically resilient to the new virus or the massive excess deaths in the USA during the COVID-era are not primarily due to any new respiratory virus. We think the latter must be concluded, and this is consistent with our findings of co-correlations with socio-geo-economic and climatic factors, which project to zero excess deaths for sufficiently small values of the correlated or co-correlated factors (e.g., Figure 25, for summer-2020 deaths).

5. Mechanistic causes for COVID-era deaths

To be clear, we have not shown that USA deaths are correlated to poverty, obesity and hot climatic regions, although that in itself is probably true to a significant degree, as can be inferred from a map of life expectancy at birth by state of the USA, such as the one shown in Figure 38a.

Figure 38a. Map of life expectancy at birth for USA states, from census tracts 2010-2015 (Tejada-Vera et al., 2020). Present interactive map location: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data-visualization/life-expectancy/index.html

This map of life expectancy at birth by state (Figure 38a) is in turn very similar to a map of antibiotic prescriptions by population by state, such as the one shown in Figure 38b.

Figure 38b. Antibiotic prescriptions per 1,000 persons by state (sextiles) for all ages, United States, 2019.“Healthcare providers prescribed 251.1 million antibiotic prescriptions—equivalent to 765 antibiotic prescriptions per 1,000 persons”, in 2019 (CDC, 2021g).

Given the similarity in state-wise distributions of life expectancy at birth (Figure 38a) and antibiotic prescriptions (Figure 38b), it is not unreasonable to conclude that a dominant cause of death limiting life expectancy, in the USA in the pre-COVID-era, is bacterial infection, the most common fatal such infection being bacterial pneumonia.

However, what we have shown is that, in the COVID-era, during summer-2020 (smp1), fall-winter-2020-2021 (cvp2) and summer-2021 (smp2), combined factors including poverty, obesity and hot climate became deadly associations for excess (above-SB) deaths, beyond the deaths that would have occurred from the pre-COVID-era background of preexisting risk factors.

In addition, we have repeatedly concluded that the sharp peak in excess mortality occurring in March-June 2020 in some USA states (“covid” peak) (cvp1) must be a consequence of aggressive government and medical response to the WHO 11 March 2020 declaration of a pandemic, in those hot-spot jurisdictions, such as New York City in particular in the USA, and we have outlined likely mechanisms whereby this aggression would have caused a large surge of deaths in care homes and hospitals everywhere that it occurred (Rancourt, 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2020) (Rancourt et al., 2021).

The question now arises: By what mechanism(s) did the COVID-era government and medical disruptions induce excess deaths, at the population level, in the most vulnerable populations (elderly, and poverty + obesity + hot climate)? Alternatively (Figure 34), by what mechanism(s) did the COVID-era government and medical disruptions make respiratory diseases, including pneumonia, so much more fatal than usual, at the population level, in the most vulnerable populations (elderly, and poverty + obesity + hot climate)? What about the COVID-era so dramatically multiplied the deadliness of poverty + obesity + hot climate, in the USA?

We submit that the overly succinct three-word answer is: “chronic psychological stress”, plus deadly institutional aggression and neglect of the sick elderly regarding the March-June 2020 catastrophe (cvp1). “Chronic psychological stress” is a powerful determinant of individual health (see below), which is essentially ignored by all those who accept the promoted dominant view that the virulence and contagiousness of the viral respiratory pathogens are predominantly determined by viral genetics, with only secondary influence from host characteristics and social determinants of host characteristics. The dominant view is contradicted by more than a century of hard mortality data, as explained above (Figures 1 through 4), where the declared pandemics are undetected and all the detected major mortality excesses are tied to socio-economic periods and events.

Researchers considering mortality from diseases must make themselves aware that ordinary psychological stress significantly impacts immune response, and that psychoneuroimmunology is a large field of research (Ader and Cohen, 1993).

Social status, within a specific dominance hierarchy, is a major predictor of chronic stress, in social animals including humans (Cohen et al., 1997a) (Sapolsky, 2005), which, in turn, may be the dominant determinant of individual health, disease burden, and longevity (Cohen et al., 2007).

Ordinary psychological stress is known to be a dominant factor in making an individual susceptible to viral respiratory disease symptomatic infection, and to increase the severity of the infection (Cohen et al., 1991). Also, social isolation (paucity of social-network interactions), in addition to individual psychological stress, is known to have an added impact on the individual’s susceptibility to viral respiratory diseases (Cohen et al., 1997b).

Furthermore, there is a large age gradient for stress endurance: extended periods of psychological stress are known to have more deleterious health effects in elderly persons than in younger persons (Prenderville et al., 2015).

The stress-immune relationship, however, is not simply a monotonic function of integrated intensity. Frequency and duration are pivotal: chronic or long-term stress harms immune response, whereas short-term adaptive stress enhances immune response. The often-cited review by Dhabhar (2014) has:

Short-term (i.e., lasting for minutes to hours) stress experienced during immune activation enhances innate/primary and adaptive/secondary immune responses. Mechanisms of immuno-enhancement include changes in dendritic cell, neutrophil, macrophage, and lymphocyte trafficking, maturation, and function as well as local and systemic production of cytokines. In contrast, long-term stress suppresses or dysregulates innate and adaptive immune responses by altering the Type 1–Type 2 cytokine balance, inducing low-grade chronic inflammation, and suppressing numbers, trafficking, and function of immunoprotective cells.

Peters et al. (2021) have reviewed these concepts and the known science for the relevance to COVID-19. They pointed out that “the socioeconomic issues and various aspects of the Western type lifestyle that are closely associated with psychosocial stress have recently been reported to contribute to COVID-19”. Their ultimate aim is to “clarify whether psychosocial interventions have the potential to optimize neuroendocrine-immune responses against respiratory viral infections during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Therefore, it is not difficult to imagine that the massive socio-economic disruptions of the COVID-era would have caused undue chronic psychological stress and amplified dominance-hierarchy stress predominantly against those who are already at the bottom of the societal dominance hierarchy, and have the least means to adjust to dramatically new circumstances. The new circumstances include: loss of sources of income, both legitimate and illegal, increased social isolation, increased hierarchical impositions, constant fear propaganda, severe mobility restrictions, closing of public and corporate-public spaces previously used, enforcement and intimidation against private or informal gatherings, mobbing against those who do not cheerfully accept the “new reality”, and increased aggressions from equally stressed individuals. The missing means to adjust would include: undisturbed salary and ability to work from home, means to stay connected by Zoom (by video conferencing applications), large comfortable air-conditioned homes, means to home-school children in an adapted environment, nearby facilities for outside exercise, private facilities for physical exercise, undisturbed shopping by home delivery, undisturbed self-medication, continued access to health care, and so on.

It follows, from the science reviewed above, that the “undue chronic psychological stress and amplified dominance-hierarchy stress”, generally applied to entire populations, would cause death in those most likely to experience the stress and already in higher risk categories. It appears, for example, that populations normally adapted to summer heatwaves in the Southern USA were either prevented from practicing their usual adaptations to the heat or became more vulnerable to this physiological stress, or both.

It is evident also that the type of weakening of the immune system caused by chronic psychological stress would lessen the body’s ability to fight bacterial pneumonia, and that the populations hardest hit during the COVID-era are already disproportionately susceptible to bacterial pneumonia (Figure 38).

At this stage (Figure 34, Figure 38), and given the state of science and practice in this regard (Ginsburg and Klugman, 2020), it is not unreasonable to ask whether the logic has not been inverted: Is COVID-19-assignment an incorrect cause-assignment for what is in fact bacterial pneumonia? From this perspective, it becomes relevant to point out that Ivermectin is probably an effective antibacterial agent against tuberculosis, for example (Crump, 2017) (Lim et al., 2013), which would have been prescribed where the mainstream protocols call for avoiding antibiotics (Beovic et al., 2020) (CDC, 2021h) (Karami et al., 2021).

Karami et al. (2021) put it this way:

Conclusions: On presentation to the hospital bacterial co-infections are rare, while empiric antibiotic use is abundant. This implies that in patients with COVID-19 empiric antibiotic should be withheld. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the current overuse of antibiotics in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Buehrle et al. (2020) pointed out that, at the same time, outpatient antibiotic prescriptions dropped significantly in the USA:

Abstract: In April 2020, there were significant reductions in prescription fills of each of the 10 most prescribed outpatient antibiotics in the United States. Monthly azithromycin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, and levofloxacin fills did not rebound significantly from April through July 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 had an immediate and sustained impact on US outpatient antibiotic prescribing.

 The CDC (2021h) shows this graph:

Figure 39. Estimated number of outpatients with dispensed antibiotic prescriptions, USA, 2019-2020. (CDC, 2021h).

If COVID-19 is largely misdiagnosed bacterial pneumonia (using a faulty PCR test: Borger et al., 2021; or not using any laboratory test), or if co-infection with bacterial pneumonia is not appropriately recognized (Ginsburg and Klugman, 2020), or if bacterial pneumonia itself goes otherwise untreated, while antibiotics (and Ivermectin) are withdrawn, in circumstances where large populations of vulnerable and susceptible residents have suppressed immune systems from chronic psychological stress induced by large-scale socio-economic disruption, then the state has recreated the conditions that produced the horrendous bacterial pneumonia epidemic of 1918 (Morens et al., 2008) (Chien et al., 2009) (Sheng et al., 2011), in COVID‑era USA.

 

6. Conclusion

By examining the socio-jurisdictional and temporal structure of the ACM/w data, and by comparing to socio-geo-economic and climatic data, we conclude that the massive above-trend COVID-era mortality in the USA is not the result of a pandemic, but instead is caused by the large-scale medical and government responses, which transformed the domestic economy and living conditions, and the associated long-term chronic psychological stress effects on the most vulnerable populations (regarding poverty and obesity), in a context of ordinary seasonal respiratory diseases and typical summer heat-wave climatic effects.

In light of the results presented herein, the view that a new respiratory disease virus caused the excess deaths in the COVID-era (March-2020 to present) in the USA has to be considered an extravagant theory, contrary to empirical data and viral respiratory disease phenomenology:

  • No declared pandemic (1957-58, 1968, 2009) has ever caused a detectable increase in yearly all-cause mortality in the USA, since 1900, except 1918, which has been incorrectly assigned as an influenza pandemic.
  • All the detected anomalies in yearly all-cause mortality in the USA, since 1900, have been associated with major socio-economic upheavals: the First World War, The Great Depression and Dust Bowl, the Second World War, and the medical and government response to the declared COVID-19 pandemic.
  • None of the recently declared viral respiratory disease pandemics (1957-58, 1968, 2009), and none of the ubiquitous seasonal (winter) epidemics of the last century or more, in all Northern hemisphere countries having sufficiently good data, exhibit large jurisdictional heterogeneity (in both time and location) in all-cause mortality of the magnitude seen during the COVID-era.
  • On the contrary, viral respiratory disease epidemics, never mind declared pandemics, never stop at jurisdictional boundaries or national or state or provincial or regional or county borders. Instead, seasonal (winter) all-cause mortality is always synchronous across mid-latitude Northern hemispheric jurisdictions, while showing similar to statistically identical patterns of temporal variation within any given year.
  • The jurisdictional and temporal heterogeneity of all-cause mortality during the COVID-era in the USA (and other nations) is of unprecedented character and magnitude (Figures 5-11, 13-16, and Table 2), which can only be due to local and time-dependent forces and vulnerability to those forces, not viral respiratory diseases as the primary driver.
  • The extraordinary mortality spike that occurred in New York City and some North-East coastal states in March-June 2020 (cvp1) and virtually nowhere else (some 34 USA states did not significantly exhibit this feature in all-cause mortality) is impossible for a virulent and contagious respiratory disease virus acting in a society free from local aggression or local environmental disaster. To our knowledge, no such intense feature, this late in the cycle-year, has ever occurred in the world epidemiological record.
  • Viral respiratory diseases never give rise to all-cause mortality by time peaks (maxima) in the summer. The unprecedented summer peaks seen in the USA in the COVID-era are contrary to known viral respiratory disease epidemiology.
  • Pre-COVID-era viral-respiratory-disease burden mortality (winter burden) does not correlate with obesity, whereas the state-wise heterogeneous summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021 and summer-2021 excess (above-SB) mortalities do correlate with obesity.
  • Pre-COVID-era viral-respiratory-disease burden mortality (winter burden) does not correlate with poverty, whereas the state-wise heterogeneous summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021 and summer-2021 excess (above-SB) mortalities do correlate with poverty.
  • Pre-COVID-era viral-respiratory-disease burden mortality (winter burden) does not correlate with climatic temperature, whereas the state-wise heterogeneous summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021 and summer-2021 excess (above-SB) mortalities do correlate with climatic temperature.
  • In the correlations that we identified, the 2020 and 2021 summer excess (above-SB) mortalities extend to zero values for sufficiently small values of poverty, obesity or summer temperatures, or their combinations, such as the product of poverty and obesity, suggesting that the presumed new pathogen requires sufficiently high state-wise average poverty, obesity and/or temperatures in order to spread and be lethal in the summer.
  • Pre-COVID-era viral-respiratory-disease burden mortality (winter burden) always correlates with the proportion of the population that is elderly, whereas the state-wise heterogeneous summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021 and summer-2021 excess (above-SB) mortalities anti-correlate with the proportion of the population that is elderly, strongly so for summer mortality.
  • No known respiratory disease virus has ever caused a permanent (1.5 years and counting) step-wise time-independent increase in mortality of 15-34 year olds, which appears to have occurred in the COVID-era (Figures 33b to 33e).
  • Pre-COVID-era viral-respiratory-disease burden mortality (winter burden) does not correlate with population density (Figure 29), whereas the state-wise heterogeneous March-June 2020 excess mortality (cvp1) strongly correlates with population density; and summer-2020, fall-winter-2020-2021 and summer-2021 excess (above-SB) mortalities anti-correlate with population density (Figure 30). (This is a consequence of the localities of the March-June 2020 anomaly, and that poor states tend to have low population density.)
  • The largest high-tech vaccination campaign in history, targeted against the presumed pathogen, had no detectable benefit in all-cause mortality, given the post-vaccination-campaign summer-2021 surge that is observed.
  • It is extremely unlikely that a virulent and contagious viral respiratory pathogen that would have caused the exceedingly large COVID-era excess mortality in the USA, could not have crossed the border into Canada, the world’s longest international land border (8,890 km) between two major trading partners; where both countries are normally (pre-COVID-era) continuously subject to seasonal (winter) viral respiratory disease epidemics having virtually identical mortality characteristics.

Finally, our examination of plausible mechanisms for the exceptionally large COVID‑era mortality in the USA, given all our empirical observations, leads us to postulate that COVID-19 may largely be misdiagnosed bacterial pneumonia (using a faulty PCR test: Borger et al., 2021; and see Ginsburg and Klugman, 2020), that correctly assigned bacterial pneumonia itself largely goes untreated, while antibiotics (and Ivermectin) are withdrawn, in circumstances where large populations of vulnerable and susceptible residents have suppressed immune systems from chronic psychological stress induced by (“COVID response”) large-scale socio-economic disruption, and that the USA has, in the COVID-era, thus recreated the conditions that produced the horrendous bacterial pneumonia epidemic of 1918 (Morens et al., 2008) (Chien et al., 2009) (Sheng et al., 2011).

Given the approximately 1 M excess deaths that have occurred in the most vulnerable and underprivileged residents of the USA in the COVID‑era, given the evidence from empirical and statistical data on the causes of the excess mortality, and in view of our research and general observations, we feel justified in making the following comment. We believe that genetic-sequencing-centered virologists and mathematical modellers (as opposed to other and broad disciplines connected to epidemiology, biology, psychology and health), pharmaceutical-industry lobbyists, politicized public health officials (WHO, national, and local), biased media, and approval-seeking politicians, have had far too much influence on public policy in the events surrounding the proclaimed pandemic, and in establishing the questionable dominant narrative, without regard for the hard data that is all-cause mortality by time, jurisdiction, age group, sex, and so forth; without regard for robust measures of population-level actual harm, while allowing tunnel-vision assignation of cause. The resulting practice has been mostly contrary to public health principles of objectively, scientifically, equally and independently assessing risks and benefits of any impactful policy, within a framework of transparency and accountability; and has caused great societal harm, beyond significant excess mortality itself, which is difficult to fully quantify.

*

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.

References

Ader and Cohen. (1993) “Psychoneuroimmunology: Conditioning and Stress”. Annual Review of Psychology 1993 44:1, 53-85. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8434895/

Beović et al. (2020) “Antibiotic use in patients with COVID-19: a ‘snapshot’ Infectious Diseases International Research Initiative (ID-IRI) survey”. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020 Nov 1;75(11):3386-3390. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkaa326. PMID: 32766706; PMCID: PMC7454563. https://academic.oup.com/jac/article/75/11/3386/5882116

Borger et al. (2021) “Addendum to the Corman-drosten Review Report.” OSF Preprints. 12 January 2021. doi:10.31219/osf.io/9mjy7. https://osf.io/9mjy7/

Buehrle et al. (2020) “Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic on Outpatient Antibiotic Prescriptions in the United States”, Open Forum Infectious Diseases, Volume 7, Issue 12, December 2020, ofaa575. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa575

CDC (2021a) “Pneumonia and Influenza Mortality Surveillance from the National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Surveillance System”. (accessed 18 October 2021). https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html

CDC (2021b) “Provisional COVID-19 Deaths by Week, Sex, and Age” | NCHS. Page last updated: October 13, 2021. (accessed 18 October 2021). https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Week-Sex-and-Age/vsak-wrfu

CDC (2021c) “National Vital Statistics System | Historical Data, 1900-1998”. Page last reviewed: November 6, 2015. (accessed on 28 July 2021). https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/mortality_historical_data.htm

CDC (2021d) “National Center for Health Statistics | CDC WONDER Online Database”. (accessed on 27 July 2021). https://wonder.cdc.gov/mortSQL.html

CDC (2021e) “Adult Obesity Prevalence Maps | Overall Obesity: Prevalence of Self-Reported Obesity Among U.S. Adults by State and Territory, BRFFS, 2020”. Page last reviewed: September 27, 2021 (accessed 24 September 2021). https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/prevalence-maps.html#states

CDC (2021f) “COVID-19 Vaccinations in the United States, Jurisdiction”. Page last updated: October 25, 2021. (accessed 28 September 2021). https://data.cdc.gov/Vaccinations/COVID-19-Vaccinations-in-the-United-States-Jurisdi/unsk-b7fc

CDC (2021g) “Outpatient Antibiotic Prescriptions — United States, 2019”. Page last reviewed: July 22, 2021. (accessed 17 October 2021). https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/data/report-2019.html

CDC (2021h) “Antibiotic Use in the United States, 2020 Update: Progress and Opportunities”. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; 2021. Page last reviewed: June 22, 2021. (accessed 17 October 2021). https://www.cdc.gov/antibiotic-use/stewardship-report/current.html

Chien et al. (2009) “Bacterial pathogens and death during the 1918 influenza pandemic”. N Engl J Med. 2009 Dec 24;361(26):2582-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc0908216. PMID: 20032332. https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMc0908216

Cohen et al. (2007) “Psychological Stress and Disease”. JAMA, 298(14), pp. 1685–1687. doi: 10.1001/jama.298.14.1685. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17925521/

Cohen et al. (1997a) “Chronic Social Stress, Social Status, and Susceptibility to Upper Respiratory Infections in Nonhuman Primates”. Psychosomatic Medicine: May/June 1997 – Volume 59 – Issue 3 – p 213-221. https://kilthub.cmu.edu/articles/journal_contribution/Chronic_Social_Stress_Social_Status_and_Susceptibility_to_Upper_Respiratory_Infections_in_Nonhuman_Primates/6613937/files/12106595.pdf

Cohen et al. (1997b) “Social Ties and Susceptibility to the Common Cold”. JAMA, 277(24), pp. 1940–1944. doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540480040036. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9200634/

Cohen et al. (1991) “Psychological Stress and Susceptibility to the Common Cold”. New England Journal of Medicine. Massachusetts Medical Society, 325(9), pp. 606–612. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199108293250903. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1713648/

Crump (2017) “Ivermectin: enigmatic multifaceted ‘wonder’ drug continues to surprise and exceed expectations”. J Antibiot 70, 495–505 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/ja.2017.11

Dhabhar. (2014) “Effects of stress on immune function: the good, the bad, and the beautiful”. Immunologic Research.2014 May; 58(2-3): 193-210. doi: 10.1007/s12026-014-8517-0. PMID: 24798553. (cited >800). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12026-014-8517-0

Doshi (2008) “Trends in Recorded Influenza Mortality: United States, 1900–2004”, American Journal of Public Health98, no. 5 (May 1, 2008): pp. 939-945. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2007.119933

Doshi (2011) “The elusive definition of pandemic influenza”. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2011 Jul;89(7):532-538. DOI: 10.2471/blt.11.086173. PMID: 21734768; PMCID: PMC3127275. https://europepmc.org/article/pmc/3127275

Elsoukkary et al. (2021) “Autopsy Findings in 32 Patients with COVID-19: A Single-Institution Experience”. Pathobiology 2021;88:56-68. doi: 10.1159/000511325. https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/511325

Ginsburg and Klugman (2020) “COVID-19 pneumonia and the appropriate use of antibiotics”. Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Dec;8(12):e1453-e1454. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30444-7. Epub 2020 Nov 11. PMID: 33188730; PMCID: PMC7833845. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(20)30444-7/fulltext

Hethcote (2000) “The Mathematics of Infectious Diseases” SIAM Rev., 42(4), 599–653. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036144500371907 —- http://www.math.yorku.ca/~hhuang/math6937-06/siamreview.pdf

Harper (1961) “Airborne micro-organisms: Survival tests with four viruses”. Epidemiology and Infection, 59(4), 479-486. doi:10.1017/S0022172400039176. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/airborne-microorganisms-survival-tests-with-four-viruses/78E907605FDC1FCF878F4C48FC0BF3B6

IHME (2021) (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation) “Estimation of excess mortality due to COVID-19”, 13 May 2021, http://www.healthdata.org/special-analysis/estimation-excess-mortality-due-covid-19-and-scalars-reported-covid-19-deaths (accessed on 14 October 2021)

Jacobson and Jokela (2021) “Beyond COVID-19 deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States”. Health Care Manag Sci (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10729-021-09570-4

Karami et al. (2021) “Few bacterial co-infections but frequent empiric antibiotic use in the early phase of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: results from a multicentre retrospective cohort study in The Netherlands”, Infectious Diseases, 53:2, 102-110, DOI: 10.1080/23744235.2020.1839672. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23744235.2020.1839672

Kontopantelis et al. (2021) “Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes by region, neighbourhood deprivation level and place of death during the first 30 weeks of the pandemic in England and Wales: A retrospective registry study”, The Lancet Regional Health – Europe,

Volume 7, 2021, 100144, ISSN 2666-7762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100144

Kostoff et al. (2021) “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?” Toxicol Rep. 2021;8:1665-1684. doi: 10.1016/j.toxrep.2021.08.010. Epub 2021 Sep 14. PMID: 34540594; PMCID: PMC8437699. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34540594/

Lim et al. (2013) “Anthelmintic avermectins kill Mycobacterium tuberculosis, including multidrug-resistant clinical strains”. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Feb;57(2):1040-6. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01696-12. Epub 2012 Nov 19. PMID: 23165468; PMCID: PMC3553693. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/AAC.01696-12

McCallum et al. (2001) “How should pathogen transmission be modelled?” Trends Ecol Evol. 2001 Jun 1;16(6):295-300. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02144-9. PMID: 11369107. https://www.math.ttu.edu/~anpeace/files/Math5354Papers/McCallumetal_2001_TREE.pdf

Montgomery et al. (2021) “Myocarditis Following Immunization With mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Members of the US Military”. JAMA Cardiol. Published online June 29, 2021. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2021.2833. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2781601

Morens et al. (2008) “Predominant role of bacterial pneumonia as a cause of death in pandemic influenza: implications for pandemic influenza preparedness.” The Journal of infectious diseases, vol. 198,7 (2008): 962-70. doi:10.1086/591708. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2599911/

NASA Earth Observatory (2021) “Exceptional Heat Hits Pacific Northwest”, 25 June 2021. (accessed on 28 September 2021). https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/148506/exceptional-heat-hits-pacific-northwest

NOAA (2021) National Centers for Environmental information, “Climate at a Glance: Statewide Mapping”, published September 2021. (accessed on 27 September 2021). https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/

Peters et al. (2021) “To stress or not to stress: Brain-behavior-immune interaction may weaken or promote the immune response to SARS-CoV-2”. Neurobiology of Stress, Volume 14, 100296. ISSN 2352-2895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynstr.2021.100296.

Prenderville et al. (2015) “Adding fuel to the fire: the impact of stress on the ageing brain”. Trends in Neurosciences, 38(1), pp. 13–25. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2014.11.001. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25705750/

Rancourt (2020) “All-cause mortality during COVID-19: No plague and a likely signature of mass homicide by government response”, by Rancourt, DG (2 June 2020) ResearchGate. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24350.77125.

https://archive.ph/PXhs

Rancourt et al. (2020) “Evaluation of the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 in France, from all-cause mortality 1946-2020”, by Rancourt, DG, Baudin, M, and Mercier, J, ResearchGate (20 August 2020) DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16836.65920/1.  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343775235_Evaluation_of_the_virulence_of_SARS-CoV-2_in_France_from_all-cause_mortality_1946-2020

Rancourt et al. (2021) “Analysis of all-cause mortality by week in Canada 2010- 2021, by province, age and sex: There was no COVID-19 pandemic, and there is strong evidence of response- caused deaths in the most elderly and in young males”, by Rancourt, DG, Baudin, M, and Mercier, J, ResearchGate (06 August 2021) DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.14929.45921.  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353750912_Analysis_of_all-cause_mortality_by_week_in_Canada_2010-_2021_by_province_age_and_sex_There_was_no_COVID-19_pandemic_and_there_is_strong_evidence_of_response-_caused_deaths_in_the_most_elderly_and_in_y

Sapolsky. (2005) “The Influence of Social Hierarchy on Primate Health”, Science, 29 April 2005, vol. 308, pages 648-652. DOI: 10.1126/science.1106477. https://www.pinniped.net/sapolsky2005.pdf

Shaman et al. (2010) “Absolute Humidity and the Seasonal Onset of Influenza in the Continental United States”, PLoS Biol 8(2): e1000316. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000316

Sheng et al. (2011) “Autopsy series of 68 cases dying before and during the 1918 influenza pandemic peak”. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Sep 27;108(39):16416-21. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1111179108. Epub 2011 Sep 19. PMID: 21930918; PMCID: PMC3182717. https://www.pnas.org/content/108/39/16416.long

Simone et al. (2021) “Acute Myocarditis Following COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination in Adults Aged 18 Years or Older”. JAMA Intern Med. Published online October 04, 2021. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.5511.  https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2784800

Simonsen et al. (1997) “The impact of influenza epidemics on mortality: introducing a severity index”, Am J Public Health. 87(12):1944-1950. doi:10.2105/ajph.87.12.1944.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9431281/

StatCan (2021) “Table 13-10-0768-01 Weekly death counts, by age group and sex”. Page last updated: October 14, 2021. (accessed on 16 October 2021). https://doi.org/10.25318/1310076801-eng

Stokes et al. (2021) “Excess Deaths During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Implications for US Death Investigation Systems”. Am J Public Health. 2021 Jul;111(S2):S53-S54. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2021.306331. PMID: 34314220; PMCID: PMC8495654. https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306331

Tejada-Vera et al. (2020) “Life Expectancy Estimates by U.S. Census Tract, 2010-2015”. National Center for Health Statistics. 2020. Designed by B Tejada-Vera et al.: National Center for Health Statistics. Page last reviewed: March 9, 2020. Content source: National Center for Health Statistics. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data-visualization/life-expectancy/index.html (accessed on 17 October 2021)

US Census Bureau (2021a) “State Population Totals: 2010-2020”. Page last revised: October 8, 2021. (accessed on 18 March 2021). https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/research/evaluation-estimates/2020-evaluation-estimates/2010s-state-total.html

US Census Bureau (2021b) “State Population by Characteristics: 2010-2020”. Page last revised: October 8, 2021. (accessed on 24 September 2021). https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/research/evaluation-estimates/2020-evaluation-estimates/2010s-state-detail.html

US Census Bureau (2021c) “Historical Population Density Data (1910-2020)”. Published: April 26, 2021. Page last revised: October 8, 2021. (accessed on 23 September 2021). https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/dec/density-data-text.html

US Census Bureau (2021d) “Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) Program | State and County Estimates for 2019”. Page last revised: October 8, 2021. (accessed on 23 September 2021). https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/2019/demo/saipe/2019-state-and-county.html

Woolf et al. (2021) “Excess Deaths From COVID-19 and Other Causes in the US, March 1, 2020, to January 2, 2021”. JAMA. 2021;325(17):1786–1789. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.5199. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361 —- and “Supplemental Online Content” (accessed on 14 October 2021)

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


Appendix

ACM/w, 2013-2021, with colour-differentiated cycle‑years, for all the individual states of continental USA

The following graphs represent the all-cause mortality by week in each state of the continental USA from 2013 to 2021. Data are displayed from week-1 of 2013 to week-40 of 2021 (last available data point at the date of access, unless otherwise stated). The different colours are for the different cycle-years. The cycle-year starts on week-31 of a calendar-year (beginning of August) and ends on week-30 of the next calendar-year (end of July). Cycle-years 2013 and 2022 are then not completed. Data were retrieved from CDC (CDC, 2021a), as described in Table 1 of section 2 of the article.

The 49 continental USA states, including District of Columbia and excluding Alaska and Hawaii, are presented by alphabetical order.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Nature of the COVID Era Public Health Disaster in the USA: From All-cause Mortality and Socio-geo-economic and Climatic Data

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In this intimate sit down interview with Wolfgang Wodarg, we discuss the broad issue of corruption in the WHO, how we should understand the “pandemic,” or lack there of and how we must stop this diabolical trend towards a fake medical dystopia that will take over all aspects of our lives.

He is one of the most honest and thoughtful people we have ever met and has an amazing resume and has lived a rich life full of experiences that uniquely qualifies him to understand the depth and breadth of this complex situation we find ourselves in.

He began his career as a doctor in internal medicine, was unhappy about the focus on making money off people who were sick so went on to be a public health official in northern Germany where he is from. There he made surveys to measure annual flu waves, by having his secretary calling factories, school and businesses to see if people were at home sick. It wasn’t uncommon in a decent flu wave for 10% to be home sick. From there he became a member of the German Parliament.

While there the Swine Flu scare occurred and he knew something wasn’t right when 800 cases in Mexico was declared a pandemic. He dug into the issue and discovered a hornets nest of lies and corruption inside the WHO. He floored a bill called Fake Pandemic and did much to deflate that fake scare at the time, to the consternation of the corrupt functionaries of these institutions. He went on to work in the Counsel of Europe and is a truly one of the most honorable and honest voices to provide perspective on our current situation. We were honored to get one remote interview earlier in the year and this in person one.

Listen and learn from this man of integrity!

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The WHO and the Road Towards a Fake Medical Dystopia. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg
  • 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.

This article published by Global Research on July 30, 2021 confirms unequivocally that the WHO is complicit in what might be described as a profit driven “criminal agenda”.

***

Those who warned that Corona “vaccinations“ were the first step towards the genetic manipulation of humans faced harsh attacks from quality media, politicians and activists who denied this and ridiculed the corresponding fears.

But all that is now moot: on 12 July 2021, the WHO itself let the cat out of the bag and published recommendations – available to everyone on the WHO website – on the genetic manipulation of humans “to promote public health“ (1).

The World Health Organisation, about which one could read in the media before the Corona crisis sentences such as “The WHO is itself on the Gates Foundation’s money drip“, writes in its news article “WHO issues new recommendations on human genome editing for the promotion of public health“ on the modification or manipulation of the human genome (1-3):

„Two new companion reports released today by the World Health Organization (WHO) provide the first global recommendations to help establish human genome editing as a tool for public health, with an emphasis on safety, effectiveness and ethics.

The forward-looking new reports result from the first broad, global consultation looking at somatic, germline and heritable human genome editing. The consultation, which spanned over two years, involved hundreds of participants representing diverse perspectives from around the world, including scientists and researchers, patient groups, faith leaders and indigenous peoples.

‚Human genome editing has the potential to advance our ability to treat and cure disease, but the full impact will only be realized if we deploy it for the benefit of all people, instead of fueling more health inequity between and within countries,‘ said Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General.“ (emphasis added)

It is therefore a „good thing“ that since its last amendment, the genetic engineering law in Germany no longer includes all living beings as before, but now “all living beings except humans“.

The WHO, on the other hand, is apparently rock-solid in its assumption that „its recommendations“ on DNA manipulation will be implemented worldwide, although the population does not yet know anything about it. This is what the above-mentioned communication of the World Health Organisation says:

“The recommendations focus on systems-level improvements needed to build capacity in all countries to ensure that human genome editing is used safely, effectively, and ethically.“

*

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 Blauer Bote Magazin.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

Fifty Truths about Fidel Castro

November 27th, 2021 by Salim Lamrani

Five Years Ago, the Passing of Fidel Castro

The historic leader of the Cuban Revolution has forever marked the history of Cuba and Latin America, making his country a symbol of dignity and resistance.

1. Fidel Castro was born into a family of seven children on August 13, 1926, at Birán in the current province of Holguín, from a union between Angel Castro Argiz, a wealthy Spanish landowner from Galicia and Cuban born Lina Ruz González.

2. At the age of seven, he was sent to the city of Santiago de Cuba where he lived with the teacher who was to be responsible for his education. She nonetheless abandoned him to his fate. “She deceived my family”, and “I have known hunger”, Fidel Castro recalled. A year later, in January 1935, he entered the religious school, Hermanos de La Salle, as an intern. In January 1938, after rebelling against the authoritarianism of a teacher, he left the institution at the age of eleven for Dolores College. From 1942 to 1945 he continued his schooling in Havana with the Jesuits at Belen College. After receiving high marks in his studies, his teacher, Father Armando Llorente, wrote in the institution’s directory, “He has distinguished himself in all literary subjects. He has also been a true athlete, an excellent and team-oriented player. Always courageously and proudly defending the college flag, he earned the admiration and affection of all. He intends to continue his studies in law and we have no doubt that he will fill brilliantly the pages of his book of life”.

3. Despite having gone into exile in Miami in 1961, following the tensions between the revolutionary government and the Cuban Catholic church, Father Llorente always retained fond memories of his former student: “I am often blamed for speaking well of Fidel. But I cannot speak ill of the Fidel that I knew. Moreover, one day, he saved my life. These are things that you can never forget”. Fidel Castro had jumped into a river to save his teacher who was being carried away by the current.

4. In 1945, Fidel Castro entered the University of Havana, where he began a law career. Elected as Faculty of Law delegate, he actively participated in demonstrations against corruption in the government of President Ramón Grau San Martín. He did not hesitate to publicly denounce the armed gangs of BAGA, a group with links to government authorities. Max Lesnik, then Secretary General of the Orthodox Youth group and a comrade of Fidel Castro, recalls an episode: “The committee ’30 September’ [created to fight against the armed gangs] had decided to denounce the government and the gangsters during the plenary session of the Students’ Federation. More than 300 students from various faculties thronged the hall to listen to Fidel when someone shouted […]: ‘He, who speaks too long, will speak for the last time’. It was clear to whom the threat was addressed. Fidel got up from his chair and, with a firm and poised step, walked to the center of the hall. After requesting a moment of silence in memory of the martyrs […], he began reading an official list of the names of all gang members and the leaders of the Federation of University Students who had received stipends from the government”.

5. In 1947, at the age of 22, Fidel Castro participated with Juan Bosch, the future President of the Dominican Republic, in an attempted landing at Cayo Confite intended to overthrow the dictator Rafael Trujillo, then supported by the United States.

6. A year later, in 1948, he participated in the Bogotazo popular uprising triggered by the assassination of Jorge Eliecer Gaitan, a progressive political leader and presidential candidate in Colombia.

7. After finishing his graduate studies in law in 1950, Fidel Castro worked as a lawyer until 1952, defending the poor, before entering politics.

8. Fidel Castro never militated for the Popular Socialist Party (PSP), the communist party of pre-revolutionary Cuba. Rather, he joined the Cuban People’s Party, also called the Orthodox Party, which had been founded in 1947 by Eduardo Chibás. Chibás’ progressive Orthodox Party program was based on several key elements: national sovereignty, economic independence achieved through the diversification of agricultural production, banning the latifundios (large estates), the development of industry, the nationalization of utilities, the fight against corruption, the struggle for social justice and the defense of workers. Fidel Castro has expressed his belief in the thinking of José Martí, of Chibás and in anti-imperialism. A talented orator, he ran in the parliamentary elections of 1952 as a candidate of the Cuban People’s Party.

9. On March 10, 1952, three months before the presidential elections, General Fulgencio Batista shattered the constitutional order by overthrowing the government of Carlos Prio Socarrás. He won the immediate support of the United States, which officially recognized the new military dictatorship.

10. Fidel Castro the lawyer filed a complaint against Batista for breach of the constitutional order: “If courts exist, Batista should be punished, and if Batista is not punished […], how then can the court judge a citizen for sedition or rebellion against a regime that is both illegal and the product of unpunished betrayal?” The Supreme Court, subservient to the new regime, found his complaint to be inadmissible.

11. On July 26, 1953, Fidel Castro became head of an expedition of 131 men committed to launching attacks against the Moncada barracks in Santiago de Cuba, the second most important military fortress in the country, and the Carlos Manuel de Cespedes barracks in the city of Bayamo. The goal was to take control of Santiago –the historical cradle of all revolutions– and launch a call to rebellion throughout the country to overthrow the dictator Batista.

12. The operation was a bloody failure and many fighters –55 in total– were murdered after being brutally tortured by Batista’s military, while only six had been killed in combat. Some managed to escape thanks to the support of the local population.

13. Fidel Castro, captured a few days later, owes his life to Sergeant Pedro Sarría, who refused to follow the orders of his superiors and execute the Moncada leader. “Do not shoot! Do not shoot! You cannot kill ideas”, he exclaimed to his soldiers.

14. During his historic defense entitled “History Will Absolve Me”, Fidel Castro, defending himself, denounced Batista’s crimes and the misery in which the Cuban people lived. He presented his program for a free Cuba, based on national sovereignty, economic independence and social justice.

15. Sentenced to 15 years in prison, Castro was released two years later in 1955, following an amnesty granted by the Batista regime. He then founded the July 26 Movement (M 26-7) and announced his plan to continue the fight against the military dictatorship before going into exile in Mexico.

16. With a young doctor named Ernesto Guevara, Fidel Castro organized the Granma expedition. Castro had no trouble convincing the young Argentine who later recalled: “I met him during a cool night in Mexico City, and I remember that our first discussion revolved around international politics. A few hours later –in the early morning– I had decided to become a member of the future expedition”.

17. In August of 1955, Fidel Castro published the first manifesto of the 26th of July Movement, a document that included the main points he had made in his “History Will Absolve Me” defense. There is the question of land reform, banning latifundios, social and economic reforms that favor the underprivileged, national industrialization, housing construction, lowering rents, nationalization of telephone, gas and electrical services, education and culture for all, tax reform and the reorganization of government services to fight against corruption.

18. In October 1955, in order to raise funds for the expedition, Fidel Castro made a tour of the United States where he met with Cuban exiles. The FBI put the patriotic clubs that were founded in different cities by 26-7 M under close surveillance.

19. On November 25, 1956, Fidel Castro left from the port of Tuxpan, Mexico, aboard the Granma, a boat designed to hold 25 people. There were in total 82 revolutionaries aboard when it set sail for Cuba with the aim to triggering a guerrilla war in the mountains of the Sierra Maestra.

20. Due to climatic conditions, the crossing was a nightmare. One member of the expedition fell overboard. Juan Almeida, a member of the group and future Commander of the Revolution, recalls the episode. “Fidel told us the following: ‘As long as we have not saved him, we will not move from here’. Everyone was touched by his words and it aroused our fighting spirit. We felt that with this man, nobody would be abandoned. Yet, it was jeopardizing the expedition. Still he was finally saved”.

21. After a voyage that lasted seven days, instead of the five that had been forecast, the troupe landed on December 2, 1956 in what was, according to Raúl Castro, “the worst swamp anyone had ever seen”. The revolutionaries were dispersed by gunfire from Cuban aviation, and pursued by some 2,000 of Batista’s soldiers who had been waiting for them.

22. A few days later, in Cinco Palmas, Fidel Castro rejoined his brother Raúl and ten other members of the expedition. “Now we’re going to win the war”, the M 26-7 leader said to his men. The guerrilla war had begun. It would last for 25 months.

23. In February 1957, the Herbert Matthews interview with Fidel Castro appeared in the New York Times, thereby permitting US and world public opinion to discover the existence of a guerrilla force in Cuba. Batista later admitted in his memoirs that through this media coup “Castro was becoming a legendary figure”. Matthews, however, nuanced the importance of his interview: “No advertising, as sensational as it might have been, would have made any difference, if Fidel Castro had not been exactly the man I described”.

24. Despite official declarations of neutrality in the Cuban conflict, the US provided political, economic and military support to Batista, and opposed Fidel Castro up to the final moments. On December 23, 1958, one week before the triumph of the Revolution, while Fulgencio Batista’s army was in disarray despite its superiority in men and weapons, the 392nd meeting of the National Security Council, with President Eisenhower in attendance, took place. Allen Dulles, the CIA director, made the US position quite clear: “We must prevent Castro’s victory”.

25. Despite the support of the United States, his 20,000 soldiers and material superiority, Batista could not defeat a guerrilla force comprised 300 armed men during the final offensive in the summer of 1958 that had gone on to mobilize more than 10,000 soldiers. This “strategic victory” demonstrated the military genius of Fidel Castro who had anticipated and defeated the “End of Fidel” operation launched by Batista.

26. On January 1, 1959, five years, five months and five days after the July 26, 1953 attack on the Moncada garrison, the Cuban Revolution emerged triumphant.

27. During the formation of the revolutionary government in January 1959, Fidel Castro was appointed Minister of the Armed Forces. He did not occupy the presidency, which devolved on Judge Manuel Urrutia, nor the post of Prime Minister, which went to the lawyer José Miró Cardona.

28. In February 1959, Prime Minister Cardona, opposed to economic and social reforms he considered too radical (the land reform project, for example), resigned. Manuel Urrutia then appointed Fidel Castro to the position.

29. In July 1959, faced with the opposition of President Urrutia, who refused further reforms, Fidel Castro resigned as Prime Minister. Huge popular demonstrations broke out across Cuba, calling for the departure of Urrutia and the return of Fidel Castro. The new President of the Republic, Osvaldo Dorticós, then reappointed Fidel Castro Prime Minister.

30. The US immediately showed itself hostile to Fidel Castro by welcoming the dignitaries of the former regime, among whom were several war criminals who had looted the national treasury and fled with some 424 million dollars.

31. Yet from the start, Fidel Castro demonstrated his willingness to maintain good relations with Washington. Nevertheless, during his first visit to the United States in April 1959, President Eisenhower refused to receive him and preferred to go golfing instead. John F. Kennedy expressed his regret about the incident: “Fidel Castro is part of the legacy of Bolivar. We should have given a warmer welcome to the fiery young rebel at the moment of his triumph”.

32. In October 1959, pilots from the US bombed Cuba and returned to Florida where they were unmolested by authorities. On October 21, 1959, a bomb dropped on Havana left two dead and 45 wounded. The person responsible for the crime, Pedro Luis Díaz Lanz, returned to Miami. He was not questioned and Washington refused to extradite him to Cuba.

33. In February 1960, Fidel Castro drew closer to Moscow, acquiring Soviet weapons only after the United States refused to provide the arsenal necessary for the island’s defense. Washington also pressured Canada and the European nations that had been approached by Cuba in order to force Cuba to turn to the socialist bloc, thereby justifying its own hostile policy toward Havana.

34. In March 1960, the Eisenhower administration made a formal decision to overthrow Fidel Castro. In total, the leader of the Cuban Revolution escaped no fewer than 637 assassination attempts on his life.

35. In March 1960, the French ship La Coubre, carrying weapons, was sabotaged by the CIA in the port of Havana. More than one hundred persons were left dead. In his address in tribute to the victims, Fidel Castro launched the slogan “Patria o Muerte” (Homeland or Death) inspired by that of the French Revolution of 1793, “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity or Death.”

36. On April 16, 1961, following the bombing of the main airports in the country by the CIA, a prelude to the invasion of the Bay of Pigs, Fidel Castro proclaimed the “socialist” character of the Revolution.

37. During the Bay of Pigs invasion, conducted by some 1400 exiles supported by the CIA, Fidel Castro was to be found on the front lines of the battle. He inflicted a severe defeat on the US by crushing the invaders in 66 hours. His popularity then skyrocketed worldwide.

38. During the October 1962 missile crisis, Soviet General Alexei Dementiev was at the side of Fidel Castro. He recounted in his memories: “I spent the most impressive moments of my life with Fidel. I was with him most of the time. There was a moment when we considered that a military attack by the United States was close at hand. Fidel made the decision to sound the alarm. Within hours, his people were in combat position. Fidel’s faith in his people was impressive, as was the faith of his people and of ourselves, Soviets, in him. Fidel is, without any question, one of the political and military geniuses of the century”.

39. In October 1965, the Cuban Communist Party (PCC) replaced the United Party of the Socialist Revolution (PURE) which had been created in 1962 (it, in turn, had replaced the Integrated Revolutionary Organizations –ORI– created in 1961). Fidel Castro was appointed First Secretary.

40. In 1975, following the adoption of the new Constitution, Fidel Castro was elected President of the Republic for the first time. He would be re-elected to this post up until 2006.

41. In 1988, from more than 20,000 kilometers away, Fidel Castro, in Havana, led the battle of Cuito Cuanavale in Angola. It was in this battle that the Cuban and Angolan troops inflicted a crushing defeat on the South African armed forces that had invaded Angola and occupied Namibia. The historian Piero Gleijeses, a professor at Johns Hopkins University in Washington, wrote: “Despite Washington’s efforts [allied with the apartheid regime], Cuba changed the course of history in Southern Africa […]. The Cubans’ prowess on the battlefield and their virtuosity at the negotiating table proved decisive in compelling South Africa to accept Namibia’s independence. The victorious defense of Cuito Cuanavale was the prelude to a campaign that compelled the South African Defense Force (SADF) to leave Angola. This victory had repercussions far beyond the borders of Namibia”.

42. A lucid observer of perestroika, Fidel Castro, in a prescient speech given on July 26, 1989, declared to the nation that should the Soviet Union disappear, Cuba would resist and continue along the path of socialism: “If tomorrow or some other day we wake up to the news that a great civil war has broken out in the USSR, or even if we wake up with the news that the USSR has disintegrated […] Cuba and the Cuban Revolution will continue to fight and resist”.

43. In 1994, at the height of the Special Period, he met Hugo Chavez for the first time. They formed a strong friendship that lasted until the latter’s death in 2013. According to Fidel Castro, the Venezuelan president was “the best friend the Cuban people ever had”. They set up a strategic partnership with the creation in 2005 of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, which now includes eight countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.

44. In 1998, Fidel Castro received the visit to Havana of Pope John Paul II. The latter demanded that “the world open up to Cuba and Cuba open up to the world”.

45. In 2002, former President of the United States Jimmy Carter made a historic visit to Cuba. He spoke directly on live television: “I did not come here to interfere in Cuba’s internal affairs, but rather to extend a hand of friendship to the Cuban people and to offer a vision of the future for both countries and for the Americas […]. I want us to be friends and to respect each other […]. Since the US is the most powerful of the two nations, it is for us to make the first move”.

46. In July 2006, following a serious intestinal illness, Fidel Castro was forced to retire from power. In accordance with the Constitution, Vice-President Raúl Castro succeeded him.

47. In February 2008, Fidel Castro permanently renounced any executive office. He has since devoted himself to writing his memoirs and regularly publishing articles under the caption “Reflections”.

48. After a trip to Cuba in 2001, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., a historian and special advisor to President Kennedy, raised the question of the cult of personality: “Fidel Castro does not encourage the cult of personality. In Havana it is difficult to find a poster or even a post card with a photo of Castro on it. The icon of Fidel’s revolution, visible everywhere, is Che Guevara”.

49. Gabriel García Márquez, Colombian writer and Nobel Prize in Literature, was a close friend of Fidel Castro. He drew up a brief profile that underscores “the absolute trust he places in direct contact. His power is seduction. He looks for problems where they are to be found. […] His patience is invincible. His discipline is ironclad. The force of his imagination expands the limits of the unexpected”.

50. The triumph of the Cuban Revolution on January 1, 1959, led by Fidel Castro, is the most significant event in the history of twentieth century Latin America. While Fidel Castro may remain one of the most controversial figures of that century, even his fiercest critics acknowledge that he has made Cuba a sovereign nation whose independence is respected internationally. His country has made undeniable social achievements in the fields of education, health, culture, sport and international solidarity. He will forever be the symbol of national dignity, someone who is always aligned with the oppressed and all those who fight for their emancipation.

Article in french :

Translated from the French by Larry R. Oberg

Doctor of Iberian and Latin American Studies at the University of Paris IV-Sorbonne, Salim Lamrani is a lecturer at the University of La Réunion, and a journalist specializing in relations between Cuba and the United States.

His new book is Cuba, parole à la défense !, Paris, Editions Estrella, 2015 (Preface by André Chassaigne).

Contact: [email protected]; [email protected]

Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/SalimLamraniOfficiel

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Fifty Truths about Fidel Castro