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).
Chicago police officers union president John Catanzara is calling Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s bluff.
The Chicago Mayor is trying to force all of Chicago’s police officers to register at a portal supplied by the city that reveals whether or not they have proof of a COVID-19 vaccination. The officers have until midnight tonight (October 14, 2021) to register at the portal, or they will go into a “non-pay” status, which Catanzara claims is a new status that previously did not even exist.
Catanzara put out a video on Tuesday this week, directing officers to “hold the line” and NOT go to the portal and give the city their personal information. He does not believe the Mayor or the City has a lawful right to this information, which clearly violates HIPAA and other privacy laws.
“Do not fill out the portal information. You are under no obligation to do that, other than the city’s demand.
Once you do that, we can never get information back.
We have no assurances from the city that that is secure. What that information is going to entail as far as going forward, who it can be shared with, etc. (nobody knows.)
The simple fact that they keep putting out public statements, emails, and having bosses call you, means one thing: our members are holding the line.
And officers from all ranks are not going into that portal. They clearly must have a very very low cooperation level, which is good.
It’s information they shouldn’t be entitled to.”
Catanzara tells the officers to submit exemption forms today (Thursday) instead of going to the portal, and the union has supplied three exemption forms that are allowed by law in the State of Illinois for valid vaccine exemptions: medical, religious, and conscientious objection.
In the video, Catanzara explains that they are prepared to file grievances with the Labor Board, and also take this to court and request a temporary restraining order (TRO).
In addressing the police officers, Catanzara makes it very clear that they are NOT calling for a strike or any other illegal action.
This is very clearly not a job action, not a call for a strike, none of that illegal stuff that I’m sure the city is going to try to make it out to be.
If the city maintains its current course, come midnight on Thursday/Friday morning, members will be forced into a non-pay status that did not complete the portal information or subject to testing thereafter.
He encourages all officers to report for duty Friday morning, and force their supervisors to send them home for not going to the portal and filling out the medical information.
If the city goes through with this, Catanzara states that 50% of the Chicago police force, or even less, will be on duty this weekend.
It seems that not only are the unvaccinated not going to the portal to surrender personal information, apparently many officers who have received a vaccine but consider the City’s demands illegal and an invasion of their privacy are also not complying.
Mayor Lori Lightfoot responded to Catanzara’s video by following the current script that the Globalists have written and that is being broadcast on their pharma-owned corporate media 24/7 now.
“If you are not vaccinated, you are playing with your life, the life of your family, the life of your colleagues, and members of the public. We don’t want to lose any more police officers for covid-19 deaths when a lifesaving vaccine is readily available.”
When questioned about the legal actions Catanzara stated the Union would take, she reportedly responded:
“Bring it on.”
Watch John Catanzara’s entire message to the Chicago police, because you will not get an accurate account of what he said from the pharma-owned corporate media.
This is still on YouTube, but if it disappears, let us know as we have a copy and will get it back up right away on alternative video platforms.
Comments Off on Chicago Set to Lose 50% or More of Police Force at Midnight Tonight as Police Union Calls Mayor’s Bluff on Reporting COVID-19 Vaccine Status
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).
This video provides a testimony by young American recruits of the 1960s who were drafted and sent to fight America’s war against the people of Vietnam.
What they say confirms the criminal mindset of the Pentagon. “All Vietnamese Were ‘Gooks'”, “We Were The Civilized People”.
Extensive crimes against humanity were committed.
Vietnam Did not Win the War
Vietnam never received war reparations from the U.S. for the massive loss of life and destruction, yet an agreement reached in Paris in 1993 required Hanoi to recognize the debts of the defunct Saigon regime of General Thai.
This agreement is in many regards tantamount to obliging Vietnam to compensate Washington for the costs of war.
In recent years, Vietnam has entered into a bilateral military cooperation dialogue with the US.
The atrocities committed by the U.S. are being erased from the history of so-called “post war era”.
Our thoughts today are with the people of Vietnam.
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 15, 2021
VIDEO. Vietnam Vets
click lower righthand corner to enlarge
Vietnam under the Brunt of Neoliberalism
Vietnam remains an impoverished country under the brunt of deadly neoliberal reforms imposed by the US and its allies since the early 1990s:
“The adoption of sweeping macro-economic reforms under the supervision of the Bretton Woods institutions was also a condition for the lifting of the U.S. embargo.
These free market reforms now constitute the Communist Party’s official doctrine. With the normalization of diplomatic relations with Washington in 1994, reference to America’s brutal role in the war is increasingly considered untimely and improper.
Not surprisingly, Hanoi had decided to tone down the commemoration of the Saigon surrender so as not to offend its former wartime enemy. The Communist Party leadership has recently underscored the “historic role” of the United States in “liberating” Vietnam from the Vichy regime and Japanese occupation during World War II.” (Peace Magazine, 1994)
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).
The Bank of Canada is hiring a product architect as it continues to move forward with its “contingency plan” for a central bank digital currency (CBDC), leading some to speculate about the potential consequences.
A digital currency is a hot topic south of the border, as the U.S. public awaits the imminent release of a Federal Reserve paper on its own CBDC. While the idea may be new to Americans, the Bank of Canada has been issuing reports on the concept since November 2016.
A year ago, the bank co-authored a report with six other central banks and the Bank of International Settlements to establish foundational principles and core features of a CBDC. In February 2021, the bank published three CBDC proposals: one from the University of Calgary, another from McGill University, and a joint University of Toronto and York University submission.
In an email to The Epoch Times, Bank of Canada spokesman Alex Paterson said the proposals were made to stimulate thought.
“[T]he proposed designs are not intended to be adopted by the Bank. Rather, the Bank will use these reports to inform its thinking and advance public conversation on a central bank digital currency design,” Paterson wrote.
Bank leadership has consistently said it’s only trying to be prepared and a digital currency is not a sure thing. Governor Tiff Macklem told the media in April that the decision ultimately lies with the finance minister, adding, “if we were to issue a digital currency, we wouldn’t stop printing cash.”
Still, the bank is taking steps toward bringing a product to market. In August, it issued a job posting for a product architect for “a program of major social significance to design a contingent system for a central bank digital currency (CBDC), which can be thought of as a banknote, but in digital form.”
According to the posting, part of the job would be to “craft a coherent product architecture and design that will be a fit at a national scale and adaptable for decades.”
Potential Sweeping Changes to Banking
According to Université du Québec à Montréal economist Steven Ambler, a CBDC would have broad implications.
“Central banks could potentially compete unfairly with commercial banks by offering higher rates of interest or charging smaller fees and use seigniorage revenue—ultimately our tax dollars—to subsidize this unfair competition,” Ambler said in an interview.
“Commercial banks would be forced to rely less on deposits for their financing, potentially making them behave more like investment banks.”
Seigniorage refers to the interest earned on a bank note minus the cost of producing, distributing, and replacing that note.
Should central banks take on more liabilities as a result of issuing the CBDC, Ambler says they would have to acquire more assets. This would either involve assuming a greater portion of government debt or taking an active role in the economy, like the Federal Reserve has done in the United States.
He noted, however, that central banks tend to be wary of digital currencies and “what could happen if demand for their national currency disappeared in favour of something else—some cryptocurrency or some version of a stablecoin—this would involve a loss in monetary control.”
Concerns About Privacy and Control
China’s central bank has issued its own digital currency, which state-run Global Times said will help challenge “U.S. dollar hegemony.” Meanwhile, it has banned bitcoin. In April, hedge fund manager Kyle Bass told NTD Television, an affiliated network of The Epoch Times, that the move is a means of controlling the Chinese people domestically but could one day also be used against foreign investors.
“If you think [Chinese leader Xi Jinping] is a terrible ruler, all of sudden, your global social credit score gets whacked and the Chinese can actually stop your ability to spend the money,” Bass said.
“This is a way they can export their digital authoritarianism around the world, and it’s something that we must stop.”
Some believe Western countries will get left behind if they don’t have a domestic version of China’s digital yuan, but others disagree. In a recent interview with Kitco News, Canadian businessman and entrepreneur Kevin O’Leary downplayed the development.
“What person outside of China would ever put that on their balance sheet? That thing as far as I am concerned is toxic waste. I wouldn’t touch it and so I would never impute any value to it. I don’t like having a single individual in a foreign government deciding who can own it, who cannot, and having a track on it because that blockchain is going to let them know that I own it. No thanks,” O’ Leary said.
“[We will] still be talking about this 20 years from now. I think what’s more likely to happen is that they [the U.S. Federal Reserve] will regulate issuers of stablecoins as banks.”
Although Ambler believes “a desire to be able to monitor people’s transactions more closely” is part of the motivation for a CBDC, he doubts any democratic government would or could ban bitcoin or physical cash.
“I personally think ways of escaping surveillance and control will exist, and if governments try to become too authoritarian, I think they won’t be able to, although … one of the things that COVID has taught me is that people have a very high demand for safety—even at the expense of individual rights and freedoms,” he said.
Sweden, one of the countries where digital payments are increasing the fastest, has an option of inserting a tiny computer chip under the skin of the hand, which can be used for certain transactions. So far around 3,000 Swedes have had a microchip implanted.
*
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.
Lee Harding is a journalist and think tank researcher based in Saskatchewan, and a contributor to The Epoch Times.
Featured image: Governor of the Bank of Canada Tiff Macklem speaks during a videoconference event with the Council on Foreign Relations at the Bank of Canada in Ottawa on Oct. 7, 2021. (The Canadian Press/Justin Tang)
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).
The modern battlefield is rapidly changing, mostly thanks to emergent technologies such as robotics and Artificial Intelligence.
Not too-long-ago, infantry had to look for their adversaries on a battlefield, be it in a forest, city or even a cave. Now, troops can simply send in their machines with mounted weapons do their dirty work.
Ghost Robotics is a company known for developing military dog-like robots for several years now. The concept was mostly popularized by Boston Dynamics and their numerous robots.
But at the 2021 Annual Meeting of the Association of the United States Army, between October 11th and 13th, they took things up a notch and showcased their brand-new robot.
The four-legged robot called Q-UGV (quadrupedal uncrewed ground vehicle) had a rifle mounting on top of it.
A gun pod mounted from the center of the robot’s torso has transformed the robot from a strange biomechanical thing to a terrifying chimera. It looks like it came out from a video game.
Although information about the newly-mounted rifle is limited, Ghost Robotics disclosed that the weapon is capable of hitting targets at a distance of 1,200 meters.
The robot also provides impressive stabilization to the rifles because of its quadrupedal design. The rifle could have “some degree of additional autonomy” because it is based on artificial intelligence, which enables the weapon to detect and lock on potential threats.
The weapon also reportedly has a sound suppressor, making it more difficult for enemy soldiers to determine where the shooting is coming from.
In short, the Q-UGV can kill a person from a distance of more than a kilometer, while not revealing where the attack came from.
Robots That Feel the World™ reads the brief display for Ghost Robotics. It describes the machines as “agile & unstoppable ruggedized ground drones with legs” that can be used “for a broad range of military and homeland security applications.”
Those applications, packed into dense jargon-rich phrases, starting with “ISR/Comms,” or intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and communications.
All of these are tasks that a robot dog, equipped with cameras and other sensors, can do well, provided a human operator is on hand with a tablet to receive the communications and scouting.
The Q-UGV is also pitched as useful for patrolling a base, or “explosive ordnance disposal,” and “Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear defence.”
But the key innovation is the rifle on top of the robot dog, which makes it possible for an operator to control it and attack adversary infantry, or it can function in autonomous mode. The Q-UGV is listed as offering another essential military function: “lethality.”
Starting in 2017, under Secretary of Defense James Mattis, “Lethality” became a focal point of military product marketing. Earlier, weapons manufacturing was focused on allowing users to fulfill their mission. However, ever since then it is much more about the “ultimate goal” – killing people. If possible, according to the “laws of war”.
Back in June 2021, Russia also showcased a robot dog, but it was not equipped with a rifle.
For war, the Russians are focusing on less-complex and, as a result, less mistake-prone systems such as the Uran-9 and the Nerektha which are actively being tested in combat and being used in military operations.
These developments show that warfare is changing towards a more autonomous and robot-oriented fight, with soldiers much less willing to risk their lives in combat, especially performing overseas operations. This is especially evident in Western militaries (and Israel, due to low population) who are rushing to develop unmanned systems of every type.
*
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).
The American television presenter Stew Peters is currently doing intensive research into the scary death series among flight pilots. Together with his interview partner Dr. Jane Ruby, a health economist, keeps reporting new cases.
Now what he has been predicting for a while has happened: One of the pilot deaths happened in the middle of a flight. A horrific event.
British Airways pilots die
As early as June there were reports that four British Airlines pilots had died in a very short time. Due to a voice message on Facebook that three BA pilots had suddenly died within seven days, the rumor surfaced that they had been vaccinated against Covid shortly beforehand:
“The first two were 40- and 50-year-olds, and this man, in his mid-thirties, was very healthy and had no underlying illnesses. He received his second shot and died within a few days, just like the other two, ”the Facebook message said, saying that“ only 10 percent of pilots can fly ”because almost 90 percent of British Airways pilots are said to have been vaccinated be.
British Airways had its spokesman respond to the circulating suspicions that four pilots had actually died recently and that the photos of the men and the condolence books in the photo on Twitter were real. But that has nothing to do with vaccinations.
“I think it was actually four young pilots who died because of the vaccination. (Note: The word “Maxine” often stands for “Vaccine” in posts because it sounds very similar, everyone knows what is meant, but the censorship robots do not recognize it and therefore do not delete the posts)
Many readers are not exactly convinced by British Airways’ answers.
Pilot “Alexander”, a pilot and aviation advisor, questioned the likelihood that four pilots dying in quick succession – after BA demanded that the flight crew be vaccinated – were pure coincidence. Pilots would have to undergo a thorough medical examination every year for reasons of safety for passengers and flight attendants. From a certain age, they would even have to be examined every six months. It is highly unlikely that these perfectly healthy pilots suffered from serious and life-threatening illnesses and were still allowed to fly on.
Delta Airlines pilots die
Three pilots of the US airline Delta Airlines also died in June 2021 after a vaccination, according to health economist Dr. Jane Ruby reported on US television at Stew Peters.
No one was granted access to the deceased’s medical records. In addition, another pilot of a cargo plane collapsed on the runway when landing in Canada.
The paramedics had to take him away on the stretcher, she explains in this video.
She goes on to say that she was given access to a document proving that the airline paid the United Airlines pilots to be vaccinated with $ 2,000, the same with Delta Airlines.
The “carrot or stick” strategy was probably used, because failure to vaccinate could result in discharge.
JetBlue Airways pilots die
A pilot of the US airline “JetBlue Airways” even went public and unpacked that up to five pilots of the airline had died between February and May of this year.
It is not known if they were vaccinated. The company is keeping the incidents secret.
The obituary notice for a 31-year-old pilot named Benjamin C. Cumberland said he died of cancer.
According to the JetBlue whistleblower, this is very unlikely because a pilot will have to remain on the ground for at least two years after being diagnosed with cancer.
Pilot dies in flight
A vaccinated pilot for the US airline Delta Air Lines died during a flight. The pilot suddenly said strange things and then died, the co-pilot said.
This case has been confirmed by three different whistleblowers, said Dr. Jane Ruby on the Stew Peters Show. The aircraft then had to make an emergency landing. The pilot worked from Los Angeles International Airport. A few days before the flight he was known to have received the second vaccination.
“It goes a lot further than people think,” said Dr. Ruby. Flights are diverted because pilots have chest pain. A flight was also rerouted because a vaccinated passenger had chest pain and was unable to breathe.
A Seattle pilot was found dead at home. He was diagnosed with an embolism. Two flight attendants from Atlanta were found dead a few days after the second vaccination. And a steward from Salt Lake City died after a second Janssen vaccination.
Last weekend, Southwest Airlines canceled more than 1,800 flights, disrupting the travel plans of thousands of passengers. According to a spokesman for the airline, this was due to the “weather conditions”.
The FAA said the cancellations were caused by Southwest’s severe staff shortage.
Pilots are advised not to fly for two to three days after receiving the corona vaccination. This is to prevent them from suffering side effects at high altitudes, according to the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).
Stroke and coma on the joystick
The number of incidents is increasing. On August 27, pilot Nawshad Quaiyum of Biman Bangladesh Airlines fell ill during a flight from Masqat in Oman to Dhaka.
The aircraft had to make an emergency landing. He suffered a stroke, fell into a coma and died in the hospital.
It’s not clear if he had been vaccinated, but the 45-year-old pilot was reportedly in good health. Quaiyum collapsed in the cockpit, whereupon the co-pilot initiated an emergency landing.
In the context of the deaths of the four British Airways pilots, three Delta Airlines pilots, five JetBlue Airways pilots, the Bangladeshi and one Air India pilot who were either known or most likely to have been vaccinated, the whole thing is starting to get spooky.
Moderator Stew Peters says in his series of interviews about the strange dying of pilots that the pilots are apparently ticking time bombs.
Also, a woman wrote on social media that her father, an Air Canada pilot, was hospitalized on a flight from Montreal to Vancouver three days after receiving the Pfizer vaccination because of a burst blood vessel in his arm. “Now Air Canada is refusing to pay his salary. And all because of that damn vaccine, ”she said.
A rebellion breaks out in Southwest Airlines
Now, last weekend, a riot has brewed out of nowhere at Southwest Airlines.
According to media reports, numerous pilots and other employees of the US airline Southwest Airlines have agreed to use up their “sick days” at the same time in order to force the management of Southwest Airlines to withdraw their new policy, either take sick leave or lose their jobs if one is not vaccinated. More than 2,000 flights were canceled over the weekend and the airports were in total chaos.
The pilots’ association of Southwest Airlines is suing the airline over the mandatory vaccination. Obviously, the angry Southwest pilots organize a so-called “sick out” (means: to be suspended from duty due to sick leave).
Interestingly, the US mainstream media are trying to cover up the uprising, telling something about “bad weather and lack of air traffic controllers,” which is why flights have to be canceled en masse. The weather phenomenon occurs conspicuously only with Southwest Airlines. No other airline reports outages due to bad weather – at the same airports.
Air travel is not very recommendable at the moment.
This article was translated by Global Research from the German.
Worldwide, large sectors of industry, agriculture and urban services stand idle. The lockdown policies initiated in March 2020 have triggered bankruptcies and unemployment, which in turn have been conducive to a process of disengagement of human resources (labor) and productive assets from the economic landscape.
Yesterday, the Canadian government announced that by Oct. 29th “core” federal public servants will have to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or face unpaid leave by Nov. 15th. Further, the government announced that anyone wishing to board a plane, train, or cruise in Canada will have to prove they are vaccinated by Oct 30th.
There have been widespread rumors this week that the thousands of flights canceled this past weekend by Southwest Airlines have been the result of massive amounts of people calling in sick to protest COVID-19 vaccine mandates for the airline industry.
The adverse events and injuries pertaining to the Covid vaccine are amply documented: thrombosis, heart attacks, myocarditis, blood clots, cancer, neurological impacts. Indelibly these vaccine related “health risks” will affect vaccinated military personnel as well as the performance and capabilities of “US fighting forces”.
Western governments in the NATO military alliance are developing tactics of “cognitive warfare,” using the supposed threats of China and Russia to justify waging a “battle for your brain” in the “human domain,” to “make everyone a weapon.”
An estimated 350,000 of our military service members are being dishonorably discharged for refusing to take a completely unnecessary and experimental mRNA nanotech injection, which is now proven to degrade immune systems and cause many serious side effects.
Currently the politically motivated expressions of national greatness tend to honor America’s quality rather than the jobs and prosperity that it is able to generate. Presidents speak of the country’s “Exceptionalism,” as well as it being a “force for good” and “leader of the free world” with all that implies.
Following the conscientious resignation of Acting Senior Sergeant Krystle Mitchell of the Victoria Police in Australia, the international network Police for Freedom https://policeforfreedom.org/ has just issued the statement below in support.
The US conducted many attacks on foreign soil and four of them include the 2003 Anglo-American attack on Iraq, 2001 US-led military intervention in Afghanistan, The first 9/11, military coup d’etat in Chile and Atomic bombings of Japan. But why is Western Media is glossing over these incidents?, discusses Shane Quinn, a British geo-strategist.
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).
It is sometimes difficult to absorb how much the United States has changed in the past twenty years, and not for the better. When I was in grade school in the 1950s there was a favorite somewhat simplistic saying much employed by teachers to illustrate the success of the American way of life that prevailed at that time. It went “What’s good for General Motors is good for America” and it meant that the U.S. version of a robust and assertive capitalist economy generated opportunity and prosperity for the entire nation. Today, having witnessed the devastation and offshoring of the domestic manufacturing economy by those very same corporate managers, such an expression would be rightly sneered at and considered risible.
Currently the politically motivated expressions of national greatness tend to honor America’s quality rather than the jobs and prosperity that it is able to generate. Presidents speak of the country’s “Exceptionalism,” as well as it being a “force for good” and “leader of the free world” with all that implies. That Americans are now in fact both poorer and less safe has generated its own national myth, that of a country beleaguered by terrorists who despise “our freedom” and which has been stabbed in the back by others, mostly in Asia, who have been engaging in unfair practices to bring America down. President Joe Biden’s gang of apologists has as well been fixated on the positive assertions that “America is back” and that the president will “build back better,” surely meaningless expressions that reflect the vacuity of the Democratic Party pre-electoral hype that Donald Trump had led the country to perdition.
President Joe Biden’s United Nations address three weeks ago was indeed largely Trump without all the bluster, threats and admonishments. He lied to the world leaders that: “I stand here today, for the first time in 20 years, with the United States not at war.” According to the latest available information, the U.S. was involved in seven wars in 2018: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger. Now that Afghanistan is nominally over, the number of current American wars is six officially, though none of them are actually declared by Congress as demanded the Constitution. If one includes clandestine counter-terrorism operations the real number is certainly much higher.
Joe Biden issued a call for all nations to work together to deal with transnational and even global threats like climate change and the pandemic, promising “relentless diplomacy” from the United States with a pledge that “we will look ahead, we will lead.” The response by the audience was predictably tepid as no one asked Joe whether anyone really wanted to be led any more, most notably America’s oldest friend and ally France, which was recently stiffed on a submarine deal by the White House. There are even reports that Biden is on bad terms with Great Britain, usually a completely reliable partner in crime. It was as if the U.S. president were reading from the “General Motors” script, having forgotten to refresh himself on what happened more recently in the debacle retreat from Afghanistan, which was not mentioned at all.
But it wasn’t all sugar and spice as Biden demonstrated his required toughness, cautioning Iran and skewering those who do not “…give their people the ability to breathe free, …who seek to suffocate their people with an iron-hand authoritarianism. The authoritarians of the world, they seek to proclaim the end of the age of democracy, but they’re wrong.” He was speaking, somewhat gratuitously, about Russia and China while also failing to mention the chaos on the U.S. southern border, demonstrating once again that everything is susceptible to change, but not in Washington.
To be sure, perhaps the most interesting aspect of the speech was the complete lack of self-awareness that the world has moved on without the United States, which has been locked into a certain foreign policy mindset since 9/11. In the past two decades Washington has invaded and brought about regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq, and has attempted to do the same unsuccessfully in Syria. It has openly intervened in the electoral process in Ukraine, which brought about a change of government that also generated a major crisis with Russia. It joined together with European allies to overthrow the Libyan government, reducing that stable and prosperous country into what is currently little better than a gangster and terrorist stronghold. It has more recently been seeking to undermine the elected government in Venezuela and has worked assiduously to wreck that country’s economy. It has interfered in Cuba, Bolivia and Ecuador and has dealt out devastating economic sanctions on adversaries like Iran.
It should be noted that all those initiatives, which Joe Biden might describe as “leadership,” took place under both Democratic and Republican Administrations, suggesting that if there is consensus in Washington it likely can be found in the willingness to wreck other nations. And Joe denounces “authoritarian” regimes without recognizing that many Americans have observed how the United States is itself becoming a model totalitarian state, irrationally obsessed with war while also having a health care system that has been ranked as one of the worst in the developed world. Witness the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, which have empowered any president to go to war without being endangered by a foreign threat. And then there is the Military Commissions Act which permits the indefinite imprisonment of terror and other suspects without having to charge anyone with a crime. And what about the prisoners still held without trial at Guantanamo after twenty years, or the Obama initiated policy of assassinating U.S. citizens overseas using drones? Or using drones to wipe out entire wedding parties while imprisoning the whistleblower Daniel Hale who had the temerity to reveal that 90% of the drone deaths in Afghanistan were of innocent bystanders who fit a “profile”?
And then there is the handling of the COVID-19 virus vaccination program at home, making it mandatory if people want to stay employed or in school. Or have a government job. The Biden Administration is now making health care decisions that impact directly on all Americans. Joe Biden is all for that and some in his administration are calling for mandatory booster vaccinations to include everyone who is already allegedly protected. Many Americans are resisting the government policies and there is growing dissent from the scientific and medical community over the efficacy of the vaccines, to include some legitimate concerns that they do more harm than good.
The government is also planning on looking at everyone’s bank accounts, an enormous invasion of privacy. A proposal working its way into law would require all banks to report directly to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) all relevant information on any account that has more than $600 in transactions in a year. That would mean nearly all accounts and one can combine that with continued government surveillance of the phones and emails of citizens who have not been involved in any criminal activity plus increased broadening of domestic terrorism legislation and guidelines which will turn half the population into “suspects.”
So, the myth of America trudges on with some new labels attached but otherwise pretty much the same. Many would argue that it is time for a reboot, to return to constitutionalism, small government and an end to pointless foreign wars and interventions. But to do that would pit individuals and small groups against some very powerful interests, i.e. the defense industry, big pharma, and government itself, which sees its natural role as one of growth. It is an unbalanced struggle, but it must be won if the United States of America is to survive with some basic freedoms intact into the 22nd century.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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 https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The world’s biodiversity has fallen below the ‘safe limit’, researchers suggest, as habitat destruction and agriculture take their toll on nature.
Ahead of the 2021 UN Biodiversity Conference (COP 15), the Museum has launched the Biodiversity Trends Explorer, an online tool that will allow everyone, from members of the public to policymakers, to see how the biodiversity of different regions has changed over time.
According to new analysis of over 58,000 species by Museum scientists, the UK has only half of its entire biodiversity left, putting it in the bottom 10% of the world’s countries.
With an average of just 53% of its native wildlife intact, it falls behind countries including the USA and China following widespread destruction of its habitats from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries.
Globally – biodiversity intactness, which represents the proportion of the original number of species in an area that remain and their abundance – is measured at 75%. This is significantly below the 90% average set as the ‘safe limit’ to maintain the ecological processes such as pollination and nutrient cycling that are vital to our survival.
The researchers behind the new analysis have called on governments around the world for ambitious action to preserve and enhance biodiversity globally ahead of the 2021 UN Biodiversity Conference (COP 15).
Professor Andy Purvis, who researches biodiversity at the Museum and carried out the analysis, says, ‘Biodiversity loss is just as catastrophic as climate change, but the solutions are linked. Stopping further damage to the planet requires big change, but we can do it if we act now, together.
‘Muddling through as we currently are doing is nowhere near enough to halt, let alone reverse, this devastating decline in biodiversity.
‘Governments possess the power – economic, political and legal – to address the planetary emergency, and there may still be time, but they must act now.’
The Museum has also launched a new tool, the Biodiversity Trends Explorer, to allow people around the world to track biodiversity changes from 2000 to 2050.
Under the analysis, scientists looked at data from ecological studies from around the world covering over 58,000 species, including animals, plants and fungi. This data was used to produce a metric, known as the Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII), for countries and island groups around the world.
Five different scenarios were modelled to predict how the BII could change in the years to 2050. These scenarios range from Taking the Green Road, where the world moves gradually to a more sustainable future, to Taking the Highway, where fossil fuels are used to fuel growth. Other scenarios imagine countries competing with each other and becoming more unequal.
Under the scenario where current trends continue, the researchers found that the UK lags behind much of the world. In the 2021 figures, only a handful of countries such as Denmark and Ukraine were found to have a lower BII.
This low figure has been attributed to the events of the Agricultural and Industrial Revolutions. These events saw traditional farming and industry increasingly replaced by more intensive practices and mechanisation, which destroyed swathes of habitat.
‘It’s over 200 years, probably, since we passed the safe threshold in terms of having enough biodiversity to reliably meet our needs in the UK,’ Andy says. ‘But since then, we’ve in effect been exporting biodiversity damage elsewhere by importing materials from those places.
‘We’ve done that because our spending power has been high. Basically, we cashed in our natural capital for economic capital hundreds of years ago.’
These impacts mean the UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. Even in the twenty-first century, the nation’s BII fell from 53.88 in 2003 to a low of 52.31 by 2007. It is yet to return to its former level. While gains are predicted until 2050, this will only reach 56.32 in the most generous scenario.
While the UK is starting from a low baseline, scientists are concerned that countries with high BII values now may see them collapse as resources are exploited to fuel development in wealthy countries.
‘Taking the Green Road is the fairest route,’ explains Andy. ‘We, the developed world, mustn’t export our biodiversity loss to lower-income countries which often have more unique biodiversity and whose people depend critically on what their local ecosystems can provide them with.’
For instance, under a scenario in which wealthy countries exploit low-income countries, Timor-Leste – currently home to some of the world’s most biodiverse marine habitats – could see its BII value fall by almost 25% by 2050.
‘Because we have purchasing power in the UK, it’s easy to massively improve the state of nature as we could just stop farming. But what that would mean is that the UK would just buy everything in, usually from places that have more unique biodiversity than the UK ever had.
‘At a global level, that would be terrible.’
Cooperation between everyone is vital to protect global biodiversity, with negotiators set to meet in China for COP 15 in October 2021, where it is hoped they will set binding targets for the preservation of biodiversity. However, agreement won’t be easy.
‘It’s easier for wealthy nations to meet targets based on trends because theirs are largely stable, whereas it’s easier for developing countries to meet targets based on status because they usually have more left,’ says Andy. ‘Both these viewpoints are valid, so it may well be that the equitable outcome involves different countries making their contribution in different ways.’
Agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity are based on a principle of fairness, with some suggesting wealthier countries with poorer biodiversity should provide funding to lower-income countries to preserve theirs.
‘I think that there’s a huge fairness and equality issue here,’ Andy says. ‘Biodiversity damage is driven primarily, but not exclusively, by consumption in rich countries.
‘I think there is an obligation on developed countries that have cashed in their own nature for profit to be compensating other countries to retain theirs, which might mean financial instruments are needed to enable those transfers to happen.’
Ahead of COP 15, the Museum has launched the Biodiversity Trends Explorer (BTE), which uses BII data to provide open monitoring of biodiversity for all. It is hoped that the tool will allow negotiators to make fair agreements using the latest data and predictions.
Andy says,
‘The negotiations at COP 26 [the UN Climate Change Conference] and COP 15 can only be successful if the validity of both sides’ positions is clearly understood, by providing each country with accurate information, not only on its recent biodiversity trend but also how much nature it has retained.
‘Accessing the Biodiversity Intactness Index via our BTE tool can help negotiators reach equitable agreements.’
Lord Zac Goldsmith, UK Government Minister for Pacific and the Environment, says,
‘As Presidents of COP26, the UK has put nature at the heart of the agenda, and we very much welcome this important study which highlights the crucial connections between climate and biodiversity and the urgent need to protect nature.
‘We wholly support this new tool and encourage all countries to increase their efforts to protect and restore nature as a solution not only to climate change, but biodiversity loss and poverty too.’
While nations must play their part, there are also actions that individuals can do as well. For instance, cutting down on meat intake, growing more nature-friendly gardens and using fewer fossil fuels can all help the planet.
‘I think it’s really important to retain the optimism that that this can be fixed,’ Andy says. ‘It’s not so much consumption of natural resource that’s the problem, it’s overconsumption.
‘Buying less and thinking about it more can make a really big difference.’
*
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).
The Central Asia region for thousands of years has been the location of endless conflict and Great Power competition as it is a crossroads for East-West trade routes. Scythians, Huns and various tribes of Turks and Mongols, among a plethora of other groups, have swept across the region. In the 19th century, Central Asia hosted the so-called Great Game between the British and Russian Empires, and, over the last two decades, the U.S. made a serious attempt to establish a permanent presence. However, just as the U.S. makes its withdrawal from Afghanistan, Ankara is making serious attempts to supplant the dominant Russian and Chinese influences in the region.
In 2010, Prime Minister (now President) Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced his ambitious 2023 vision as the year being the centenary celebration of the Republic of Turkey. The 2023 Vision aimed for Turkey to have a vigorous foreign policy and involvement in all major global organizations and events. Also envisioned was Turkey becoming a key transportation-trade-pipeline hub as just like Central Asia, it too is a crossroads for East-West trade routes.
Under this ambitious vision to elevate Turkey’s power and influence was the “Policy of Zero Problems with our Neighbors,” created by former foreign minister and current Future Party leader Ahmet Davutoğlu. Ankara went from “Zero Problems with Neighbors” to “Problems with nearly all Neighbors” very quickly as the breakout of the Syrian War provided Turkey a rare opportunity to significantly expand its influence – if President Bashar al-Assad was deposed. The Syrian War was the first giveaway that the so-called “Zero Problems with Neighbors” policy, implemented in 2010, had not even lasted the course of 2011 before Erdoğan scrapped Davutoğlu’s vision and quickly descended into an ideology of syncretic neo-Ottomanism and pan-Turkism.
The Republic of Turkey was founded by Mustafa Kemal following a campaign to create a “Turkey for the Turks” that culminated in the genocide of 3 million Armenians, Greeks and Assyrians. Surviving Christian populations that were not deported to Greece, the Soviet Union or allowed to remain in Istanbul, were forcibly Turkified and Islamified.
Because identity was fluid during the Ottoman Empire, all Muslims were labelled as Ottomans in censuses regardless if their ethnicity was Greek, Serb or something else. Kemal himself was born to Dönme (hidden Jewish but publicly Muslim) parents of Albanian stock. Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Kemal embarked on a massive Turkification campaign to eliminate all identity that was not Turkish, and even adopted the moniker Atatürk (Father Turk). Atatürk enforced Turkification on a country that had only escaped total collapse from the Greek Army thanks to Bolshevik military aid. Turkey as a new country comprised of various Muslim peoples from the Balkans, Anatolia and the Caucasus that were rapidly Turkified to consolidate a united national identity and mythology for the newly established country.
Because of such a Turkification policy, most citizens in Turkey believe they are descended from Turkic tribes that conquered Anatolia, rather than indigenous peoples that were forcibly Turkified. Modern genetic testing has found that the majority of Turkish citizens have very little to zero Turkic admixture, with Turkey-born professors like Mehmet Efe Caman and Ihsan Yilmaz highlighting as much.
However, this forced Turkification has ideologically guided Ankara’s foreign policy too. It is on this basis that Turkey today is actively introducing pan-Turkism with Political Islam to Azerbaijan and the Turkic countries of Central Asia. To challenge Russian influence over these countries, remembering that it was the Soviets who introduced secularism to the region, Turkey funds NGO’s and institutions in these countries to consolidate pan-Turkic ideology that is also rooted in Islam.
This poses major issues, including for Russian security concerns, as Far-Right ultra-nationalist Turkish organizations like the once Gladio-funded Grey Wolves have the stated goal of uniting all Turkic-speaking peoples in one state stretching from the Balkans to Central Asia. The group has fought in Chechnya, made links with Tartar groups in Crimea, and encourage members to fight in Syria. One of their mottos is “Your doctor will be a Turk and your medicine will be Islam.” Erdoğan, his coalition partner Devlet Bahçeliand several opposition leaders are frequently seen making the hand signal of the group, which several countries recognize as a terrorist organization.
Erdoğan hopes that through the Turkic Council, comprising also of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, Turkish ideological influence can begin penetrating these countries. One of the mission goals of the Turkic Council is “developing common positions on foreign policy issues.” Effectively, Ankara sees itself at the centre of a Turkic Arc that stretches from Kyrgyzstan to Istanbul, and hopes that it can encapsulate Central Asia into its own sphere of influence at the expense of Russia and China.
This will prove problematic as the synthesis of pan-Turkic identity and Political Islam will ultimately culminate into the expansion of the Grey Wolves or other ideologically aligned organizations into Central Asia. Just as the Grey Wolves are responsible for exporting terrorism to Syria and the Caucasus, and have committed massacres against Kurds, Alevis and other minority groups, such extremism will ultimately be exported to Central Asia too if these countries allow themselves to be consumed by Turkey’s current ideological conjecture and foreign policy – just as it seeks to do through the Turkic Council.
For Russia, a growth of terrorism in Central Asia will be a direct affront to its own national security, especially as pan-Turkists have Crimea in their sights, and the more extreme elements even look towards the Russian regions around the Altai Mountains, the mythological homeland of the Turkic people. For China, the threat is just as great, especially as pan-Turkist ideology also includes China’s Xinjiang Province in their grand territorial aspirations.
In this way, a real ideological struggle is ensuing over Central Asia. The region has a choice to make – to take on Turkmenistan’s example of being neutral (hence why it is not a Turkic Council member state), or go on the path into becoming pariah states that could become hotbeds of extremism and instability, which itself would drive away from serious investment opportunities and projects from China and Russia which cannot be replaced by a Turkey whose economy is being battered.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.
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).
The current energy situation in Europe is really disturbing. The exponential rise in the price of gas directly threatens the functioning of basic sectors of European society. Amidst a scenario of growing demand for energy supply with low economic and environmental impact, European countries are looking for sustainable forms of cooperation and see Russia as the most promising ally. However, American interventionism threatens this cooperation and, consequently, all sectors of European society affected by the energy crisis.
In the entire Europe, energy prices have risen uncontrollably over the past six months, reaching historic highs, and creating an extremely dangerous crisis. Considering that more than a fifth of the electricity consumed in the European continent comes from natural gas, the dependence on this product had a strong negative impact after the recent rise in prices in the world gas market. The rise in prices is due to a series of different factors, mainly the expansion in world demand, at a time when countries end their confinements and economies are trying to return to normality in a rapid way. In short, the world started to invest less and less in energy during the last year because the economy decreased, but now Europe, which is in an advanced process of vaccination, wants to return to pre-pandemic economic development numbers quickly and efficiently – however, the structures of the energy market are not being enough to supply the demand. Since 2020, the price of gas has increased by 600%, reaching an unprecedented mark.
About 90% of the gas used in Europe comes from imports, which makes the situation on the continent tense not only for the economic superstructure, but also for the common consumers, who are dealing with the increase in the price of their tariffs. European states have been trying to articulate strategies in order to solve this problem, approving tax cuts and other measures – but nothing has been enough to overcome the harmful effects of the precarious supply.
As the largest gas provider for the EU, Russia supplied about 43.4% of the product consumed in European states last year, which makes Moscow an important strategic ally for Europe in terms of mitigating the effects of the current crisis. Indeed, the more Europe buys Russian natural gas, the sooner the energy crisis will end, considering that Russian production structures have been less affected by the pandemic than those of other countries.
Historically, the Russian-European bilateral dialogue in the gas sector has operated in an absolutely pragmatic way, generating mutually beneficial results for both sides. But things seem to be changing, with misinformation and ideological alignment overlapping pragmatism recently. Recently, American experts started to accuse Russia of using gas as a geopolitical weapon in its international relations. The most impressive point is that, despite being unsubstantiated, the accusations have prevented the realization of several partnerships and have made dialogue between Russians and Europeans difficult.
Washington alleges that Russia is deliberately generating the energy crisis in Europe, using gas as a geopolitical weapon to gain advantage. However, the arguments that would supposedly support this hypothesis are extremely weak and do not corroborate this conclusion. For example, one of the arguments is that Moscow would be boycotting the presence of its own gas on European soil by banning gas routes in Ukraine due to the Nord Stream 2 – which is a big fallacy considering that such a ban not only never occurred, but also that Russia has been exporting more and more gas via Ukraine, despite the completion of the Nord Stream works. The purpose of the accusations against Russia, in the end, seems to be just to develop an anti-Nord Stream narrative, pointing to the pipeline as a supposed cause of the crisis and making European citizens believe that Germany must end its energy cooperation with Russia.
Obviously, Moscow has denied all accusations so far. President Vladimir Putin himself said:
“Russia has always been a reliable gas supplier to consumers around the world, in Europe and in Asia, and always has fully met all its obligations. I would like to underline that the situation in the European energy markets is a bright example of the inadmissibility of hasty and politically motivated moves in any sphere, particularly in energy issues that determine stability of industries and welfare and life quality of millions of people”.
In fact, with the beginning of the crisis, Russia was the first alternative for the Europeans, who started to look to Moscow for a safe, clean, and cheap source of gas. In the first months of 2021, cooperation increased by about 15% – which certainly caught the attention of the US government. The US also supplies gas to Europe, however, via a long, difficult and dangerous route. For the American government, regardless of the safety of the route, the only important thing is to undermine Russian influence and supply the European market with its own gas.
In the current scenario, there is only one path for the European democracies, which will have to choose between passively accepting Washington’s accusations or reacting by cooperating with the only country that can solve the energy problem.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Lucas Leiroz is a research fellow in international law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.
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).
“Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead.” — Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Last week, President George W. Bush’s torture regime reared its head in an unusual argument before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 2002, Abu Zubaydahwas captured by a militia in Pakistan and handed over to the CIA, which brought him to Poland. Under the supervision of CIA agents and American psychologists, he was brutally tortured until his removal to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba in 2006.
The Bush administration argued Mr. Zubaydah was a high-ranking member of al-Qaida who possessed information needed to fight the war on terror. After his torture produced no actionable information, the CIA told the Department of Justice and the Senate that Mr. Zubaydah was not a member of al-Qaida. It had no evidence of wrongdoing by him.
His lawyers filed a criminal complaint with the European Court of Human Rights against the CIA, its psychologists, and the Polish intelligence agents who carried out the torture.
That court concluded that the torture occurred, and it referred to Polish prosecutors to proceed criminally against the defendants. During that criminal proceeding, Polish prosecutors asked the DOJ for the names of those who tortured Mr. Zubaydah and documentation of what they did to him.
In the Supreme Court last week, the government’s lawyer conceded that the names of the torturers and the nature of their horrible deeds are already known — the psychologists wrote a book about it — but the government will not confirm any of it because it constitutes state secrets.
*
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: Abu Zubaydah is a citizen of the Palestinian territories held in Guantanamo Bay. (Source: Public Domain)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
At a joint press conference with his Israeli and UAE counterparts, Blinken said the US has not “changed our position to oppose the reconstruction of Syria until there is irreversible progress toward a political solution.”
More and more Arab countries are accepting that Assad isn’t going anywhere and have taken steps to normalize, including Jordan, which opened its border with Syria in September. Blinken said the US does not intend to “express any support for efforts to normalize relations or rehabilitate Mr. Assad” or lift a “single sanction” unless there is regime change in Damascus.
US sanctions under the Caesar Act against Syria specifically target the energy and construction sectors to impede the country’s ability to rebuild after 10 brutal years of war. The sanctions can target any person regardless of nationality, discouraging Syria’s neighbors from helping in the reconstruction.
On top of the sanctions, the US also maintains an occupation force of about 900 soldiers in eastern Syria and supports the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces in the region. This area of Syria is where most of the country’s oil fields are, so the US presence keeps vital resource out of the hands of Damascus.
Washington’s economic warfare against Syria is exacerbating the country’s food shortages. According to the UN, as of February, the number of Syrians that are close to starvation is at 12.4 million, or 60 percent of the population.
*
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.
Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.
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.
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).
These nearly two Covidian years have seen the emergence of a propaganda ministry based around “certified experts” who have dominated the media scene with an uncommon skill. They are often medical doctors and medical professionals, therefore people who should be more familiar with hospital wards, sick needs for care and laboratories, so their sudden skill in managing the media gives rise to the suspicion that the “doctors” are a team of spin doctors serving non-health agendas.
The work of such an organized propaganda front has not succeeded in blinding everyone to the facts. Nurses seeing the harmful effects of the vaccine on the vaccinated, the vaccinated told that they were 95% protected only to learn that they are not and must wear masks and have booster shots, and real doctors who cure Covid with HCQ and Ivermectin have all seen through the official narrative.
Important doctors and scientists, such as Luc Montagnier and Robert Malone, have contested the propaganda narrative that is enriching pharmaceutical companies, giving authoritarian control to governments, and perhaps also reducing the world population.
Some Italian doctors have refused to follow the instructions of the Italian Ministry of Health, thus rejecting the infamous “Tylenol and watchful waiting” and they have instead visited patients (even house by house) and cured the infected by administering prohibited HCQ and Ivermectin. Many lives have been saved, and although openly attacked, these doctors have never been reported and taken to court. The last thing the official narrative desires is evidence presented in a court. That would collapse the entire house of cards.
The Hippocrate Association—IppocrateOrg Association–founded by the Italian Mauro Rango, has saved thousands of human lives by treating instead of vaccinating. Robert Malone, developer of the mRNA technology used in the vaccine, was interviewed by the association on the risks of hasty use of mRNA vaccines.
Interview with Dr. Robert Malone
The Italian Hippocratic Association
I interviewed Mauro Rango who described a different and more humane approach than lockdowns, masks, and injection with a dangerous experimental substance, the consequences of which are unknown.
Here are Mauro Rango’s answers to my questions:
Costantino Ceoldo: Can you explain to us how the IppocrateOrg Association was born and why you gave yourselves this name?
Mauro Rango: We were born as a spontaneous Movement. It all started on a day that now seems very far away and instead only a little more than a year has passed since, on May 4, 2020, desperate for what I saw happening in my country of origin, Italy, I entrusted a message to WhatsApp. A message in a bottle, with the hope that someone would pick it up. I live on a small island in the Republic of Mauritius where I have always dealt with the right to health, collaborating with the local government. Covid had just appeared in Italy, but here in the island where I live it was immediately eradicated using Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin.
I followed with amazement, anger and helplessness what was happening in Italy where tens of thousands of people died without treatment or with wrong therapies, people left alone in the disease, without medical assistance and without valid therapy.
I had tried in every way to contact the Ministry of Health in Italy, political forces, anyone who was able to change things by receiving the right information and knowing that the treatments were there. My attempts were in vain, no one ever replied. So, in a last desperate act, I wrote all this on a WhatsApp message and sent it to about forty people, my contacts, hoping that someone would read it. I didn’t even expect what happened next. The reply messages arrived, one after the other, and so did the emails and so did the phone calls. They arrived in a few hours! Thousands of people answered me, some curious, some hesitant, some happy to find an opening, a way out of a nightmare. This message that spoke of cures and life had gone viral in a country that spoke only of death.
I also did not expect that my message, born from an act of desperation, could get to involve so many people. From there, exchanges of messages, phone calls, everyone had the need to talk, to find common points of view. With some people the relationship has been tightening, common ideals, common needs have come into focus and the idea has emerged clearer and clearer not to leave all this limited to exchanges of words and opinions but to transform it into something structured, operational, concrete. Something that had its own identity and gathered within it, people, even completely different ones, but with the same purpose, to restore to the human being his centrality and his natural right to health and well-being instead of being victim of a protocol dictated by strong economic powers and interests. Thus, the Movement with its website, became an International Association and gathers thousands of people within it worldwide.
The choice of the name was natural, taken for granted, it was in my thoughts and dreams as a boy. IppocrateOrg embodies the concept of medical ethics, commitment to life, respect for man and natural laws. “Primum non nocere” (Latin for “first, don’t hurt”) is the maximum expression of this.
CC: Is it a purely Italian experience or does it also exist in other parts of the world?
MR: IppocrateOrg Association is an international movement, now present in various countries of the world and in almost all continents: Europe, Asia, South America and Central North, Africa. Even in the United Arab Emirates we have our own representation. The Covid Patient Assistance Service has its greatest expression in Italy, but it is active with local doctors also in other countries, especially in South America and India. Elsewhere it is our own Italian doctors who help Covid patients, sometimes finding collaboration in local doctors.
CC: You have developed an anti-COVID protocol alternative to that of the Ministry of Health. Did I understand well?
MR: I wouldn’t say that. I would rather say that the Ministry of Health has not developed any protocols. Regarding home therapies, World Health Organization proposes a watchful waiting. Never in the history of medicine has there been a “watchful waiting” for the onset of a disease with the development of inflammatory and even lethal aspects. If the watchful waiting can make sense in young subjects who in any case do not die of Covid, it does not, however, make any sense in subjects at risk because they are burdened by other pathologies that we know are putting the patient’s life at risk. In this case it is necessary to intervene immediately in the first phase of the disease (phase of viral replication) with Ivermectin and Azithromycin and in the second phase of the disease (advanced inflammatory phase) with corticosteroids and enoxaparin. Using the right drugs, at the right dosages and on schedule, we always get the result of defeating the pathology and a recovery of the patient in a short time. [Ivermectin is spreading worldwide as the preferred Covid treatment: see this]
CC: Do you visit COVID patients house-to-house?
MR: No. We do not visit home but in telemedicine.
CC: How many are the healed among the sick who have entrusted themselves to you?
MR: Out of 60,000 patients treated we suffered 9 deaths.
CC: Is it normal that during a pandemic emergency there are “prohibited” drugs and discouraged autopsies?
MR: It is not normal. It is pure madness.
CC: What is your opinion on the “Green Pass”?
MR: We believe that the Green Pass is absolutely useless for the purpose of containing the epidemic, especially when we refer it to vaccinated people, in fact this vaccine does not block infection and contagion and therefore does not prevent the spread of the virus. Vaccinated people are carriers of the virus, they can get sick and make others sick, vaccinated or not. The green pass generates a false illusion of immunity.
CC: One last question: why don’t most doctors act like you?
MR: We should ask them. Certainly, following the instructions of the Ministry of Health is more comfortable and protects from retaliation.
*
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).
Western governments in the NATO military alliance are developing tactics of “cognitive warfare,” using the supposed threats of China and Russia to justify waging a “battle for your brain” in the “human domain,” to “make everyone a weapon.”
NATO is developing new forms of warfare to wage a “battle for the brain,” as the military alliance put it.
The US-led NATO military cartel has tested novel modes of hybrid warfare against its self-declared adversaries, including economic warfare, cyber warfare, information warfare, and psychological warfare.
Now, NATO is spinning out an entirely new kind of combat it has branded cognitive warfare. Described as the “weaponization of brain sciences,” the new method involves “hacking the individual” by exploiting “the vulnerabilities of the human brain” in order to implement more sophisticated “social engineering.”
Until recently, NATO had divided war into five different operational domains: air, land, sea, space, and cyber. But with its development of cognitive warfare strategies, the military alliance is discussing a new, sixth level: the “human domain.”
“While actions taken in the five domains are executed in order to have an effect on the human domain, cognitive warfare’s objective is to make everyone a weapon.”
“The brain will be the battlefield of the 21st century,” the report stressed. “Humans are the contested domain,” and “future conflicts will likely occur amongst the people digitally first and physically thereafter in proximity to hubs of political and economic power.”
The 2020 NATO-sponsored study on cognitive warfare
While the NATO-backed study insisted that much of its research on cognitive warfare is designed for defensive purposes, it also conceded that the military alliance is developing offensive tactics, stating, “The human is very often the main vulnerability and it should be acknowledged in order to protect NATO’s human capital but also to be able to benefit from our adversaries’s vulnerabilities.”
In a chilling disclosure, the report said explicitly that “the objective of Cognitive Warfare is to harm societies and not only the military.”
With entire civilian populations in NATO’s crosshairs, the report emphasized that Western militaries must work more closely with academia to weaponize social sciences and human sciences and help the alliance develop its cognitive warfare capacities.
The study described this phenomenon as “the militarization of brain science.” But it appears clear that NATO’s development of cognitive warfare will lead to a militarization of all aspects of human society and psychology, from the most intimate of social relationships to the mind itself.
Such all-encompassing militarization of society is reflected in the paranoid tone of the NATO-sponsored report, which warned of “an embedded fifth column, where everyone, unbeknownst to him or her, is behaving according to the plans of one of our competitors.” The study makes it clear that those “competitors” purportedly exploiting the consciousness of Western dissidents are China and Russia.
In other words, this document shows that figures in the NATO military cartel increasingly see their own domestic population as a threat, fearing civilians to be potential Chinese or Russian sleeper cells, dastardly “fifth columns” that challenge the stability of “Western liberal democracies.”
NATO’s development of novel forms of hybrid warfare come at a time when member states’ military campaigns are targeting domestic populations on an unprecedented level.
The Ottawa Citizen reported this September that the Canadian military’s Joint Operations Command took advantage of the Covid-19 pandemic to wage an information war against its own domestic population, testing out propaganda tactics on Canadian civilians.
Internal NATO-sponsored reports suggest that this disclosure is just scratching the surface of a wave of new unconventional warfare techniques that Western militaries are employing around the world.
Canada hosts ‘NATO Innovation Challenge’ on cognitive warfare
Twice each year, NATO holds a “pitch-style event” that it brand as an “Innovation Challenge.” These campaigns – one hosted in the Spring and the other in the Fall, by alternating member states – call on private companies, organizations, and researchers to help develop new tactics and technologies for the military alliance.
The shark tank-like challenges reflect the predominant influence of neoliberal ideology within NATO, as participants mobilize the free market, public-private partnerships, and the promise of cash prizes to advance the agenda of the military-industrial complex.
“Cognitive warfare seeks to change not only what people think, but also how they act,” the Canadian government wrote in its official statement on the challenge. “Attacks against the cognitive domain involve the integration of cyber, disinformation/misinformation, psychological, and social-engineering capabilities.”
Ottawa’s press release continued:
“Cognitive warfare positions the mind as a battle space and contested domain. Its objective is to sow dissonance, instigate conflicting narratives, polarize opinion, and radicalize groups. Cognitive warfare can motivate people to act in ways that can disrupt or fragment an otherwise cohesive society.”
NATO-backed Canadian military officials discuss cognitive warfare in panel event
An advocacy group called the NATO Association of Canada has mobilized to support this Innovation Challenge, working closely with military contractors to attract the private sector to invest in further research on behalf of NATO – and its own bottom line.
While the NATO Association of Canada (NAOC) is technically an independent NGO, its mission is to promote NATO, and the organization boasts on its website, “The NAOC has strong ties with the Government of Canada including Global Affairs Canada and the Department of National Defence.”
The researcher who wrote the definitive 2020 NATO-sponsored study on cognitive warfare, François du Cluzel, participated in the event, alongside NATO-backed Canadian military officers.
The October 5 panel on cognitive warfare, hosted by the NATO Association of Canada
The panel was overseen by Robert Baines, president of the NATO Association of Canada. It was moderated by Garrick Ngai, a marketing executive in the weapons industry who serves as an adviser to the Canadian Department of National Defense and vice president and director of the NAOC.
Baines opened the event noting that participants would discuss “cognitive warfare and new domain of competition, where state and non-state actors aim to influence what people think and how they act.”
The NAOC president also happily noted the lucrative “opportunities for Canadian companies” that this NATO Innovation Challenge promised.
NATO researcher describes cognitive warfare as ‘ways of harming the brain’
The October 5 panel kicked off with François du Cluzel, a former French military officer who in 2013 helped to create the NATO Innovation Hub (iHub), which he has since then managed from its base in Norfolk, Virginia.
Although the iHub insists on its website, for legal reasons, that the “opinions expressed on this platform don’t constitute NATO or any other organization points of view,” the organization is sponsored by the Allied Command Transformation (ACT), described as “one of two Strategic Commands at the head of NATO’s military command structure.”
The Innovation Hub, therefore, acts as a kind of in-house NATO research center or think tank. Its research is not necessarily official NATO policy, but it is directly supported and overseen by NATO.
In 2020, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT) tasked du Cluzel, as manager of the iHub, to conduct a six-month study on cognitive warfare.
Du Cluzel summarized his research in the panel this October. He initiated his remarks noting that cognitive warfare “right now is one of the hottest topics for NATO,” and “has become a recurring term in military terminology in recent years.”
Although French, Du Cluzel emphasized that cognitive warfare strategy “is being currently developed by my command here in Norfolk, USA.”
The NATO Innovation Hub manager spoke with a PowerPoint presentation, and opened with a provocative slide that described cognitive warfare as “A Battle for the Brain.”
“Cognitive warfare is a new concept that starts in the information sphere, that is a kind of hybrid warfare,” du Cluzel said.
“It starts with hyper-connectivity. Everyone has a cell phone,” he continued. “It starts with information because information is, if I may say, the fuel of cognitive warfare. But it goes way beyond solely information, which is a standalone operation – information warfare is a standalone operation.”
Cognitive warfare overlaps with Big Tech corporations and mass surveillance, because “it’s all about leveraging the big data,” du Cluzel explained. “We produce data everywhere we go. Every minute, every second we go, we go online. And this is extremely easy to leverage those data in order to better know you and use that knowledge to change the way you think.”
Naturally, the NATO researcher claimed foreign “adversaries” are the supposed aggressors employing cognitive warfare. But at the same time, he made it clear that the Western military alliance is developing its own tactics.
Du Cluzel defined cognitive warfare as the “art of using technologies to alter the cognition of human targets.”
Those technologies, he noted, incorporate the fields of NBIC – nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive science. All together, “it makes a kind of very dangerous cocktail that can further manipulate the brain,” he said.
Du Cluzel went on to explain that the exotic new method of attack “goes well beyond” information warfare or psychological operations (psyops).
“Cognitive warfare is not only a fight against what we think, but it’s rather a fight against the way we think, if we can change the way people think,” he said. “It’s much more powerful and it goes way beyond the information [warfare] and psyops.”
De Cluzel continued:
“It’s crucial to understand that it’s a game on our cognition, on the way our brain processes information and turns it into knowledge, rather than solely a game on information or on psychological aspects of our brains. It’s not only an action against what we think, but also an action against the way we think, the way we process information and turn it into knowledge.”
“In other words, cognitive warfare is not just another word, another name for information warfare. It is a war on our individual processor, our brain.”
The NATO researcher stressed that “this is extremely important for us in the military,” because “it has the potential, by developing new weapons and ways of harming the brain, it has the potential to engage neuroscience and technology in many, many different approaches to influence human ecology… because you all know that it’s very easy to turn a civilian technology into a military one.”
As for who the targets of cognitive warfare could be, du Cluzel revealed that anyone and everyone is on the table.
“Cognitive warfare has universal reach, from starting with the individual to states and multinational organizations,” he said. “Its field of action is global and aim to seize control of the human being, civilian as well as military.”
And the private sector has a financial interest in advancing cognitive warfare research, he noted: “The massive worldwide investments made in neurosciences suggests that the cognitive domain will probably one of the battlefields of the future.”
The development of cognitive warfare totally transforms military conflict as we know it, du Cluzel said, adding “a third major combat dimension to the modern battlefield: to the physical and informational dimension is now added a cognitive dimension.”
This “creates a new space of competition beyond what is called the five domains of operations – or land, sea, air, cyber, and space domains. Warfare in the cognitive arena mobilizes a wider range of battle spaces than solely the physical and information dimensions can do.”
In short, humans themselves are the new contested domain in this novel mode of hybrid warfare, alongside land, sea, air, cyber, and outer space.
NATO’s cognitive warfare study warns of “embedded fifth column”
The study that NATO Innovation Hub manager François du Cluzel conducted, from June to November 2020, was sponsored by the military cartel’s Allied Command Transformation, and published as a 45-page report in January 2021 (PDF).
The chilling document shows how contemporary warfare has reached a kind of dystopian stage, once imaginable only in science fiction.
“The nature of warfare has changed,” the report emphasized. “The majority of current conflicts remain below the threshold of the traditionally accepted definition of warfare, but new forms of warfare have emerged such as Cognitive Warfare (CW), while the human mind is now being considered as a new domain of war.”
For NATO, research on cognitive warfare is not just defensive; it is very much offensive as well.
“Developing capabilities to harm the cognitive abilities of opponents will be a necessity,” du Cluzel’s report stated clearly. “In other words, NATO will need to get the ability to safeguard her decision making process and disrupt the adversary’s one.”
And anyone could be a target of these cognitive warfare operations: “Any user of modern information technologies is a potential target. It targets the whole of a nation’s human capital,” the report ominously added.
“As well as the potential execution of a cognitive war to complement to a military conflict, it can also be conducted alone, without any link to an engagement of the armed forces,” the study went on. “Moreover, cognitive warfare is potentially endless since there can be no peace treaty or surrender for this type of conflict.”
Just as this new mode of battle has no geographic borders, it also has no time limit: “This battlefield is global via the internet. With no beginning and no end, this conquest knows no respite, punctuated by notifications from our smartphones, anywhere, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.”
The NATO-sponsored study noted that “some NATO Nations have already acknowledged that neuroscientific techniques and technologies have high potential for operational use in a variety of security, defense and intelligence enterprises.”
It spoke of breakthroughs in “neuroscientific methods and technologies” (neuroS/T), and said “uses of research findings and products to directly facilitate the performance of combatants, the integration of human machine interfaces to optimise combat capabilities of semi autonomous vehicles (e.g., drones), and development of biological and chemical weapons (i.e., neuroweapons).”
The Pentagon is among the primary institutions advancing this novel research, as the report highlighted: “Although a number of nations have pursued, and are currently pursuing neuroscientific research and development for military purposes, perhaps the most proactive efforts in this regard have been conducted by the United States Department of Defense; with most notable and rapidly maturing research and development conducted by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA).”
Military uses of neuroS/T research, the study indicated, include intelligence gathering, training, “optimising performance and resilience in combat and military support personnel,” and of course “direct weaponisation of neuroscience and neurotechnology.”
This weaponization of neuroS/T can and will be fatal, the NATO-sponsored study was clear to point out. The research can “be utilised to mitigate aggression and foster cognitions and emotions of affiliation or passivity; induce morbidity, disability or suffering; and ‘neutralise’ potential opponents or incur mortality” – in other words, to maim and kill people.
The 2020 NATO-sponsored study on cognitive warfare
The report quoted US Major General Robert H. Scales, who summarized NATO’s new combat philosophy: “Victory will be defined more in terms of capturing the psycho-cultural rather than the geographical high ground.”
And as NATO develops tactics of cognitive warfare to “capture the psycho-cultural,” it is also increasingly weaponizing various scientific fields.
The study spoke of “the crucible of data sciences and human sciences,” and stressed that “the combination of Social Sciences and System Engineering will be key in helping military analysts to improve the production of intelligence.”
“If kinetic power cannot defeat the enemy,” it said, “psychology and related behavioural and social sciences stand to fill the void.”
“Leveraging social sciences will be central to the development of the Human Domain Plan of Operations,” the report went on. “It will support the combat operations by providing potential courses of action for the whole surrounding Human Environment including enemy forces, but also determining key human elements such as the Cognitive center of gravity, the desired behaviour as the end state.”
All academic disciplines will be implicated in cognitive warfare, not just the hard sciences.
“Within the military, expertise on anthropology, ethnography, history, psychology among other areas will be more than ever required to cooperate with the military,” the NATO-sponsored study stated.
The report nears its conclusion with an eerie quote:
“Today’s progresses in nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology and cognitive science (NBIC), boosted by the seemingly unstoppable march of a triumphant troika made of Artificial Intelligence, Big Data and civilisational ‘digital addiction’ have created a much more ominous prospect: an embedded fifth column, where everyone, unbeknownst to him or her, is behaving according to the plans of one of our competitors.”
“The modern concept of war is not about weapons but about influence,” it posited. “Victory in the long run will remain solely dependent on the ability to influence, affect, change or impact the cognitive domain.”
The NATO-sponsored study then closed with a final paragraph that makes it clear beyond doubt that the Western military alliance’s ultimate goal is not only physical control of the planet, but also control over people’s minds:
“Cognitive warfare may well be the missing element that allows the transition from military victory on the battlefield to lasting political success. The human domain might well be the decisive domain, wherein multi-domain operations achieve the commander’s effect. The five first domains can give tactical and operational victories; only the human domain can achieve the final and full victory.”
Canadian Special Operations officer emphasizes importance of cognitive warfare
When François du Cluzel, the NATO researcher who conducted the study on cognitive warfare, concluded his remarks in the October 5 NATO Association of Canada panel, he was followed by Andy Bonvie, a commanding officer at the Canadian Special Operations Training Centre.
With more than 30 years of experience with the Canadian Armed Forces, Bonvie spoke of how Western militaries are making use of research by du Cluzel and others, and incorporating novel cognitive warfare techniques into their combat activities.
“Cognitive warfare is a new type of hybrid warfare for us,” Bonvie said. “And it means that we need to look at the traditional thresholds of conflict and how the things that are being done are really below those thresholds of conflict, cognitive attacks, and non-kinetic forms and non-combative threats to us. We need to understand these attacks better and adjust their actions and our training accordingly to be able to operate in these different environments.”
Although he portrayed NATO’s actions as “defensive,” claiming “adversaries” were using cognitive warfare against them, Bonvie was unambiguous about the fact that Western militaries are developing these tecniques themselves, to maintain a “tactical advantage.”
“We cannot lose the tactical advantage for our troops that we’re placing forward as it spans not only tactically, but strategically,” he said. “Some of those different capabilities that we have that we enjoy all of a sudden could be pivoted to be used against us. So we have to better understand how quickly our adversaries adapt to things, and then be able to predict where they’re going in the future, to help us be and maintain the tactical advantage for our troops moving forward.”
‘Cognitive warfare is the most advanced form of manipulation seen to date’
Marie-Pierre Raymond, a retired Canadian lieutenant colonel who currently serves as a “defence scientist and innovation portfolio manager” for the Canadian Armed Forces’ Innovation for Defence Excellence and Security Program, also joined the October 5 panel.
“Long gone are the days when war was fought to acquire more land,” Raymond said. “Now the new objective is to change the adversaries’ ideologies, which makes the brain the center of gravity of the human. And it makes the human the contested domain, and the mind becomes the battlefield.”
“When we speak about hybrid threats, cognitive warfare is the most advanced form of manipulation seen to date,” she added, noting that it aims to influence individuals’ decision-making and “to influence a group of a group of individuals on their behavior, with the aim of gaining a tactical or strategic advantage.”
Raymond noted that cognitive warfare also heavily overlaps with artificial intelligence, big data, and social media, and reflects “the rapid evolution of neurosciences as a tool of war.”
Raymond is helping to oversee the NATO Fall 2021 Innovation Challenge on behalf of Canada’s Department of National Defence, which delegated management responsibilities to the military’s Innovation for Defence Excellence and Security (IDEaS) Program, where she works.
In highly technical jargon, Raymond indicated that the cognitive warfare program is not solely defensive, but also offensive: “This challenge is calling for a solution that will support NATO’s nascent human domain and jump-start the development of a cognition ecosystem within the alliance, and that will support the development of new applications, new systems, new tools and concepts leading to concrete action in the cognitive domain.”
She emphasized that this “will require sustained cooperation between allies, innovators, and researchers to enable our troops to fight and win in the cognitive domain. This is what we are hoping to emerge from this call to innovators and researchers.”
To inspire corporate interest in the NATO Innovation Challenge, Raymond enticed, “Applicants will receive national and international exposure and cash prizes for the best solution.” She then added tantalizingly, “This could also benefit the applicants by potentially providing them access to a market of 30 nations.”
Canadian military officer calls on corporations to invest in NATO’s cognitive warfare research
The other institution that is managing the Fall 2021 NATO Innovation Challenge on behalf of Canada’s Department of National Defense is the Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM).
A Canadian military officer who works with CANSOFCOM, Shekhar Gothi, was the final panelist in the October 5 NATO Association of Canada event. Gothi serves as CANSOFCOM’s “innovation officer” for Southern Ontario.
He concluded the event appealing for corporate investment in NATO’s cognitive warfare research.
The bi-annual Innovation Challenge is “part of the NATO battle rhythm,” Gothi declared enthusiastically.
Gothi reassured corporate investors that NATO will bend over backward to defend their bottom lines: “I can assure everyone that the NATO innovation challenge indicates that all innovators will maintain complete control of their intellectual property. So NATO won’t take control of that. Neither will Canada. Innovators will maintain their control over their IP.”
The comment was a fitting conclusion to the panel, affirming that NATO and its allies in the military-industrial complex not only seek to dominate the world and the humans that inhabit it with unsettling cognitive warfare techniques, but to also ensure that corporations and their shareholders continue to profit from these imperial endeavors.
*
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.
Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with editor Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @BenjaminNorton.
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).
There have been widespread rumors this week that the thousands of flights canceled this past weekend by Southwest Airlines have been the result of massive amounts of people calling in sick to protest COVID-19 vaccine mandates for the airline industry.
Neither management nor airline employees would admit to a protest movement like this, as it is illegal and considered a matter of “national safety.”
Anyone who was around 40 years ago will remember when President Ronald Reagan fired 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored a court order to return to work. Reagan considered the strike a “peril to national safety” and ordered air traffic controllers back to work under the terms of the Taft–Hartley Act.
When the vast majority of them refused, Reagan banned them from federal service for life.
He made sure to explain that he and his group would never endorse a strike or “sick out” as he knows that this is illegal.
Here is what he did say on national TV:
As we know the transportation sector is the heart and soul of this country. And it’s a very delicate system. If there’s a disruption in one part of the system, it has a catastrophic effect among the rest of the system, which is going to affect commerce, it’s going to affect trade, and ultimately it is going to affect the economy.
If you have flights reduced by 30% because 30% of the pilots are fired because they won’t take the vaccine, this is going to affect how your goods get here from overseas, how they’re distributed to the stores.
We have all the control. And the control comes from a simple word. And that’s “no.” We just don’t need to comply.
I think you will see massive disruptions in the supply chain and in your travel, if we just stand up and say “no.”
If these companies fire us, and they fire 30% of the workforce, aircraft are going to stop moving. And it’s going to affect you.
It’s going to affect your air travel, and it’s going to affect the economy.
Another commercial airline pilot, who was only identified as “David in Orange County,” called into the American Journal show on Infowars.com this week.
He started out by explaining that they were given a very small window of opportunity to try and file a medical or religious exemption to the mandated COVID-19 shots, making it almost impossible to do so.
He then goes on to explain that all pilots must maintain a mandated FAA medical certificate of “good health” based on a medical exam, and that if the COVID-19 shots cause any type of injury that would cause them to fail that exam, that basically their careers are over.
He expressed surprise that more pilots were not talking about this subject.
David also addressed the issue of flying with pilots who have taken the COVID-19 shot, and their increased risks for blood clots. He stated:
I’ve noticed that some of the pilots who have taken the shot are almost mentally missing things that are kind of surprising, that (they) wouldn’t normally miss. It’s a good thing there’s two of us up there, because we can at least bounce things back forth with each other and work together as a team.
Watch both interviews. This is on both our Bitchute and Rumble channels.
Here is the Freedom Flyers 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.
Featured image is a screenshot from the video above
Comments Off on Airline Industry Issues Dire Warning Against Vaxx Mandates: “We have all the Control – Aircraft Will Stop Moving” with Major Effects on Economy
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).
Yemen’s Ansar Allah boasted a significant success in the operations to capture Marib city from the Saudi-led coalition.
On October 12th, Houthi (as Ansar Allah is known) spokesman Brigadier-General Yahya Saree said that over the last several days an operation titled ‘Fajr Al-Intisaar’ (Dawn of Victory) was carried out against Riyadh’s forces.
The specific timeline is unclear, but it lasted presumably around ten days.
The operation was dubbed a success as it achieved the capture of the area in Al Bass Al Shadebed, looking down on Marib city, and shooting down 6 US-made spy fighter planes and 11 spy planes. Approximately 600 square kilometers were taken from Saudi-coalition control.
Additionally, the Houthi missile unit had carried out 68 attacks, targeting enemy bases, barracks and headquarters, out of which 49 attacks were carried out in the occupied territories of Yemen and 19 inside the Saudi territory.
Approximately 300 armored vehicles, and troop carriers, 850 weapons, and four weapons depots, were damaged, destroyed and burned. And about 5,650 Saudi-led coalition fighters were killed, injured or captured.
The Houthis announced that any mercenary who would leave willingly would be allowed to go to Sana’a and have their injuries treated.
The Saudi-led coalition responded to this with an increased airstrike activity. Over the period, the Saudi-led coalition carried out 948 airstrikes, allegedly targeting civilian homes and roads.
On October 12th, the Saudi fighter jets carried out nearly 50 air raids, with 24 strikes targeted Houthi positions near Marib city, Abdiyah was struck 21 times.
With the fight ramping up in Yemen, it is becoming increasingly important for regional stability and power balance in the Middle East. This is especially true for the United States, after losing its positions in Afghanistan.
Yemen is a tool of influence in the region, and primarily over Saudi Arabia, since it’s capability heavily depends on the weaponry that Washington provides, as well as its logistic support.
With the energy market volatility, and the evident reinforcement of the UAE’s role in the region, Yemen’s significance is growing. It would not be any surprise if the US administration plans to focus more on fostering relations with the UAE and improving its standing in the Middle East, as Saudi Arabia has proven itself as a rather inadequate and incapable ally.
*
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).
So-called public health experts sponsored by the federal government had been conducting experiments on how to make people take the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines six months before they first became available.
Researchers from Yale Universityconducted the study back in July 2020, at least five months before the first COVID-19 vaccine received an emergency use authorization. It was published in the National Library of Medicine, a medical library run by the National Institutes of Health.
This means the federal government has sponsored tests designed to figure out the best messages to use to get people vaccinated.
The study, officially titled “Persuasive Messages for COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Part 1,” involved 4,000 participants recruited online. The goal of the study was to test which kind of messaging would work best to convince people to get the COVID-19 vaccine.
In the study, one group of participants was assigned as a control group. They were given messages that were not related to getting the COVID-19 vaccines. Another group was assigned to be fed baseline messaging. Meaning, they were fed straightforward “facts” regarding the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines.
It should be noted that all COVID-19 vaccines were still in the middle of development in July last year. This means any “facts” this group was fed regarding the vaccines had not been proven at the time. (Related: COVID propaganda roundup: The ‘safe and effective’ narrative implodes.)
The experiment had 10 other groups that were told different kinds of propaganda regarding the vaccines. One group was fed messages about “personal freedom.” Members of that group were told that COVID-19 is limiting people’s personal freedom “and by working together to get enough people vaccinated, society can preserve its personal freedom.”
One other group was told that frontline workers like firefighters, doctors and other healthcare personnel are brave for helping deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Those who choose not to get vaccinated against COVID-19 are not brave,” read the study’s summary of this experiment.
Another group was told to trust in the science regarding the COVID-19 vaccines. The main message for the group was:
“Vaccination is backed by science. If one doesn’t get vaccinated that means that one doesn’t understand how infections are spread or who ignores science.”
One group was told that getting vaccinated was the only way they can regain their economic freedom. Another was told messages claiming it would be economically beneficial for them to get vaccinated.
Three groups were dedicated to feeding people messages to pressure them to get vaccinated. These groups were divided by tactic: guilt, embarrassment and anger. Two groups were fed messages regarding the social benefit of getting vaccinated and how getting vaccinated is in the best interest of the person or of the community.
Matt Agorist of the Free Thought Project has said that those messages ultimately proved to be ineffective, “which is why the government is now rolling out mandates.”
Children are now being targeted by vaccine messaging
The White House has told governors and other state leaders to prepare for the massive push to vaccinate children as young as five years old by early November. This is in anticipation of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine being given clearance to be used for younger age groups.
According to recent reports, the administration of President Joe Biden has already purchased as much as 65 million doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. This would be enough to vaccinate an estimated 28 million children between the ages of five to 11 who will soon be eligible to take the deadly and experimental vaccine.
In line with this preparation, Biden’s administration has ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to plan a messaging and outreach campaign specifically designed to encourage parents to get their children vaccinated.
The administration has also begun planning the mass vaccination campaign with other local, state and federal groups, other medical groups and pharmacies.
Learn more about how the federal government is trying to influence people into taking the experimental, rushed and deadly COVID-19 vaccines by reading the latest articles at Vaccines.news.
*
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).
Following the conscientious resignation of Acting Senior Sergeant Krystle Mitchell of the Victoria Police in Australia, the international network Police for Freedom https://policeforfreedom.org/ has just issued the statement below in support.
Krystle had served Victorians, with distinction, for 16 years as a police officer and has recently resigned over a matter of conscience in relation to policing of the Covid-19 restrictions.
Watch her interview below.
Here is the Police for Freedom statement:
Police For Freedom International commends Acting Senior Sergeant Krystle Mitchell for standing up and giving a voice to thousands of police in Victoria, Australia right now. Thank you for your courage and integrity, sacrificing your career in the name of truth.
In the current political climate, in which rights and freedoms worldwide are restricted and under further threat, it is the conscience and courage of individuals who capably defend such rights and freedoms, such as Krystle Mitchell, that will be vital if the truth is to ultimately prevail.
These rights include those articulated in the UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, including:
Article 3.1: Human dignity and human rights:
Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be fully respected. The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society.
Article 6: Consent:
Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.
We at Police For Freedom are happy to support each and every serving officer who decides to stand on the right side of history. It is tragic that police are having to lose their jobs for simply raising concerns about where our societies are being taken under the guise of health mandates.
Policing is all about community, and we will do our very best to help police stand together with their people.
Henna Maria Vermeulen, founder of Police For Freedom, and international coordinator
Juan Manuel Ramos Mateo, co-founder of Policías por la Libertad, Agente Jefe del Policía Local España
Edward Gilbert, representative of Victoria, Australia, and former An Garda Siochana, Ireland
Dennis Spaanstra, representative of The Netherlands, and Brigadier van politie Nederland
Vincent Gircys, representative of Ontario, Canada, and retired Provincial Constable, Canada
Oscar Suarez, representative of Florida, U.S.A., and Corporal Supervisor, Local Police, Florida
Sonia Vescovacci, co-founder of Policías por la Libertad, and Oficial del Cuerpo Nacional de Policía España
Me Virginie de Araujo-Becchia, legal representative of Police For Freedom, and Attorney Paris Bar Association
Robert J. Burrowes, nonviolent action strategist of Police For Freedom, Australia
Mads Krarup Nielsen, representative of Denmark, and former Constable WA and Copenhagen Police
Maria Chirdaris, representative of British Columbia, Canada, and Police Constable, former BC Sheriff
Charlene Lynch, representative of Quebec, Canada, and Police Technic, John Abbot College
*
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).
The global economy is in crisis. The Covid-19 Lockdown policies have triggered a process of Worldwide economic destabilization which directly affects both “Supply” and “Demand” relations. It’s the most serious economic crisis in World history affecting simultaneously more than a 150 countries.
Worldwide, large sectors of industry, agriculture and urban services stand idle. The lockdown policies initiated in March 2020 have triggered bankruptcies and unemployment, which in turn have been conducive to a process of disengagement of human resources (labor) and productive assets from the economic landscape.
The freeze of air-travel, the contraction in international commodity trade in the course of 2020-2021 has also contributed to a massive decline in production and investment.
The Crisis in International Commodity Trade
The crisis in container trade has also led to major shortages in the availability of staple food commodities such as rice, sugar, soya beans, etc. which in turn has triggered inflationary hikes at the retail level. India, which is the second largest exporter of sugar experienced a collapse of approximately 80% in its sugar exports.
Shortage in the Availability of Semi-conductors
The automobile industry experienced a decline in production of 15% in 2020. The evidence suggests a much larger decline in 2021, largely affecting production in Japan, South Korea and China.
This decline has been accentuated by a shortage in the availability of semi-conductors:
“Automakers, which rely on dozens of chips to build a single vehicle, have been particularly hard hit, forced to halt production lines globally as they await chip supplies. The debacle is likely to cost the auto industry $450 billion in global sales … In September 2021 Toyota was forced to slash production at 14 factories in Japan over a lack of semiconductors. Some of the cuts will continue into October due to a lack of components from Southeast Asia, Toyota has said.” (Washington Post, September 2021)
Since 2021, there have been several instances of production standstill in the automotive industry. The Volkswagen subsidiary Skoda, for example, estimates that there were 100,000 cars that they could not manufacture in 20216.
Across the entire industry, an estimated 7.7 million fewer vehicles were produced in the same year-on-year period. This corresponds to a monetary value of about 210 million USD7. Due to the complexity of the production chains described above, it will take time even after production capacities have recovered until output in the automotive industry is at pre-crisis level once again.
The resulting lead times of six to nine months for complex microchips affect the entire supply chain, making it noticeably more difficult for the whole industry to respond to fluctuations in demand.
Some car manufacturers have therefore started to stockpile chips in preparation for future fluctuations (just-in-case instead of just-in-time production)9. However, the limited shelf life of a microchip makes this a temporary solution at best.
Engineered chaos in industrial production? From one day to the the next Japan’s automobile industry is in crisis.
Semiconductors constitute a strategic commodity, used in a variety of sectors including electronics, medical devices, electronic and communications networks etc.
There are indications of possible manipulations, which have led to artificial shortages of semiconductors affecting a number of key sectors of the global economy.
There are geopolitical implications. The World’s largest semiconductor producer which was has been routinely trading with China is Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC).
In a strategic decision, the US has pressured the Taiwan government with a view to relocating its plant to the U.S. in a joint venture arrangement.
From the very outset of the Covid Crisis in January 2020, the Big Money elites have been involved in the broader process of manipulation of financial, commodity and energy markets as well as the disruption of air transportation. (For details, see Michel Chossudovsky’s E Book, Chapters IV, V, XIII)
This diabolical plan from the outset has been to bankrupt entire sectors of the “Real Economy” with a view to restructuring and appropriating the productive assets of bankrupt companies. According to F. William Engdahl:
The price of energy from all sources conventional is exploding globally. Far from accidental, it is a well-orchestrated plan to collapse the industrial world economy that has already been weakened dramatically by almost two years of ridiculous covid quarantine and related measures.
View this important report by Stew Peters, which confirms that shortages are being created deliberately.
VIDEO
An anonymous worker from the Port of Los Angeles came forward on “The Stew Peters Show” to confirm what we have all suspected.
*
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.
In the last 50 years there have been two major threats to life on our planet. The first, the nuclear arms race and its near disaster of 1962, was narrowly averted by President John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert Kennedy, who then set a course for peace. (See Part I of this essay)
The second, the ticking climate bomb on its short “business as usual” fuse, has no solution in sight.
In both cases unseen forces have blocked a survival response to incalculable danger. We will examine these forces and suggest a way forward, modeled partially on action taken by JFK to avert nuclear war.
Mind is the Master power that moulds and makes,
And Man is Mind, and evermore he takes
The tool of Thought, and, shaping what he wills,
Brings forth a thousand joys, a thousand ills: —
He thinks in secret, and it comes to pass:
Environment is but his looking-glass.
James Allen,1902
The Looming Climate Emergency: Science Anyone Can Understand
The role of greenhouse gases, which absorb and hold the heat in earth’s atmosphere, and which acidify the oceans, has been simply and clearly illustrated by Dr. Eric Grimsrud in his slide-show, Short Course: The Earth’s Climate.[29]
Overwhelmingly, scientists now believe it is “likely that the world will blow past the 2 degree C warming threshold that scientists and international negotiators agree is needed to avoid catastrophic consequences.”[30]
On December 3, 2012, The Global Carbon Project, comprised of 35 climatologists from 10 countries, reported that under “business as usual,” “emissions are heading to a 4.0 to 6.1 degree C ‘likely’ increase in temperature.”[31]
How do they know this?
Note on the graph below that 800,000 years of ice core data show a close correspondence between atmospheric CO2 and earth’s average temperatures.[32] Also, the pre-industrial (1840’s) CO2 level was 278 parts per million, and had never been much higher during the 800,000 years.[33]
The increase in CO2 levels between 2011 and 2012 was the second-biggest ever recorded, jumping 2.67 parts per million in that year alone, to reach 395 ppm.
The NOAA graph of Mauno Loa CO2 data from 2009 to February 2013, showing a rise from 386 to 396.8 ppm, looks like a runaway train.[34]
This CO2 persists in the atmosphere for thousands of years, accumulating faster than earth’s oceans and forests can absorb it, with the result that the past 10 years have been hotter than more than 75% of the past 11,300 years.[35]
In January, 2013 the New York Times reported an effect of this rate of accumulation: “Temperature differences between years are usually measured in fractions of a degree, but last year’s 55.3 degree average demolished the previous record, set in 1998, by a full degree Fahrenheit.”[36]
Former skeptics finally believe we are facing a planetary emergency:
British climate change economist Lord Nicholas Stern said in January that “I got it wrong on climate change — it’s far, far worse;” that he now believes we are “on track for something like four” degrees above the long-term global temperature average, and the “risks of a four- or five-degree rise.”[37]
World Bank President Jim Kim spoke of “a real and present danger,” referring to “an extreme heat wave in Russia [that] led to 55,000 deaths.” In Thailand, the 2011 floods led to losses of “45 billion or about 13% of GDP.”[38]
Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said recently that “unless we take action on climate change, future generations will be roasted, toasted, fried and grilled.”[39]
“During the three decades from 1980 to 2011, the number of violent storms, floods, droughts, heat waves, wildfires, as tabulated by the reinsurance company Munich Re, has increased more than three-fold. They also estimate that the financial losses follow a trend line that has gone from $40 billion to $170 billion dollars per year.”[40]
It is clear to these economists, who do not hold science degrees, that once the tipping point is passed and earth is unable to regain its balance, our most desperate attempts will be unable to fend off catastrophe.
So why have governments been so slow to respond?
IV. Climate Reality: The Unspeakable Obstruction to Public Awareness and Action
An enormous gulf exists historically between scientific consensus on climate change and public awareness, with the media giving equal time to believers and deniers.
Grimsrud attributes this extraordinary negligence to “the humungous snow job that is being done to the intellect of the general public by the omnipotent fossil fuel dynasties that have dominated life on our planet for many decades.”[41]
For example, in 2009 former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev convened The Climate Change Task Force[42], a group of 20 scientists, economists, former heads of state, Nobel prize laureates and climate experts from developed and developing countries.
In June, 2012 the Task Force issued a 3-page “Appeal for Urgent Action on Climate Change”, calling on the UN Conference Rio+20, for “an urgent and profound international response to the increasing risks and threats of climate change,” and for “radical new solutions.” [43]
A Google News Archive search reveals that this body has never once been covered in the Western mainstream news since its inception in 2009.
Not surprising. From 2002-2010 a group of anonymous conservative billionaires channeled $120 million “of dark money” to more than 100 think tanks, many near Washington DC, casting doubt on the science behind climate change.[44] “Those same groups are now mobilising against Obama’s efforts to act on climate change in his second term. A top recipient of the secret funds on Wednesday put out a point-by-point critique of the climate content in the president’s state of the union address.”[45]
The plan is in full swing, especially regarding the proposed $7 billion, 1700-mile Keystone XL Pipeline.
The 2,000-page draft environmental impact statement was issued by the US State Department on March 1st.[46]
It has since come to light that this statement was actually written by the TransCanada Pipeline contractor.[47] “The statement estimates, and then dismisses, the pipeline’s massive carbon footprint and other environmental impacts, because, it asserts, the mining and burning of the tar sands is unstoppable.”
Why is it unstoppable? Because the public, deluged with media anti-science, still hopes its addiction to oil will somehow work out — and many believe that “cheap oil” is the only thing that keeps the economy from tanking.
But why is Obama, who knows the science and has two daughters who will live into the coming debacle, not taking the “transformative, radical action” urged by Gorbachev? Why does he not start by turning Keystone down, as the New York Times urged him to do?[48]
Obama has in fact tried to end the $4 billion in subsidies to oil and gas companies. However the March 29, 2012 bill was defeated 51-47 by the Senate (60 votes are required).[49]
But the unseen hand is ever-present:
US Energy Secretary Dr. Steven Chu resigned February 1, 2013, after a four-year term. Long criticized by the oil industry for his clean energy programs, Chu said that “only one percent of the companies we funded went bankrupt. That one percent has gotten more attention than the 99 percent that have not.”[50]
The pro-Keystone XL Bill that passed March 16, 2013 in the US Senate was co-sponsored by 14 Senators, who together have received $10 million in campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry.[51]
Vancouver economist Robyn Allan writes of the Harper government’s pro-Keystone agenda: “If the goal was to strengthen Canada’s economy, bitumen would be upgraded at facilities in Alberta (creating jobs and adding value to the petroleum product), and then moved east where there is a domestic demand in Ontario and Quebec.”[52] Canadian unions know this and urgently oppose the pipeline.[53]
In short, the whole Keystone debate has nothing to do with jobs, investigative reporting, or an informed public — and everything to do with narrow industry profits, election campaign chests, and industry-backed media fog.
These mercenary interests posing as climate deniers are holding sway over the future of both countries, if not the world.
V. Confronting the Unspeakable
If JFK, MLK, and RFK were assassinated while promoting peace in a military economy, how far can Obama push for renewables in a military/oil economy?
In 2009, the Department of Defense, the largest consumer of energy in America, used over 93% of all US Government energy, and more than the whole country of Nigeria with a population of 140 million.[54]
The military produced 4% of the carbon emissions of the entire U.S. How can Obama slow down this glutted war machine? If he tries, will he face the same fate as JFK?
When White House Press journalist Sarah MacClendon asked President Bill Clinton why he wasn’t doing anything about UFO disclosure, Clinton replied, “Sarah, there’s a government inside the government, and I don’t control it.”[55]
CIA veteran Ray McGovern, who for years delivered the morning intelligence brief to Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush, referred in 2009 to “two CIA’s.” One was created by President Truman to “give him the straight scoop without any fear or favor. [And there is also a] covert action arm,” which acts without oversight by Congressional committees. “I think Panetta, and to a degree President Obama, are afraid — I never thought I’d hear myself saying this — I think they’re afraid of the CIA.”[56]
Indeed, former CIA Director Leon Panetta advised Obama, when he wanted to downsize troops in Afghanistan, that “no Democratic president can go against military advice, especially if he asked for it…So just do it. Do what they say.”[57]
Such warnings would also explain Obama’s granting of immunity to 98 of Bush’s 100 CIA torturers in 2012, after he had sworn to bring justice to the issue.[58]
It’s therefore not much of a stretch to see that when:
a) the military depends heavily on oil, and
b) there is hard evidence that a covert arm of the CIA has been complicit in state assassinations,
a President who has already backed off on troop reductions and CIA accountability might well fear running afoul of “the abyss” if he took decisive action against the oil-based economic steamroller.
And here we come to the Presidential crunch between the “deep state” and the public (democratic) state. The deep state is the embedded politics of the corporate evil that has become so pervasive in recent years. The guts of the U.S. economy is a morality blind to bank fraud, rampant pharmaceutical toxicity, a fats-and-sugar food industry driving epidemic obesity, and fossil-fuel control of the media.
How can we help Obama to save the public state, and indeed the world, from global warming? How can we regain control of our national democracies to secure the survival of life itself?
In the final analysis, Douglass concludes, the Unspeakable is not far way. It is not somewhere out there, fused with a government that has become alien to us. To the extent that we fail to confront it, the void of responsibility is also within ourselves.
We might now turn to the words of Robert F. Kennedy before a large Indianapolis crowd the day Martin Luther King was killed. With his own brother’s death clearly in mind he cited his favorite Greek poet, Aeschylus:
“In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God.”
Such pain has been known to all of us. It is the duality that deepens our compassion for humankind. Allowing it to live on in us marks the end of existential isolation and inertia.
VI. A Way Forward to Climate Sanity
It is clear from the foregoing that all people must rise to meet the crisis. To sustain life as we know it, humanity must reduce atmospheric CO2 from 396 ppm to 350 ppm, and soon.
“Business as usual” will lead to disaster and is now out of the question. We are at war with our own behavior and it is time to gear up, impose discipline, and win the planet back.
We must first consider the over-arching nature of reality. Contrary to the prevailing view, the economy is a subset of our ecology — not the other way around.[59]
Ecology is what we live in. We are dependent on the land base and we need it to survive. Our society lives within the land base, and inside our society is the economy. The most basic necessity is not the economy, but the ecology, and this truth must be recognized in order to map our recovery.
The actions below, if taken, would return us to living in an ecological society:
1. Tame the U.S. Senate on Climate Matters
First, the will of the people, the Congress, and the President must take priority over the Senate.
In August 1963, JFK, up against nuclear “cold warriors” and the Senate, waged an all-out campaign to win Senate approval of the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty. White House organizers led by Norman Cousins reached out through a Citizens Committee to business and religious leaders, scientists, scholars, universities, unions, newspapers, and NGO’s. This remarkable campaign succeeded within several weeks in mobilizing the anti-nuclear sentiment of the country, and the Senate approved JFK’s Treaty 80-19 in September.[60]
Obama faces a similar situation today: a) the planet is imperiled by fossil fuels; b) the Senate is under pressure from the oil industry; c) the public is becoming increasingly alarmed and could be mobilized to speak out; d) workable transition strategies for clean energy have already been developed.
2. Commit to Workable Principles for Transitioning to Clean Energy
Dr. Grimsrud has set out in his Short Course a simple, workable plan for transitioning to clean energy:[61]
Use only known reserves of gas and oil. They are the “cleanest” forms of fossil fuels. Halt exploration for new reserves.
Leave all other forms of fossil fuels in the ground, including coal, tar sands, and shale oil.
Pursue massive reforestation and biomass production to enable CO2 uptake.
3. Commit to Economic Incentives to Build Compliance
Immediately start taxing the full atmospheric cost of fossil fuel use to producers. Use this money to subsidize eligible clean energy businesses. Charge carbon import taxes on all products for which a carbon tax was not paid in the country of origin. (The Carbon Fee and Dividend Plan)
Transfer existing oil and gas subsidies to eligible clean energy businesses, including high-mileage cars and green buildings.
Create venture-capital programs for the clean-tech sector.
Create efficiency standards for household appliances and lighting.
Subsidize in-city public transport and bicycle use.
Rationing: Introduce rationing of oil and gas for automobiles, home heating (while subsidizing electricity and heat pumps), and non-essential flight travel.
World War II rationing in Great Britain worked well and was based on the following decisions: [62]
In 1939 and 1940 the government rejected proposals to rely upon increased taxation to cut consumption because the impact of tax rises would be slow and inequitable.
The government introduced rationing instead, as it was the best way to cut consumption quickly and ensure that reduced supplies were shared out equitably.
Policymakers rejected tradable rations, a feature of current carbon rationing proposals, fearing that it would undermine the moral basis of rationing, encourage coupon fraud and feed inflation, thereby negating the socially-progressive aspects of tradable rations.
The public accepted that rationing was a temporary but necessary measure due to persuasive economic arguments, underlying trust in central government, and positive memories of rationing during the First World War.
To introduce a successful carbon rationing scheme, the experience of the Second World War indicates that the government must convince the public that rationing levels are fair; that the system is administered transparently and fairly; and that evaders are few in number, likely to be detected and liable to stiff penalties if found guilty.
In this essay we have looked at the truth about climate, and what is needed to address it.
As Arundhati Roy has written, “The trouble is that once you see it, you can’t unsee it, and once you’ve seen it, keeping quiet, saying nothing, becomes as political an act as speaking out. There’s no innocence. Either way you’re accountable.”[63]
VII. Conclusion
It is critically important that we respond to the precipice in front of us: there is no time to be lulled by a sense of normalcy while the planet quietly and irreversibly succumbs to ruin. We must act now, before the weather becomes truly terrifying.
Let us honor our assassinated heroes by learning from them.
John Kennedy, in his American University address, was proclaiming a way out of the Cold War and into a new human possibility. We need to connect with JFK’s new possibility by meeting the unspeakable: first in ourselves, and then in the deep hidden places that we sense exist behind our democratic institutions.
So far, we have failed these men unforgivably by not looking long and hard where they pointed.[64]
The price of not going into the heart of truth has become unaffordable. Bob Dylan once asked, “How far in will you go?”
This question must mark the beginning of a new journey at every level of society.
Notes
[29] Eric P. Grimsrud, “Short Course. The Earth’s Climate: Historic, Present, and Future,” May, 2012 (http://ericgrimsrud.com/short-course_281.html). Grimsrud is a Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, Montana State University, who taught atmospheric science for 29 years, has written more than 100 published articles, and holds teaching and research awards. See also the 4-minute video “Climate 101,” narrated by Bill Nye (http://vimeo.com/28991442 ); and the TED Talk, by David Roberts, “Climate Change is Simple” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7ktYbVwr90).
[30] Glen P. Peters, et al., “The Challenge to Keep Global Warming Below 2°C, Nature Climate Change, December 2012 (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n1/full/nclimate1783.html).
[31] Global Carbon Project, “Global Carbon Budget, 2012,” December 12, 2012 (http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/12/files/CarbonBudget2012.pdf).
[32] Eric P. Grimsrud, “Short Course. The Earth’s Climate: Historic, Present, and Future,” May, 2012 (http://ericgrimsrud.com/short-course_281.html), Section 4.
[33] See Grimsrud “Short Course,” Section 4 (http://ericgrimsrud.com/short-course_281.html).
[34] U.S. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, “Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide,” http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
[35] Shaun A. Marcott, et al., “A Reconstruction of Regional and Global Temperature for the Past 11,300 Years,” Science, March 8, 2013 (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/339/6124/1198.abstract).
[36] Justin Gillis, New York Times, January 8, 2013, “Not Even Close: 2012 Was Hottest Ever in US” (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/09/science/earth/2012-was-hottest-year-ever-in-us.html?_r=1&).
[37] “Nicholas Stern: ‘I got it wrong on climate change — it’s far, far worse,'” Heather Stewart and Larry Elliott, The Guardian, January 26, 2013 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jan/27/nicholas-stern-climate-change-davos).
[38] World Bank President Jim Yong Kim at G20 Meeting, “Climate Change Represents Real, Present Danger, February 16, 2003 (http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/speech/2013/02/16/world-bank-president-jim-kim-at-g20-meeting-climate-change-represents-real-present-danger).
[39] David Runnalls, “Roasted, Toasted, Fried and Grilled: Climate Talk from an Unlikely Source,” The Globe and Mail, February 1, 2013 (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/roasted-toasted-fried-and-grilled-climate-change-talk-from-an-unlikely-source/article8077946/).
[40] “Letter from Secretary Steven Chu to Energy Department Employees Announcing His Decision Not to Serve a Second Term,” February 1, 2013 (Steven Chu resignation letter, http://www.doe.gov/articles/letter-secretary-steven-chu-energy-department-employees-announcing-his-decision-not-serve). Munich Re report at http://www.munichre.com/publications/302-07742_en.pdf.
[41] Eric Grimsrud, “Questions Concerning Short Course,” March 18, 2013 post , “Welcome to Freelandia” (http http://ericgrimsrud.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/welcome-to-feelandia/).
[42] CCTF http://www.climatechangetaskforce.org/task-force/view.php?Id=1. The full 27-page 2012 CCTF Statement, “Action to Face the Urgent Realities of Climate Change,” is at http://green-cross.se/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/CCTF_Statement_180612.pdf.
[43] The Climate Change Task Force, “Appeal for Urgent Action on Climate Change,” Geneva, June 11, 2012 (http://www.gcint.org/sites/default/files/publication/document/CCTF%20APPEAL-June11-2012-Eng.pdf).
[44] Susan Goldenberg, “Secret funding helped build vast network of climate denial thinktanks,” The Guardian, February 14, 2013 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network).
[45] Ibid.
[46] U.S. Department of State. Keystone XL Pipeline Project, “Draft Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement,” March 1, 2013 (http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/draftseis/index.htm).
[47] Brad Johnson, “‘State Department’ Keystone XL Report Actually Written by TransCanada Contractor,” Huffington Post Blog, March 6, 2013 (www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-johnson/keystone-xl-pipeline-report_b_2825044.html).
[48] “When to Say No,” New York Times, March 10, 2013 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/opinion/when-to-say-no-to-the-keystone-xl.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=1&).
[49] “Obama Plan to End U.S. Oil Subsidies Rejected,” CBC News, March 29, 2012 (http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/03/29/obama-oil-subsidies.html).
[50] Tom Zeller, “Energy Secretary Steven Chu Resigns, Chastises Climate Deniers and Clean-Energy Critics,” Huffington Post, February 1, 2013 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/01/steven-chu-resigns_n_2601964.html).
[51] David Turnbull, “Pro-Keystone XL Senate Bill Follows Pattern of Following the Oil Money,” Oilchange International, March 14, 2013 (http://priceofoil.org/2013/03/14/pro-keystone-xl-senate-bill-follows-pattern-of-following-the-oil-money/).
[52] Travis Lupick, “Economist Questions Financial Benefits of Alberta Oil Sands,” Striaght.com, March 26, 2013 (http://www.straight.com/news/365441/economist-questions-financial-benefits-alberta-oil-sands).
[53] Gloria Galloway, “Oil-sands Workers Press MP’s to Oppose ‘Wrongheaded’ Keystone Pipeline,” The Globe and Mail, September 21, 2011 (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/oil-sands-workers-press-mps-to-oppose-wrongheaded-keystone-pipeline/article617711/).
[54] “How Much Energy Does the U.S. Military Consume?” January 3, 2011 (http://www.dailyenergyreport.com/how-much-energy-does-the-u-s-military-consume/).
[55] Rick Bonner, “UFOs and the President’s Office: What the President Knows, and Doesn’t,” May 23, 2012 (http://www.examiner.com/article/ufos-and-the-oval-office-what-the-president-knows-and-doesn-t).
[56] Brad Friedman, “Ray McGovern Warns of ‘Two CIA’s,'” September 13, 2009 (http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/091309a.html). Dr. Peter Dale Scott has called this “deep politics.” Peter Dale Scott, “The ‘Deep State’ Behind U.S. Democracy,” Voltaire Net, April 6, 2011 (http://www.voltairenet.org/article169316.html). My essay variously refers to the “deep state” as “the unspeakable”, “the abyss”, and “the void”.
[57] Bob Woodward, “Obama’s Wars,” Simon & Schuster, 2010, p. 247.
[58] Glenn Greenwald, “Obama’s Justice Department Grants Final Immunity to Bush’s CIA Torturers,” The Guardian, August 31, 2012 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/31/obama-justice-department-immunity-bush-cia-torturer).
[59] Satish Kumar, founder of the Schumacher Institute, “Economics is a Subset of Ecology,” posted November 10, 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW0IV30H6Hk&noredirect=1).
[60] Lawrence S. Wittner, “Looking Back: Norman Cousins and the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963,” Arms Control Today, December, 2012 (http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2012_12/Looking-Back-Norman-Cousins-and-the-Limited-Test-Ban-Treaty-of-1963).
[61] Eric P. Grimsrud, “Short Course. The Earth’s Climate: Historic, Present, and Future,” May, 2012 (http://ericgrimsrud.com/short-course_281.html), Sections 8a and 8b.
[62] These points are copied directly from: Mark Roodhouse, “Rationing Returns: A Solution to Global Warming?” History & Policy, March, 2007 (http://www.historyandpolicy.org/papers/policy-paper-54.html). History & Policy is a collaboration between scholars at the Universities of Cambridge and London, England.
[63] Arundhati Roy, “Power Politics,” South End Press, 2001, p. 7.
[64] Indeed President Eisenhower had explicitly warned against it in 1961: “The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Eisenhower’s Farewell Address to the Nation, January 17, 1961″ (http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm).
I wish to thank Dr. Michael J. Harvey, biologist, for his assistance with this essay.
This essay is dedicated to Dr. James W. Douglass, from whose book JFK and the Unspeakable and workshop I learned deeply.
The purpose of this work is to provide an investigation into the ideology of anthropogenic (human caused) climate change.
It has been written with the confidence that further research within the public, as well as the academic realm is required. Furthermore, the investigative strategy incorporated in this paper serves to provide a starting place for additional investigation. Therefore, the foundational reason for this work is to empower the understanding of the readership.
“We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it…And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control.” John F. Kennedy
To initiate an evidentiary inquiry into geopolitical decision making, one must first understand the causal relations that frame how a scientific issue is presented, addressed and subsequently dismissed. Of importance, is the distinction between sound science and methods motivated by political self interest. In the case of the former, the observer maintains a qualitative standard founded upon the premise that such an investigation will enhance the comprehensive intelligence within their respective discipline. In the case of the latter, the observer upholds a personal standard founded upon the ideology that this method will satisfy their self-interest and accelerate their ascendance to academic prominence. Thus, to value the integrity of the former method, the current directive must be to inspire a holistic understanding within the readership, as well as to identify the inconsistencies that arise within the discourse pertaining to anthropogenic climate change.
To further clarify, the guiding principals and intent of this work is to transform power. Since the prevailing dominant discourse derives its influence through maintaining ignorance, a praxis grounded upon intellectual empowerment is the most effective use of this knowledge. This investigation begins with an analysis of inconsistencies documented by official sources.
First to be examined is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. It is the prerogative of NASA to research and identify causal forces within Earth’s solar system. NASA identifies multivariate concerns over uncertainties pertaining to potential causal forces influencing climate change. “There’s a great deal that we don’t know about the future of Earth’s climate and how climate change will affect humans”, including the impacts of solar irradiance, aerosols/dust/smoke, clouds, the carbon cycle, ocean circulation, precipitation and sea level rise (NASA 2013). As illustrated by researcher Victor Herrera of the Institute of Geophysics at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, this statement by NASA is critical for “the models and forecasts of the UN IPCC are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity” (Morano 2008, pg 4). To omit such an influential contributor to climate change as the sun would inherently bias statistical models in favour of anthropogenic theorizing. NASA’s admission is important for it sets the groundwork for a genuine understanding on climate change.
A secondary piece of pertinent evidence is a report issued in 2012 by the United Kingdom’s National Weather Service. In this report, Colin Morice et al. state: “this model cannot take into account structural uncertainties arising from data set construction methodologies. It is clear that a full description of uncertainties in near-surface temperature, including those uncertainties arising from differing methodologies, requires that independent studies of near-surface temperatures should be maintained” (Morice, 2012, pg 5). This is important for the scientists involved clearly state the limitations of their chosen methodology, ie the HADCRUT4 data set, and recommend that independent research be conducted to affirm their findings.
David Rose, reporting for the UK’s Daily Mail, incorporated the graphs from this study into an article he wrote entitled Global Warming Stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report. Rose also interviews a number of climate scientists who express uncertainty regarding the accuracy of climate modeling.
These interviews include “Professor Phil Jones, [former] director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia…[who] admitted that he and his colleagues did not understand the impact of ‘natural variability’ – factors such as long-term ocean temperature cycles and changes in the output of the sun” (Rose 2012). Professor Phil Jones is the same individual “who found himself the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails..” (Rose 2012).
In these emails, Jones, in association with Michael Mann and other collaborators, communicate their intention to censor academic papers via intervening in the IPCC peer review process, as well as manipulate statistical data to conform to inaccurate climate forecast models. In a 2009 email correspondence between Kevin Trenberth and Michael Mann, Trenberth states: “the fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t… Our observing system is inadequate” (Global Research 2009). As identified in the introduction, the actions of Jones and Mann perfectly illustrate the ideal of scientists working for academic self interest and not for the benefit of scientific understanding.
Arising from this case of intellectual manipulation is collateral damage. The scientific discipline of climate change and the severe ways upon which human beings are impacted by it, are dismissed in favour of the expert management of human populations. In the dominant discourse, additional issues such as globalization, corporatism, effective waste management, public health impacts, fresh water scarcity and natural resource privatization are often conveniently omitted. This practice of academic self interest attempts to discredit legitimate science while effectively empowering an environment of division, disinformation and subsequently, ignorance. It is within such an environment that opportunists thrive, pseudo-scientists whose rhetorical machinations frame the discourse of public opinion.
“[Thus it has become the case that] our government’s science and technology policy is now guided by uniformed and emotion-driven public opinion rather than by sound scientific advice. Unfortunately, this public opinion is controlled by the media, a group of scientific illiterates drunk with power, heavily influenced by irrelevant political ideologies, and so misguided as to believe that they are more capable than the scientific community of making scientific decisions” (Cohen 1984, pg 59).
A classic example, is Nobel Peace Prize recipient and former United States vice president Al Gore. A significant proponent of anthropogenic climate change, Gore also happens to be a major benefactor (The Telegraph). According to the Capital Research Centre’s publication Foundation Watch, “along with Gore, the co-founder of GIM [Generation Investment Management] is former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson…[In September 2006] Goldman Sachs bought 10% of CCX [Chicago Climate Exchange] shares for $23 million. CCX owns half of the European Climate Exchange (ECX), Europe’s largest carbon trading company…” (Barnes 2007, pg 4). This sale occurred the same year Al Gore released the film An Inconvenient Truth, which claims both a scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, as well as pushing the need to offset carbon emissions via green investments. (Freeman 2007, pg 29). In fact, the Executive Intelligence Review reports that “Al Gore spoke at the May 2005 INCR [Investors Network on Climate Risk] Investors Summit at the United Nations, in his capacity as Chairman of his Generation Investment Management. He called for following the model of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme, which started up in 2005. Monetize emissions; trade them; reduce them, was Gore’s mantra” (Freeman 2007, pg 29).
Upon further analysis, Foundation Watch affirms that “like CCX, the European Climate Exchange has about 80 member companies, including Barclays, BP, Calyon, E.ON UK, Endesa, Fortis, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Shell, and ECX has contracted with the European Union to further develop a future market in carbon trading” (Barnes 2007, pg 4). It is apparent that several significant benefactors are among the most powerful captains of banking, business and industry. The benefits they incur via the successful management of government policy and mainstream environmental activism is enormous and therein is the real inconvenient truth.
Therefore it is evident that the intentional manipulation of a scientific subject, can be designed to both generate a public reaction, as well as to benefit private interests. However, the real danger is when rhetorical mechanisms infiltrate the common sense of a particular population and influences that populations’ moral consciousness. When rhetoric, and those who employ it, can establish a jurisdiction of unquestionable authority, then it becomes a god, which through its own machinations, is capable of empowering its skillful technicians and silencing logical inquiry. The population, unaware of an intellectual coup d’etat, become willful participants in their own subjugation. Through their acquiescence to a society that abandons formative critical analysis and evidentiary investigation, the population voluntarily reinforces this invisible intellectual prison.
What develops next, is a form of group mentality. When robbed of the proper utilization of the reasoning faculty, a person surrenders to a set of prevailing assumptions, which in this case are reinforced by the rhetorical mechanisms operating in that society. “In fact, people can be so attached to ‘consensus reality’ that its assumptions and predictions override contradictory evidence. When speakers encounter a situation in which people or events do not fit the categories provided by their model of reality, they are more likely to describe those people or event to make them “fit” the model rather than change or revise the model itself” (Penelope 1990, pg 37). What this means is that even when a circumstance arises which exposes that person to an alternative perspective on reality, no matter how grounded in evidentiary logic, that individual will instinctively re-frame or reject that knowledge.
Knowledge, and its effective application, is power. Thus, the willful ignorance of the public creates the opportunity for technocratic domination, i.e., those with superior knowledge make unquestionable decisions that affirm their own superiority (Carson 2002, pg 12-13). This form of expert management arises and is attributed to the demand for it. This is a causal relationship. First, the public generates an expressed need for governance. Second, this need influences the nature and direction of the outcome. Without the demand, governance would not be delivered. Consequently, an important inquiry to raise at this juncture would be: is the current public’s expressed need also managed to support the prevailing political/economic status quo? In pursuit of this answer, the following analysis is offered.
It would seem that men and women need a common motivation, namely a common adversary against whom they can organize themselves and act together…[to] bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy, either a real one, or else one invented for the purpose (Schneider 1991, pg 70).
In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill…All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself (Schneider 1991, pg 75).
This report entitled The First Global Revolution, was published by the Club of Rome in 1991. According to their website, “the Club of Rome is a non-profit organisation, independent of any political, ideological or religious interests. Its essential mission is to act as a global catalyst for change through the identification and analysis of the crucial problems facing humanity and the communication of such problems to the most important public and private decision makers as well as to the general public” (Club of Rome). It appears, that one of these most important private decision makers, is none other than Al Gore, who holds a membership with the Club of Rome (ABC News 2007).
Throughout this evidentiary inquiry into anthropogenic climate change, the following connections have been witnessed:
1) the statistical manipulation and censorship of data by leading anthropogenic climate scientists [Phil Jones, Michael Mann],
2) the intrinsic bias towards anthropogenic causal forces inherent in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change forecast models [Herrera, detailing omission of solar activity],
3) the admission of systemic uncertainties inherent in climate forecast methodologies [UK National Weather Service],
4) the widespread unknown variables identified by NASA [solar irradiance, aerosols/dust/smoke, clouds, the carbon cycle, ocean circulation, precipitation and sea level rise], 5) the corporate, industrial and banking interests behind major proponents of anthropogenic climate change [Barclays, BP, Endesa, Fortis, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley et al], and
6) the calculated ideological premise that human beings are the source of all environmental problems and thus an enemy to humanity itself [Club of Rome]. Subsequently, the consequences of this prevailing worldview must be addressed.
In doing so, it is important to understand that this prevailing discourse arises primarily from a position of advanced financial capital and influence. Hence, its intentional dissemination by public, private and corporate actors serve to further promulgate its sphere of influence (Schneider 1991, pg 157). The major tenets of this worldview propose limitations on human energy consumption, as well as restrictions on activities that generate carbon output. The expressed bias inherent in how anthropogenic climate change is presented to the public is that of a blaming the victim modality, i.e., that the public must bear the responsibility of the corporate/military/industrial sector.
According to Professor Delgado Domingos of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, “creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning” (Morano 2012, pg 5). Thus, when driving at the heart of this manipulation, it becomes clear that its overarching purpose is not to manifest a global environmental equilibrium, but in fact to re-enforce the predominant political/economic status quo.
This is further illustrated by the aforementioned report by the Club of Rome. Authors Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider state: “the global nature as well as the seriousness of the environmental crisis, especially that of earth-warming, indicates the need for a coherent and comprehensive attack at the international level and at the level of the United Nations” (Schneider 1991, pg 99). They continue: “in addition, we propose the organization, possibly under the auspices of the Environmental Security Council, of regular meetings of industrial leaders, bankers and government officials from the five continents. These Global Development Rounds, envisaged as being somewhat similar to the Tariff Rounds of GATT [General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade; a precursor to the World Trade Organization], would discuss the need to harmonize competition and cooperation in the light of environmental constraints” (Schneider 1991, pg 100).
Essentially, the authors are calling for an agreement among prominent political, economic and financial institutions, to facilitate the centralization of collaborative decision making. This citation is also an example of the discourse “administrative rationalism [which] may be defined as the problem-solving discourse which emphasizes the role of the expert rather than the citizen or producer/consumer in social problem solving, and which stresses social relationships of hierarchy rather than equality or competition” (Dryzek 2005, pg 75). Hence, the prevailing dominion of international economic powers is strengthened via this form of environmentalism, and anthropogenic climatology, in the manner it has been presented to the public, inculcates an environment of oppression.
A major mechanism by which this form of expert management is being implemented around the world is the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, also known as ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability. As previously identified, there is a causal relationship between the public’s demand for governance and its delivery. Subsequently, an important question to consider is: can an international secretariat that identifies itself as “…a powerful movement of 12 mega-cities, 100 super-cities and urban regions, 450 large cities as well as 450 medium-sized cities and towns in 84 countries…[that] have built a global sustainability network of more than 1,000 local governments…”, influence the public’s demand for this form of governance (ICLEI 2013)?
According to the Capital Research Centre report ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability, the answer is an affirmative. The author David Libardoni states: “…the group [ICLEI] is the product of a United Nations conference: the U.N. World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future…[Bolstered by ICLEI’s delivery system,] ambitious local politicians around the world are using ICLEI as an international platform that allows them to build their careers and quickly network with one another on environmental issues” (Libardoni 2008, pg 2).
It appears that politicians willing to become proponents of anthropogenic climate change, as well as ICLEI itself, stand to benefit both financially and politically through the collaborative success of this ideology. For in addition to the sliding-scale membership fees charged to local municipalities (calculated by population size), “over the past 11 years [2008 statistic], ICLEI has received between $250,000 and $1,500,000 annually in EPA grants to fund its CCP [Cities for Climate Protection] Campaign and emissions analysis software. In 2006, it reported $904,000 in governmental grants (out of $3.3 million in total revenue) on its IRS 990 tax form…” (Libardoni 2008, pg 3). In addition to these grants, “in 1997, the Open Society gave ICLEI a $2,147,415 grant to support its Local Agenda 21 Project, also sometimes known as Communities 21…More recently, ICLEI has received major contributions from the left-leaning Rockefeller Brothers Fund ($650,000 in March 2008, $525,000 in 2006), the Surdna Foundation ($200,000 in 2006), the Kendall Foundation ($150,000 in 2007) and the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Foundation ($100,000 in 2007)” (Libardoni 2008, pg 3). Thus, in light of this evidence gathered concerning the European Climate Exchange, as well as the financial benefits accrued by ICLEI, it becomes readily apparent that the discipline of anthropogenic climatology in concert with private self-interest can in praxis become an ideology of corporatism, advanced financial capital and multinational industry.
It is precisely this ideology that is demonstrated by the New Brunswick provincial government and in particular, the Department of Environment and Local Government. By way of illustration, the following select objectives from the chapter Action Plan Milestones derived from the department’s publication Action Plan for a New Local Governance System in New Brunswick, are identified:
“Transfer the cost of service administration for Local Service Districts to those who receive the service, effective January 2012, by introducing amendments to the Municipalities Act” [Fall 2011] (New Brunswick 2011, pg 16).
“Create a new community funding arrangement, replacing the Unconditional Grant, by introducing amendments to the Municipal Assistance Act” [Fall 2012] (New Brunswick 2011, pg 17).
“Engage stakeholders in the development of community sustainability criteria and a self- assessment tool” [Spring 2013] (New Brunswick 2011, pg 18).
“Implement community and municipal sustainability targets for the establishment and restructuring of Municipalities and Rural Communities” [Fall 2013] (New Brunswick 2011, pg 18).
“Seek input from stakeholders on a framework for a new Local Governance Act as part of the policy development process” [Summer 2013] (New Brunswick 2011, pg 18).
Regardless of the purpose, direction or intended result of the above provisions, the action plan milestones that the New Brunswick government is committing to are consistent with the discourse of administrative rationalism, as well as the designed sustainability criteria of ICLEI. To ground this proposition in evidentiary logic, the following comparison is provided by way of a citation from ICLEI Canada’s publication Changing Climate, Changing Communities: Guide and Workbook for Municipal Climate Adaptation (ICLEI Canada, pg 8):
To further clarify this evident congruence between ICLEI’s Milestone Framework and New Brunswick’s Action Plan Milestones, “as outlined earlier, Canadian local governments should be familiar with the Milestone process, as it is also central to the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program offered in partnership by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and ICLEI” (ICLEI Canada, pg 6). Remarkably, this corresponds to the objectives outlined in the previously cited Club of Rome publication, The First Global Revolution: “it would be appropriate that the scheme [energy efficiency] be launched by the United Nations in association with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Meterological Organization and Unesco [United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization].
A corollary would be the setting up in each country of an Energy Efficiency Council to supervise the operation on the national scale” (Schneider 1991, pg 99). In accord with this proposal ICLEI’s World Secretariat recently announced, “ICLEI and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) are joining efforts in conducting a global survey on resource efficiency in cities with an objective to get a wide range of city level perspectives and understandings of local needs on resource efficiency.
The global survey will run between March and May 2013 and will result in a final report planned for August 2013. The survey is conducted by a team of experts led by ICLEI’s World Secretariat in close collaboration with UNEP’s Built Environment Unit. The results will inform the Global Initiative for Resource Efficient Cities (GI-REC)” (ICLEI World Secretariat 2013). Indeed, it is evident, that in the dominions of finance, politics and industry, multivariate international powers have aligned their objectives. This method of harmonization between international powers, by which prominence is consolidated and agreements are constituted, is known as globalization.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, globalization is defined as “the process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale [e.g. ICLEI]” (Oxford Dictionaries Online 2013).
The concept of sustainability, disseminated and affirmed by previously identified proponents and benefactors of anthropogenic climate change, is “[a subject or practice being] able to be maintained at a certain rate or level: sustainable economic growth, [as well as] conserving an ecological balance by avoiding depletion of natural resources (Oxford Dictionaries Online 2013). These goals are consistent with the operational capacities of corporations active in the natural resource extraction industry, with several currently accruing a substantial profit via the European Climate Exchange [BP, Endesa, Shell, Goldman Sachs, Barclays] (Barnes 2007, pg 4).
In addition, the previously cited ICLEI Canada publication, Changing Climate, Changing Communities: Guide and Workbook for Municipal Climate Adaptation, “..was made possible with the generous support of Natural Resources Canada: Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Division (ICLEI Canada, pg 3). Now that ICLEI’s employed methodology (i.e. globalization) has been established, the next question of this evidentiary inquiry is the following: in relation to the intentional manipulation of the scientific discipline of anthropogenic climate change, are there additional methods that further the personal and/or private interests of another organization? To be addressed is the military industrial complex.
A high-risk, high-reward endeavor, weather-modification offers a dilemma not unlike the splitting of the atom. While some segments of society will always be reluctant to examine controversial issues such as weather-modification, the tremendous military capabilities that could result from this field are ignored at our own peril. From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control, weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary (Celentano 1996, pg vi).
In this 1996 United States Department of Defense research paper, Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025, authors Major Ronald J. Celentano et al. promulgate the importance, as well as (in their view) the opportunities intrinsic to the integration of weather modification technologies into conventional warfare. As noted in this report’s Executive Summary, “in 2025, US aerospace forces can ‘own the weather’ by capitalizing on emerging technologies and focusing development of those technologies to war-fighting applications. Such a capability offers the war fighter tools to shape the battlespace in ways never before possible. It provides opportunities to impact operations across the full spectrum of conflict and is pertinent to all possible futures” (Celentano 1996, pg vi).
To accurately illustrate these proposed capabilities, Celentano et al chronologically incorporate Table 1: Operational Capabilities Matrix on the next page of their research paper. The following citation is this identical table, copied verbatim from this publication (SEE Celentano 1996, pg vii).
Subsequently it becomes readily apparent that the United States Air Force, as well as the US Department of Defense, have an expressed interest in anthropogenic climate change. Their interest, is largely dependent on their ability to strategically profit from it. To affirm this analysis, Professor Michel Chossudovsky, Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization states, “rarely acknowledged in the debate on global climate change, the world’s weather can now be modified as part of a new generation of sophisticated electromagnetic weapons. Both the US and Russia have developed capabilities to manipulate the climate for military use” (Chossudovsky 2004).
This ideology of self-interest is consistent among all of the exclusive proponents of anthropogenic climate change identified in this investigation. Evident, within the operating methodology of each proponent, is a calculated benefit directly attributed to the successful dissemination of this incomplete and ‘debate settled’ ideology of anthropogenic climate change. Several of the prominent organizations cited are actively involved in the indoctrination of citizens, as well as strategically influencing government policy. Therefore, any remedy offered via this evidentiary inquiry must maintain, as its foundation, a qualitative standard pursued for the purpose of empowering public consciousness. It is integrity, not manipulation, deception, or disinformation that will achieve both an accurate understanding of climate causal forces as well as create an inclusive participatory process for affecting positive environmental change.
Fortunately, there is a growing opposition to the claimed consensus regarding anthropogenic climate change as well as considerable numbers of scientists seeking to accurately understand climate causal forces. Reported by the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, in 2008 over six hundred fifty scientists expressed opposition to the claimed scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change (Morano 2008, pg 1).
[According to this report:] “the following developments further secured 2008 as the year the ‘consensus’ collapsed. Russian scientists ‘rejected the very idea that carbon dioxide may be responsible for global warming’. An American Physical Society editor conceded that a ‘considerable presence’ of scientific skeptics exists. An International team of scientists countered the UN IPCC, declaring: ‘Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate’. India issued a report challenging global warming fears. International Scientists demanded the UN IPCC ‘be called to account and cease its deceptive practices,’ and a canvass of more than 51, 000 Canadian scientists revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is ‘settled’” (Morano 2008, pg 2).
Upon evaluation of this Senate Committee’s report, in additional to the aforementioned statements by scientific sources, it can be surmised that any entity, scientific or otherwise, claiming a global consensus on anthropogenic climate change is doing so: a) falsely, and b) to further their own ideological agenda. The following lecture citation, by Dr. Taylor Gray, concurs with this open minded analysis of anthropogenic climate change: “the occurrence of ecosystems maintaining a state of dynamic equilibrium stipulates that the phenomena of climate change is a naturally occurring process. To identify climate change as a problem is exclusively the prerogative of human beings and their unwillingness to accept environmental factors that are beyond their control” (Gray 2013). With this understanding, morality when taken from a practical standpoint, is largely founded upon the availability of the essential ingredients required for life. According to Dr. Gray, “as a naturally occurring biogeochemical cycle, as well as playing the role of an important atmospheric component, carbon is essential for the fats, proteins, and carbohydrates that constitute life. Thus, limiting carbon would place a limiting factor upon the potential for life” (Gray 2013).
What is within the power of human beings, are the ways upon which we build an authentic global community; one founded upon compassion and awareness of the growing needs of environmentally disadvantaged peoples. For example, liberating immigration restrictions to Canada, would allow this country’s comparatively minor population-to-landmass representation (approximately thirty five million, out of a global population of over seven billion) to become proportional through the vitalization by peoples in need of a more hospitable environment. International solidarity based upon localized commodity/agricultural markets would decrease the privatization of arable land in developing countries, which in turn would advance international food security. The creation of empowered generations skilled in home-building, permaculture, holistic medicine and environmental science would limit international economic dependency and encourage healthy, inclusive and self-sufficient communities. However, before this can happen, the prevailing untruths within society must be addressed.
The effective application of knowledge is powerful. And to provide a remedy to a public that willfully embraces convenient untruths is two-fold. To begin, the inculcation and transmission of ignorance must be replaced with a social/economic paradigm that supports continuous learning. To be clear, this would take the form of encouraging independent thought, critical analysis and informed opinion. This instrument of social advancement must have one and only one primary objective. That being the cooperative evolution of human consciousness.
To achieve such a social mechanism the first remedy must be manifested in concert with the second, i.e., the systemic replacement of the conditions upon which material benefit is derived from intellectual manipulation. Effectively, this would mean organizing around a political/economic paradigm that did not foster an environment of exploitation. Conversely, the praxis of this new paradigm would be the encouragement of an informed and intellectually adept body politic.
The success of this naturopathic remedy would arise organically from a psychologically healthy population. Upon this foundation intellectual creative power could create a holistic and inclusive political/economic paradigm. A public effectively self-immunized against ignorance brings with it the opportunity for unheralded philosophical and scientific evolution. In relation to governance and geopolitical decision making, the expressed public demand for it would end making psychological domination effectively irrelevant. Thus, when the conditions for freedom surround the human family, the only problem that remains is choice.
On some positions, cowardice asks the question, is it expedient? And then expedience comes along and asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? Conscience asks the question, is it right? There comes a time when one must take the position that is neither safe nor politic nor popular, but he must do it because conscience tells him it is right. Martin Luther King Jr.
References
ABC News. Club of Rome Member Warns Against Council Amalgamations. Published 5 June 2007. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-06-05/club-of-rome-member-warns-against-council/58734
Club of Rome. Organization: Overview. Club of Rome. Accessed 14 April 2013. http://www.clubofrome.org/?p=199
Baker, Marcia Merry. A Genocidal Hoax: A Chronology of the Global Warming Swindle in LaRouche Lyndon’s Executive Intelligence Review. March 30, 2007. Vol. 34, No. 13, p. 51-55.
Barnes, Deborah Corey. Capital Research Centre: Foundation Watch. Published August 2007. http://capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/v1185475433.pdf
Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. United States: Houghton Mifflin Company, First Mariner Books Edition, 2002.
Celentano, Maj Ronald J et al. Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025. Air Force 2025: United States Department of Defense,1996.
Chossudovsky Ph.D., Michel. The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use. Centre for Research on Globalization. Published 27 September 2004. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ultimate-weapon-of-mass-destruction-owning-the-weather-for-military-use-2/5306386
Cohen, Bernard L. Statement of Dissent in Ed. Julian Simon and Herman Khan’s The Resourceful Earth: A Response to Global 2000. United States: Basil Blackwell Incorporate, 1984.
Dryzek, John, The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Freeman, Richard & Marcia Merry Baker. Carbon Tax Swindle Behind Gore Hoax in LaRouche Lyndon’s Executive Intelligence Review. March 30, 2007. Vol. 34, No. 13, p. 29-34.
Gray, Taylor, Ph.D. Lecture on Anthropogenic Climate Change, St. Thomas University, 27 March 2013.
Global Research. Ed. Michel Chossudovsky Ph.D. Manipulation of Data and Concepts: The Climate Change Emails. Centre for Research on Globalization. Published 29 November 2009. http://www.globalresearch.ca/manipulation-of-data-and-concepts-the-climate-change-emails/16324
ICLEI. Who We Are. ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability. Accessed 14 April 2013. http://www.iclei.org/iclei-global/who-is-iclei.html.
ICLEI Canada. Changing Climate, Changing Communities: Guide and Workbook for Municipal Climate Adaptation. ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability. Accessed 15 April 2013. http://www.fcm.ca/documents/tools/PCP/changing_climate_changing_communities_guide_for_municipal_climate_adaptation_EN.pdf
ICLEI World Secretariat. UNEP – ICLEI Global Survey on Resource Efficiency in Cities. ICLEI: Local Government for Sustainability. Accessed 15 April 2013. http://www.iclei.org/our-activities/research-consulting/unep-iclei-global-survey.html
Kennedy, John F. Address: The President and the Press, Before The American Newspaper Publishers Association. New York City: 27 April 1961. Transcript contributors: Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=8093.
King Jr., Martin Luther. Remaining Awake Through A Great Revolution. Washington D.C.: 31 March 1968. Transcript contribution: Martin Luther King, Jr. Research And Education Institute, Standford University. http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/ documentsentry/doc_remaining_awake_through _a_great_revolution/
Libardoni, David. ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability: Taxpayer Dollars and Foundation Grants Help A U.N. Inspired Group Show U.S. Cities How to Enact Climate Change Policies. Capital Research Centre: Organizational Trends. Published November 2008. http://capitalresearch.org/pubs/ pdf/v 1225578943.pdf
Morano, Marc et al. U.S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims, Scientists Continue To Debunk “Consensus” in 2008. U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works. Published 11 December 2008.http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9
Morice, Colin et al. Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: the HadCRUT4 data set, UK Met Office, 2012. http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/HadCRUT4_accepted.pdf.
NASA. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Uncertainties: Unresolved questions about Earth’s climate. Accessed 13 April 2013. http://climate.nasa.gov/uncertainties.
Oxford Dictionaries Online. Globalization. Oxford English Dictionary. Accessed 16 April 2013. http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/globalization
Oxford Dictionaries Online. Sustainable. Oxford English Dictionary. Accessed 16 April 2013. http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/sustainable?q=sustainability#sustainable__6
New Brunswick. Department of Environment and Local Government. Action Plan for a New Local Governance System in New Brunswick. December 2011. http://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/ Departments/lg-gl/pdf/ActionPlanLocalGovernance.pdf
Penelope, Julia. Speaking Freely: Unlearning The Lies of The Father’s Tongues. United States: Pergamon Press, 1990.
Rose, David. Global Warming Stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report. Daily Mail. Published 16 October 2012. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2217286/Global-warming-stopped-16-years-ago-reveals-Met-Office-report-quietly-released–chart-prove-it.html.
Schneider, Bertrand and Alexander King. The First Global Revolution: A Report By The Council Of The Club Of Rome. Orient Longman, 1991.
The Telegraph. Al Gore could become world’s first carbon billionaire. Ed. Richard Fletcher. The Telegraph Media Group. Published 3 November 2009. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/6491195/Al-Gore-could-become-worlds-first-carbon-billionaire.html
Tracy Ph.D., James F. Chemtrails: The Realities of Geoengineering and Weather Modification. Centre for Research on Globalization. Published 8 November 2012. http://www.globalresearch.ca/chemtrails-the-realities-of-geoengineering-and-weather-modification/5311079
James Divine is a well-traveled transdisciplinary who believes freethinking is essential to the well-being of human innovation. His maverick personality confidently resonates with holistic medicine, investigative literature and spiritual empowerment.
Glasgow. Who is behind The Climate Agenda? Financial Interests?
This article was first published in 2015
***
Sixty five Nobel winners were meeting in Mainau, Lake Constance in Southern Germany at their annual conference of Nobel Laureates sponsored by the Lindau Foundation.
Among the donors to the Lindau Nobel initiative are Lockheed Martin, Deutsche Bank, UBS, Bayer, Merck, Novartis and Microsoft.
Climate Change was on the agenda. The venue was largely a science gathering. There was no declaration or scientific debate on broader issues of war and peace. (See the program)
According to the Nobel Laureates, the threat of nuclear war belongs to a bygone era. Nuclear war is no longer the main threat, its climate change, “a threat of comparable magnitude”.
The threat to humanity prevails but it has taken on a different form:
Nearly 60 years ago, here on Mainau, a similar gathering of Nobel Laureates in science issued a declaration of the dangers inherent in the newly found technology of nuclear weapons—a technology derived from advances in basic science. So far we have avoided nuclear war though the threat remains. We believe that our world today faces another threat of comparable magnitude.1 (emphasis added)
While Climate Change is the object of concern, the Nobel science laureates are silent on the ongoing US-NATO wars and the war crimes committed by the Western military alliance in Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia, not to mention the destabilizing impacts of economic warfare.
Meanwhile the Pentagon is beating the drums of war. The recent threats of the Obama administration to use nuclear weapons on a first strike pre-emptive basis not only against Russia but also against several non-nuclear states in the Middle East are casually ignored by the Science Nobel Laureates.
The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.
While a World War III scenario implying the preemptive use of nuclear weapons has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than ten years, military planners are now involved in the formulation of concrete attack plans directed against Russia including the deployment of missile systems and NATO ground forces inside Ukraine.
The Doomsday Clock
The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (BAS) which has historically warned against the dangers of nuclear war, has changed its narrative. According to the BAS, nuclear war is less of a threat today compared to the Cold War era:
Today, the mind-numbing possibility of nuclear annihilation as a result of a deliberate attack on the other by the United States or Russia seems a thing of the past, …. (emphasis added)
The fact of the matter is that none of the safeguard of the Cold War era prevail. This assessment totally disregards the US doctrine of preemptive nuclear war involving first strike nuclear attacks as an instrument of peace-making, as formulated in the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review.
Climate change and nuclear war are now presented side by side in the BAS’ doomsday clock. Nuclear war is no longer the main threat.
2015: “Unchecked climate change, global nuclear weapons modernizations, and outsized nuclear weapons arsenals pose extraordinary and undeniable threats to the continued existence of humanity, and world leaders have failed to act with the speed or on the scale required to protect citizens from potential catastrophe. These failures of political leadership endanger every person on Earth.” Despite some modestly positive developments in the climate change arena, current efforts are entirely insufficient to prevent a catastrophic warming of Earth. Meanwhile, the United States and Russia have embarked on massive programs to modernize their nuclear triads—thereby undermining existing nuclear weapons treaties. “The clock ticks now at just three minutes to midnight because international leaders are failing to perform their most important duty—ensuring and preserving the health and vitality of human civilization.”
Apples and Oranges
Climate change vs. Nuclear War, “A threat of comparable magnitude”, according to the Nobel Science Laureates.
Scientific assessment of climate change focuses on “the impact of human activity” on the Earth’s climate and ecology. We are dealing with a complex long-term process, involving scientific assessment and measurement.
By casually juxtaposing climate change and nuclear war, the BAS scientists and Nobel Science Laureates are essentially “comparing apples and oranges”. There is a fundamental misunderstanding regarding the nature of causality, which serves to distract public opinion from the imminent dangers of global warfare.
While the decision to unleash a nuclear attack against a known enemy can be implemented in a matter of minutes, –i.e. a decision of the US president and Commander in Chief, — the causes, the underlying time trends as well as policies pertaining to climate change are of an entirely different nature.
In the post-Cold War era, nuclear war has become a multibillion dollar undertaking, which fills the pockets of US defense contractors. What is at stake is the outright “privatization of nuclear war”. War and nuclear war are the result of concrete military and political decisions, in response to powerful economic interests.
Global Warming on the other hand is not unleashed by “pushing a button” at the political level. (With the exception of geoengineering used as a weapon of warfare).
The campaign against war and nuclear war is virtually dead since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
What is at stake for the peace movement is to ultimately undermine a decision-making process at the highest levels of the US government apparatus including the US State Department, the Pentagon and the intelligence apparatus. Is there a sense of Urgency? Yes there is.
Today, US-NATO are leading simultaneous wars of aggression in several regions of the World coupled with a process of political destabilization and restructuring. Under the brunt of powerful financial institutions, national economies are undermined and destroyed, large sectors of the World population are impoverished.
These actions within the economic sphere are based on a deliberate process of financial manipulation. The Pentagon, NATO, the IMF and Wall Street work in tandem. We are dealing with a coordinated decision-making process both within the economic, geopolitical and military spheres. It’s called war and “financial warfare”.
To distract public opinion from the very real dangers of a World War III scenario, the mainstream media has its eyes riveted solely on the imminent dangers of climate change.
While climate change is an important global issue in its own right, at this juncture in our history, it is essential that people comprehend the logic of US led hegemonic wars, under the disguise of counterterrorism operations. There is no such thing as a humanitarian war. Moreover, these wars are economic wars. They are wars of economic conquest.
The propaganda campaign consists in presenting global warming as the sole danger to humanity with a view to minimizing the public’s understanding of the dangers of war and nuclear war, which are inevitably coupled with a global process of neoliberal economic restructuring and impoverishment.
At his West Point speech on May 28 2014, President Obama said, “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.” Obama stated his bottom line is that “America must always lead on the world stage,” and “the backbone of that leadership always will be the military.” American exceptionalism based on might, not diplomacy, on hard power, not soft, is precisely the hubris and arrogance that could lead to the termination of human life. Washington’s determination to prevent the rise of Russia and China, as set out in the Brzezinski and Wolfowitz doctrines, is a recipe for nuclear war.
The need is dire for the president of the US, Russia, or China to state in a highly public forum that the existence of nuclear weapons creates the possibility of their use and that their use in war would likely mean human extinction. As nuclear war has no winners, the weapons should be banned and destroyed before they destroy all of us. (Steven Starr, Global Research, June 2014, emphasis added)
During the Cold War era, the doctrine of “mutually assured destruction” (MAD) prevailed. The US and the Soviet Union understood that the use of nuclear weapons could potentially lead to Worldwide nuclear radiation and a nuclear holocaust.
In the wake of the Cold War, this understanding on the dangers of nuclear war (MAD) no longer prevails. Moreover, the Pentagon has recently made public its policy of a nuclear first strike against the Russian Federation in response to Russia’s alleged aggression against Ukraine.
Should we be concerned? Is Nuclear War more dangerous than Global Warming?
If these US nuclear strikes were to be implemented, humanity would be precipitated into a Third World War, which could potentially be the “final war” on planet earth.
Note
1. The Mainau Declaration on the Dangers of Climate Change was signed by 36 of the 65 Nobel laureates in attendance.
Order Michel Chossudovsky’s Book directly from GR,
Global Research, Montreal, 2011, also available in pdf.
Nuclear war has become a multibillion dollar undertaking, which fills the pockets of US defense contractors. What is at stake is the outright “privatization of nuclear war”.
The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.
Central to an understanding of war, is the media campaign which grants it legitimacy in the eyes of public opinion. A good versus evil dichotomy prevails. The perpetrators of war are presented as the victims. Public opinion is misled.
Breaking the “big lie”, which upholds war as a humanitarian undertaking, means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force. This profit-driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.
The object of this book is to forcefully reverse the tide of war, challenge the war criminals in high office and the powerful corporate lobby groups which support them.
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
This is beyond disturbing. According to Dr Pierre Kory, MD, MPA, and verified by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), 100 to 200 congressional reps and/or staff and families who contracted COVID-19 were treated with the Front Line Ivermectin protocol.
These illegal restrictions in violation of fundamental human rights are being applied to Canadians across the land. These restrictions applied to “federal public servants” also apply to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
A “Physicians’ Declaration” produced by an international alliance of physicians and medical scientists strongly condemns the global strategy to treat COVID, accusing policy-makers of potential “crimes against humanity” for preventing physicians from providing life-saving treatments for their patients and suppressing open scientific discussion.
Bourla’s statement gives us a teaching moment par excellence, since his words are indicative of the mind-boggling levels of gaslighting that have taken hold in our society.
A marriage license is required to get legally married in Canada, meaning that Oakville’s rules effectively prohibit people who refuse the COVID shots from tying the knot. Couples cannot obtain a license online.
At a time when the peoples of the earth are in great distress because they are being denied their previous humanity and pure existence by the ruling “elite” and their political accomplices, I am not hesitating to recall the motto of the German philosopher and Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 to 1804) “Sapere aude!” (“Dare to be wise!”).
Delta has recently partnered with the U.S. Transport Security Administration (TSA) to deploy face biometrics to streamline check-in and security in Atlanta, while Emirates suggested airline passengers will have to wear masks for at least two more years.
The global economy is in crisis. The Covid-19 Lockdown policies have triggered a process of Worldwide economic destabilization which directly affects both “Supply” and “Demand” relations. It’s the most serious economic crisis in World history affecting simultaneously more than a 150 countries.
The White House has pressed the airlines to adopt vaccine mandates using the leverage of federal contracts. United knuckled under first and announced a vaccine requirement. Southwest recently announced its employees had until December 8, 2021, to get vaccinated or lose their jobs.
We labor today under the weight of countless tyrannies, large and small, carried out in the so-called name of the national good by an elite class of governmental and corporate officials who are largely insulated from the ill effects of their actions.
The so-called “Uyghur Tribunal” is promoted across the Western media as an “independent” tribunal. AP claims that it seeks to lay out evidence that will “compel international action to tackle growing concerns about alleged abuses in Xinjiang.”
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).
The global supply chain is in complete tatters. Tens of thousands of items and services are in short supply or can’t be found at all. This is leading to higher prices, a/k/a cost-push inflation, and a general decrease in the purchasing power of all fiat currencies, be it the US Dollar, the Japanese Yen or the Euro.
The choice of items to include here could fill volumes. We picked things that often appear very obscure, such as ketchup or pallets and yet are staples of modern life.
Pallets
Wooden shipping pallets are required to transport almost anything imaginable including: paper goods, food items, auto parts, diapers, etc. Until now, they’ve always been plentiful and taken for granted. During the past year, pallet prices have more than doubled, going from less than $7 to over $15 now. According to Bloomberg, pallets are now a hot commodity, which has led to hoarding and even theft. While lumber prices have recently decreased, pallet prices have kept going up and continue to do so, while supplies will remain extremely tight for the foreseeable future.
Aluminum
Aluminum is yet another mundane commodity that has gone into supply deficit. Current shortages are unprecedented; prices keep going higher. 2021 has seen an over 50 percent price rise. Lockdowns and quarantines are largely responsible. The result was a rise in home drink consumption with more beverage cans being consumed. A global competition for supply among soda and beer producers has broken out. They are scouring the four corners of the planet searching for adequate supplies.
CO2
Contrary to the beliefs of climate alarmists, there’s actually an ongoing shortage of CO2. Opponents can take heart that its price has quintupled in the past year. It has a plethora of little-known uses such as soft drink and alcoholic beverage carbonation, promoting greenhouse plant growth, keeping food fresh during transport, extending shelf life of packaged meats, baby food and baked products, etc. CO2 is a by-product produced by fertilizer plants, a number of which have shut down due to rapidly rising natural gas feedstock prices.
Truck Drivers
In the US and abroad, the truck driver shortage has been going on for years. Truck drivers are the backbone of supply chain, but they’re also its Rodney Dangerfield as well. They don’t get no respect and not a lot of money either. Long-haul US Truck Drivers were once a highly unionized, receiving generous pay and benefits. Today, most are owner-operators. A pay squeeze has led large numbers of qualified drivers to abandon the industry. Trucking costs have been shooting higher too: fuel (up 85%), tires (up 20%), insurance (up 10%) and highway tolls, thus further reducing wages. The only way to get more truckers on the road is by paying them higher wages. This is unlikely given other cost constraints.
Ketchup and Condiments
Believe it or not, Heinz is facing Ketchup production shortages. The situation is so bad that it has unveiled a new roller type of packet that enables users to squeeze out the very last drop of Ketchup. Since the pandemic, America’s favorite condiment has been in near constant short supply. Supplies of other condiments, such as mustard and relish are also limited. As expected, prices are rising and the consumer is paying more.
Champagne
This popular bubbly beverage could be heading towards a major Christmas shortage. The 2020 lockdowns decreased demand, not a lot people were celebrating during the pandemic. Champagne houses responded by reducing bottles produced. However, as things improve more people are celebrating their newly re-found freedom and Champagne demand is picking up. It will only increase as we come into the holiday season.
Construction Materials
Prior to the pandemic, the construction cycle peaking and supplies were already tightening. This is typical. However, a recent survey found that 71% of contractors are facing at least one material shortage. Lumber was most-cited, followed by steel, electrical and lighting supplies. 2021 ushered in huge steel and lumber price increases. With near dire port backlogs, it will be quite some time before we see a return to normalcy.
Coal/Energy
According to the Washington Post coal shortages are causing some Chinese Provinces to ration electricity; Europeans are paying sky-high prices for natural gas, power plants in India are on the verge of running out of coal, and the average price per gallon of regular gasoline in the United States went from $1.72 in April to $3.25 now.
The not-so sudden energy crunch is putting further stress on already frayed supply chains. This has set off a global competition for resources and has helped make the green energy revolution a lesser priority. The situation in Europe is growing more serious due to Russia’s natgas supply reduction. A cold winter could very well put the world into disaster mode.
Healthcare Workers
Healthcare worker vaccine mandates will dramatically reduce worker availability to care for the sick and elderly. In New York alone, an estimated 70,000 healthcare workers will lose their jobs. To address the issue, Governor Hochel called in the national guard. However, there are not enough medically trained guardsmen to make up the difference. This will be repeated in other states across the country and could result in a major disaster.
Auto Mechanics and Technicians
The author encountered this situation while visiting an auto tire store. The manager informed us that our vehicle wouldn’t be ready until late in the day as they were extremely short staffed. Quite shocking, as these used to be decent paying jobs with many takers. He complained that it was nearly impossible to find qualified mechanics and technicians; those he did hire, often worked a day or two and then left. This situation is being repeated in gas stations, auto dealers and service centers around the country. With the shift to electric vehicles, one has to wonder where the highly trained and qualified techs are going to come from?
Bonus – Port Cargo Shipping Capacity
The pandemic greatly compressed the shipping cycle. For months international trade ground to a halt and nothing left the ports. The lifting of health restrictions set-off a global shipping scramble. Everyone was trying to make up for lost time in an effort to fulfill the Christmas demand. Currently the Port of Long Beach has 134 ships waiting to unload. Similar occurrences are happening at ports around the globe. In just one year, the world outgrew its entire shipping port capacity. And there’s no end in sight.
With more shortages cascading around the globe, it’s going to be a long cold winter and a not-so Merry Christmas.
*
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).
Delta has recently partnered with the U.S. Transport Security Administration (TSA) to deploy face biometrics to streamline check-in and security in Atlanta, while Emirates suggested airline passengers will have to wear masks for at least two more years. Also, SITA argues for health credential checks to be integrated into travel ecosystems all around the globe.
Delta partners with TSA on biometrics for aviation
Thanks to the new partnership, passengers will be able to go through security checks at airports in Atlanta without a paper boarding pass or a physical government ID credential.
Instead, after registering via the TSA app and confirming their identity, customers will be able to have their faces scanned via facial verification cameras at the airport.
The scanning process encrypts passengers’ images, then sends them to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) facial biometric matching service via a secure channel with no accompanying biographic data.
CBP then verifies a customer’s identity against government holdings and sends back an indicator to allow the customer to proceed.
Delta clarified that individuals who do not wish to utilize the system will be free to opt out.
The new biometrics system will first be visible in Atlanta’s South Security Checkpoint in the coming weeks and then expanded to bag drop and boarding areas before the end of the year. Delta also confirmed it aims to expand the technology’s deployment to additional hubs next year.
Emirates SVP suggests masks on planes for two more years
The case was made by Zack Zainal Abidin, senior vice president of Emirates Group Security, at an aviation security conference in Dubai on Sunday.
The National News reported on the claims, which highlighted Abidin’s warning on the likelihood of mask-free travel.
According to the executive, the pandemic still presents challenges for the aviation security sector.
Particularly, Abidin suggested facial recognition is not enough anymore, as threats, including terrorism, become more sophisticated, and mask recognition is still not as accurate as traditional face biometrics systems.
Fingerprint recognition is also an issue, according to Abidin, since the need for physical distancing has made the biometric technology less safe for passengers.
“These are the new technologies that have to be explored and expanded, due to the conditions created by the pandemic,” Abidin said.
SITA calls for increased health credential integration
Challenges to face biometrics are not the only one facing airport systems that may need to adapt. According to the air transport communications specialist, the need for passengers to provide health credentials during the pandemic is substantially reducing the capacity of airports, causing longer processing and waiting times.
“As we open up, it’s imperative we integrate the multiple different ways of sharing health credentials digitally and seamlessly into a single approach for the world’s travel eco-system,” wrote Sherry Stein, head of Technology at SITA Americas, in a blog post.
According to the technology expert, this would be the only way to tackle the wait times at check-in, as well as restoring self-service to save time, confusion, and congestion for passengers.
“And, crucially, we can give travelers the assurance that wherever they venture in the world, they’ll be allowed into the country and to return home,” she explained.
To this end, SITA recently launched Health Protect, an initiative aimed at integrating health status checks within airlines and airports’ travel processes.
“Integration with SITA Health Protect will enable self-service check-in – be it by web, mobile, or kiosk – while advance passenger processing will verify that passengers have a trusted traveler credential and are allowed to board,” Stein added.
The pandemic has had a devastating impact on our industry, according to Stein, and yet, it has also focused minds on accelerating digital progress.
“This is vital today, as we recover, and as we strive to enhance traveler convenience and operational excellence. But it will also increase the resilience of our processes should we face another epidemic or global pandemic in the future,” she concluded.
*
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).
Yesterday, the Canadian government announced that by Oct. 29th “core” federal public servants will have to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 or face unpaid leave by Nov. 15th. Further, the government announced that anyone wishing to board a plane, train, or cruise in Canada will have to prove they are vaccinated by Oct 30th.
The announcements came from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland.
For the approximately 267,000 federal workers affected by this policy, whether they work from home or go into the office, mandates will apply. There are a couple of limited exemptions in place. People will need to provide medical proof of the requirement for the exemption or testify under oath to their religious beliefs.
Should federal employees not wish to be vaccinated still, they will be required to attend an online COVID vaccine re-education session. They will also lose access to their workplace, office events, meetings, and will not be able to travel for business at all.
Partially-vaccinated workers will have up to 10 weeks to receive their second dose before being put on unpaid leave. Federal workers who wish to keep their jobs are required to make an attestation of their vaccination status which will be used as proof.
“It’s very straightforward: If you want to continue to work for the public service of Canada, you’re going to need to be fully vaccinated. And the way to ensure that that happens as quickly as possible, is to allow for the vast majority of public servants who are vaccinated, to make a simple straightforward attestation… That allows managers and departments to focus in on those people who will not…” – Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
Mandates For Travellers
Updates have also been provided for passengers boarding any domestic or international flight, interprovincial train or cruise ship, as well as workers in restricted sections of airports. Starting Oct 30th, passengers must be fully vaccinated to board these travel vehicles. There will be a short period where proof of a negative COVID-19 test will be acceptable, but by Nov 30th, that option will fall away.
Ferry passengers have not been included in these new mandates.
“This is about keeping people safe on the job and in our communities,” Trudeau said. “If you’ve done the right thing and gotten vaccinated, you deserve the freedom to be safe from COVID-19, to have your kids safe from COVID, to get back to the things you love.” – Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
Trudeau is seen again politicizing the COVID issue by bringing children into the equation while controversial and draconian measures are announced. As The Pulse has covered on numerous occasions, children face almost no risk from COVID. In fact, children are at greater risk of death and hospitalization from the seasonal flu. One can only assume this speech was written to counteract an authoritarian policy with pulling on community heartstrings when it comes to children.
The careful wording of “If you’ve done the right thing” is also troublesome for a journalist like myself. I’ve noticed that many of my colleagues in journalism are not exercising balanced journalism during COVID, and are leaving out pertinent facts that drastically change the narrative around COVID.
Right now there are effective treatments available for COVID. We know that the vaccines are not very effective after the 6 or 7 month mark, making treatments all that much more important for the aging population, yet government and media continues to deny these treatments and continues forcing everyone to be vaccinated. As with the several decades prior to COVID, it feels all too clear again that Big Pharma has massive influence over government policy.
As a journalist who has been censored on several occasions during COVID, I can say that if Canadians were given the full truth, as opposed to the very limited truth they are getting from mainstream media, they would likely not feel that the government has “done the right thing.”
My sense is that the average person who would support such measures is likely not aware of facts like: the likelihood of false positives from PCR tests is around 50%, the fact that vaccination only offers protection from severe infection for 6 to 7 months, that children are more at risk from the seasonal fluthan COVID, that it’s exceedingly rare for children to spread COVID to others, there are several viable treatments for COVID, and that the chances of hospitalization if infected by COVID is extremely low.
Here in lies what is worrisome about what’s taking place, the vast majority of people are not aware of the entirety of what’s going on, so they support measures that are tackling a problem that isn’t like what they are told. If they did understand it however, they likely would push back much harder on these measures.
This new mandatory vaccination policy includes the RCMP, as well as full-time employees, casual workers, students and volunteers for federal departments, agencies, and offices such as the Department of Health, Veterans Affairs Canada, Service Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Correctional Service of Canada, and the Canada Border Services Agency.
“We are taking this step to protect those who work in the federal public service, their families, and their communities. This measure also protects everyone who does business with the public service, whether it is getting access to your benefits at a Service Canada office, or safely traveling across our borders,” – Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland
Trudeau also mentioned the government is still working on what is being dubbed ‘the standardized, pan-Canadian proof of vaccination document.’ This document is designed to hold Canadian citizen’s vaccination records for use in international travel. Dedicated funding and work on this measure suggests that Canada is not looking to stop COVID vaccination efforts in the coming years, which means constant boosters will likely need to be kept up with to be fully vaccinated as vaccine efficacy after two doses steeply wanes after 6 to 7 months.
“Part of the work that we’re doing with the major carriers in this country is to integrate the proof of vaccination digital codes into their online booking process, so that when you print out your boarding pass either at the airport, or in advance, there will be a clearly marked proof of vaccination thumbs up or checkmark, so that the gate agent does not have to be checking documentation,” – Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
What will come next is anyone’s guess, but what we do know is that a culture of authoritarian control is evident in government right now. It seems upon people to begin to calmly and effectively organize around creating solutions to push back against these measures in a meaningful way. Anger only further fuels the government and mainstream media in pointing to “anti-vaxxers as crazy.” Still, the solution seems unclear, but meaningful dialogue can bring us there.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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).
Midway through his recent interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Albert Bourla, the chief executive officer of Pfizer, said the following:
“We are very proud of what we have done… There is no other company that can claim to have done so much good to humanity as we have done.”
Bourla’s statement gives us a teaching moment par excellence, since his words are indicative of the mind-boggling levels of gaslighting that have taken hold in our society.
Let us look at the record and see what Pfizer has really done for humanity.
If you remember, it all began with great pomp when Pfizer triumphantly announced that its vaccine was 95 percent effective (see Pfizer’s November 2020 press release here). It was so good, Bourla and co. claimed, that emergency authorization for it should be immediately granted by governments around the world.
In fact, its effectiveness was such, they said, that members of the Pfizer placebo trial group were asked to take the shot, which rendered meaningful evaluation of data virtually impossible.
Never mind that the trials were short and incomplete to an unprecedented degree. Despite this, the frightened public accepted Pfizer’s claims – which were uncritically amplified by the collaborating corporate media – at face value and a vaccine frenzy ensued. Many people were so desperate to get these allegedly “life-saving” shots that they were willing to pay bribes to jump the vaccine line.
This mad rush to get injected by so many turned out to be a windfall for Pfizer. The company sold hundreds of millions of shots and posted record profits.
Soon, however, cracks began to appear in Pfizer’s narrative. It turned out that the “protection” afforded by its vaccine was rather short-lived.
Studies showed that Pfizer-induced antibodies fade quite quickly. After six months, half of those injected have none. Unashamed and undaunted, Pfizer came out with a booster. The coerced and gaslit public lined up to receive it in surprisingly high numbers, which in turn further pushed Pfizer’s already hefty profits into the stratosphere.
Unfortunately for the boostered, it appears that the antibodies induced by the third injection are no more long lasting than those generated by the original jabs. This is why there is already talk of the fourth injection! In Israel they may start giving it before the end of this year, which means that some people will have received four Pfizer shots in the space of some twelve months.
But here is the worst of it: not only have Pfizer-induced antibodies turned out to be very short-lived, but they also appear to be largely ineffective in dealing with the virus when encountered in the real world. To wit, a number of countries with high vaccination rates have experienced widespread outbreaks of Covid-19. Israel, a country that uses Pfizer almost exclusively, is a case in point. An early leader in the vaccination effort, it experienced the highest infection rate in the world. This is from a recent Bloomberg report:
“The country, once a front-runner in the global race to move on from Covid-19, became a pandemic hot spot in early September. Following the spread of the delta variant over the summer, Israel had the world’s highest per-capita infection rate in the week through Sept. 4, according to figures compiled by Johns Hopkins University.”
So, this is what inoculating most of your population with Pfizer vaccines gets you: the highest infection rate on the planet. And this by a considerable margin. At the time, Israel’s infection rate was fifty percent higher than that of the second most infected country, which was Mongolia.
Thanks, Mr. Bourla, for that.
So impotent were the vaccines in even slowing the spread of Covid-19 that in her August 15 interview with CNN, CDC director Rochelle Walensky made the following admission: “What they can’t do anymore is to prevent transmission.”
Not only do vaccines do nothing to stop the spread of Covid, they also do not appear to confer any special protection against its severe forms or death. In other words, vaccinated people are not only getting widely infected, they are also falling seriously ill and dying at high rates.
Consider the following facts:
According to a recent report by the Associated Press, 70 percent of those hospitalized in Israeli hospitals with serious Covid are fully vaccinated. This figure is higher than the country’s general vaccination rate. It would thus appear that getting vaccinated may actually increase one’s chances of falling ill with serious Covid. Be that as it may, this number at least shows that the Pfizer vaccine does not reduce hospitalization rate in the vaccinated as compared with their un-jabbed counterparts.
This was already obvious this summer when nearly 60% of hospitalized Covid patients in Israel had received the full course of the Pfizer protocol.
So much for the completely fallacious claim that the vaccine protects against serious Covid. It does not and the data shows that clearly. This claim is another specious lie propagated by gaslighters like Albert Bourla who are saying things that are completely contrary to reality.
The situation appears to be no better regarding the boosters. The boosters, which were obviously designed to remedy the failure of the original shots, seem to be making things worse.
Below is a graphic based on data from John Hopkins University that shows a sharp rise in Covid deaths after the booster was introduced in Israel at the end of July.
Chart from Citizen Free Press
For comparison, the chart also features the death rate in Sweden, a country which did not administer boosters during this period. Its graph remained largely unchanged.
Here are undeniable, documentable facts regarding the Pfizer vaccine:
Pfizer- induced antibodies last only for a few months.
Pfizer vaccines do not stop transmission of infection.
Vaccinated people are falling seriously ill and dying in large numbers. In many cases these rates are higher that the general vaccination rate in given populations.
From early data it would appear that Pfizer booster may be as ineffective as the original shots.
Not to be unfair to Pfizer, the facts regarding the other vaccines are very similar if not worse.
This is a massive vaccination debacle by any standard.
And we have not even mentioned serious injuries and deaths that have been caused by these vaccines.
The World Health Organization’s database, for example, records over two million potential COVID vaccines injuries in 2021.
According to an analysis of data recorded in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), “the total number of deaths associated with the COVID-19 vaccines is greater than the number of deaths associated with all other vaccines combined since the year 1990.”
According to a US government whistleblower, nearly fifty thousand people died in the United States within two weeks of receiving the vaccines.
Amazingly, those responsible for this debacle are making record profits.
More amazingly still, one of the main architects of this fiasco, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, has the audacity to claim that his company has done more for the good of mankind than any other company.
It is more than clear that Bourla and his fellow band of vaccinators are on a mission to gaslight the world. In the process they are making claims that run in complete contravention of reality and facts.
Other prominent gaslighters include the Head of the National Institute of Health Anthony Fauci and CDC director Rochelle Walensky, as well as a host of public health officials and government figures.
These people, in effect, say that black is white. They claim that ineffective and dangerous vaccines are a gift to humanity.
Many have fallen for it while the vaccinators are rejoicing on their way to the bank.
Sadly, the massive gaslighting campaign has been a considerable success. The failure of the vaccines stares us right in the face and yet most people are unable to see it.
If you are one of them, please try to think about these three questions:
What would we normally call vaccines that fail to prevent the spread of the targeted disease?
What would we normally call vaccines that do not stop serious Covid or death?
Would we not rightly call such pharmaceuticals a “failure”?
The word “failure,” however, is not often used in connection with the vaccines, at least not in government bulletins or mainstream media.
And what would you call those who have raked in unprecedented profits from these failed vaccines?
The words such as cheats and racketeers come to mind. And yet these terms are not applied either.
This situation is reflective of the gaslighters’ cunning and skill. Despite the havoc they have wrought, they are still in their jobs filling their pockets with millions (and in some cases with billions).
In a sane world they would be chased out of town. They would be removed from their positions and deprived of their ill-gotten gains.
But in the twilight zone we live these days, profiteers like Albert Bourla continue to grow enormously rich while most of the population is unable to grasp what is happening right before their eyes.
*
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).
In einer Zeit, in der die Völker der Erde in großer Bedrängnis sind, weil ihnen von der herrschenden „Elite“ und ihren politischen Helfershelfern das bisherige Menschsein und die pure Existenz abgesprochen wird, scheue ich mich nicht, den bereits mehrfach zitierten Wahlspruch des deutschen Philosophen und Aufklärers Immanuel Kant (1724 bis 1804) „Sapere aude!“ („Wage es, weise zu sein!“) erneut in Erinnerung zu rufen. Denn noch ist die Frage nicht beantwortet, wie die Menschen die desaströse politische, wirtschaftliche und soziale Entwicklung stoppen können.
Da nur frei denkende, mutige und mitfühlende Bürger die Welt in eine andere Bahn lenken werden, müssen wir über den Tag hinausdenken und Vorsorge treffen. Deshalb ist es für alle an der Erziehung Beteiligten ein Gebot der Stunde, es zu unterlassen, die heranwachsende Generation auf ihrem Weg ins Erwachsenenleben mit autoritären Erziehungsmethoden gehorsam und gefügig zu machen. Man muss ihr stattdessen dazu verhelfen, ihr eigenes Wesen ohne Einschnürung durch eine Konfession ausprägen zu können.
Dank der tiefenpsychologischen Einsicht wissen wir heute, dass der Mensch in einem derartigen Maß das Produkt seiner Erziehung ist, dass wir die Hoffnung hegen dürfen, durch psychologische Erziehungsmethoden Menschen heranbilden zu können, die eigenständig denken können, gegen die Verstrickungen des Machtwahns gefeit sind und keinen Kadavergehorsam mehr zeigen.
Kant: „Habe den Mut, dich deines eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen!“
Die weltweite Ausnahmesituation erfordert es, weise zu sein und danach zu handeln. Wenn es den Menschen im Zeitalter der Aufklärung gelang, sich aus dem mittelalterlichen Denken zu befreien und die Vernunft zu gebrauchen, von willkürlicher Autorität unabhängig zu werden und die persönliche Handlungsfreiheit (Emanzipation) ausdehnen – dann sollte es auch der „moderne“ Menschen schaffen, die Angst aufzugeben und sich des eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen ohne die Anleitung eines anderen.
Wenn wir Menschen uns aber weiterhin unmündig verhalten und zu faul oder feige sind, selbst zu denken, ist es für andere leicht, so Kant, sich zu „Vormündern“ unmündiger Menschen aufzuschwingen. Diese Vormünder würden auch alles dafür tun, dass die unmündigen Menschen den Schritt zur Mündigkeit nicht nur für beschwerlich, sondern auch noch für gefährlich halten. (1)
Gesunder Menschenverstand statt Autoritätshörigkeit und magische Weltanschauung
Um uns Bürgern den gesunden Menschenverstand auszutreiben und absoluten Gehorsam einzufordern, verwenden Herrscher aller Couleur das Disziplinierungs- und Herrschaftsmittel der Angst. Doch auch eine Erziehung nach streng religiösen und militärischen Grundsätzen kann zu absolutem Gehorsam führen. Ein anschauliches Beispiel für dieses psychologische Problem bieten die autobiographischen Aufzeichnungen von Rudolf Höß, dem ehemaligen Kommandanten von Auschwitz und der Lebenslauf seines „Geistesverwandten“ Adolf Eichmann. Beide lernten in ihrer Kindheit blinden Gehorsam, Pflichterfüllung und das Nichthinterfragen von „höheren“ Anordnungen und reagierten deshalb als Erwachsene mit einem „Kadavergehorsam“.
Ignatius von Loyola, der Gründer des Jesuiten-Ordens, verfasste Mitte des 16. Jahrhunderts einen erhellenden Text, auf den das Wort „Kadavergehorsam“ zurückzuführen ist:
„Wir sollten uns dessen bewusst sein, dass ein jeder von denen, die im Gehorsam leben, sich von der göttlichen Vorsehung mittels des Oberen führen und leiten lassen muss, als sei er ein toter Körper, der sich wohin auch immer bringen und auf welche Weise auch immer behandeln lässt, oder wie ein Stab eines alten Mannes, der dient, wo und wozu auch immer ihn der benutzen will.“ (2)
Bereits lange Zeit vor Ignatius von Loyola verglich Franz von Assisi (1181/82–1226) die vollkommene und höchste Form des Gehorsams (perfecta et summa obedientia) gegenüber dem Vorgesetzten mit einem toten, entseelten Leib (corpus mortuum, corpus exanime), der sich ohne Widerstreben und ohne Murren hinbringen lässt, wo man will.
Mit psychologischen Erziehungsmethoden gegensteuern
Eltern, Erzieher und Priester müssen diese Art von Erziehung dringend aufgeben und mit psychologischen Erziehungsmethoden gegensteuern. Die Pädagogik in Elternhaus und Schule hat auf das autoritäre Prinzip – das Jahrhunderte lang als fraglos gültige Grundlage des erzieherischen Verhaltens angesehen wurde – und auf jegliche Gewaltanwendung zu verzichten. Auch der verwöhnende und verzärtelnde Erziehungsstil, der durch die Tendenz der Erzieher geprägt ist, Kindern in behütender Absicht auch einfache Aufgaben abzunehmen, ist eine Form von Gewalt.
Erzieher haben sich mit wahrem Verständnis der freien Entwicklung und Entfaltung des kindlichen Seelenlebens anzupassen, die Persönlichkeit des Kindes zu achten und sich ihm freundschaftlich zuzuwenden. Eine solche Erziehung wird einen Menschentypus hervorbringen, der keine „Untertanen-Mentalität“ besitzt und darum für die Machthaber in unserer Welt kein gefügiges Werkzeug mehr sein wird.
*
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. Rudolf Hänsel ist Erziehungswissenschaftler und Diplom-Psychologe.
Noten
(1) Hänsel, Rudolf (2020). Keinem die Macht übergeben! Ein psychologisches Manifest des gesunden Menschenverstands. Gornji Milanovac /Serbien. Teile I und II sowie Kurzfassung in: „Neue Rheinische Zeitung“ und „Global Research“.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
As People Before Profit prepare to introduce a Bill to Dáil Éireann which would ban new data centres in Ireland, Alexandra Day looks at the disasterous impact of these centres for the environment and communities.
The proliferation of data centres is becoming an area of increasing concern for environmentalists in Ireland. Though presented by the government as an opportunity for investment (owing to considerable lobbying from Google, Amazon, and Microsoft), the growth of these centres has catastrophic implications for the natural environment. They are especially dangerous because although they do not have chimney stacks belching out black smoke, their enormous carbon footprint is concealed behind neat racks of shiny black servers.
Beyond environmentalists, the general public have much to be concerned about from the distinct possibility of power outages and blackouts in the imminent future. Indeed, there have been stark warnings from energy providers of widespread blackouts this winter. When ordinary people are facing cuts in the name of ‘climate’, we have to question why data centres are allowed untrammelled growth across the country.
Data centres are the physical storage centres for the online, digital aspect of our world. Everything we do online, from sending emails to browsing the web or streaming movies, needs to be stored somewhere. If you’re reading this article online, it will generate data that has to be processed and stored. Data centres act like the hard drive on your computer in this way, though instead of storing a handful of documents, they store online information at scale. This is what is meant when we talk about ‘the cloud’.
Though it may sound ethereal and complicated, data centres have considerable ‘real-world’ ramifications. There are currently 70 data centres in Ireland today, an increase of 25% since last year, with Dublin alone the largest data centre hub in Europe. They require enormous amounts of water and energy to power them, and use massive quantities of water to cool the servers down; the energy required to run the centres puts significant pressure on the grid, regardless of whether they are run on renewable energy or fossil fuels; the resulting carbon emissions equated to 1.85% of Ireland’s total emissions in 2020 (a rapid increase); and data centres accounted for approximately 10% of Ireland’s electricity usage in 2019.
A report from Eirgrid suggests that data centres could use up to one third of Ireland’s energy grid by 2030, if their growth is allowed to continue. This will lead to mass, rolling black-outs and strain on the grid across the country. Globally, data centres consume about 2% of electricity, a figure set to reach 8% by 2030. Few countries, if any, will match Ireland’s level.
To demonstrate the disproportionate consumption of energy by data centres, take the example of the proposed data centre for Ennis. During hot weather, the site would use one million litres of water a day. Members of the campaign group Futureproof Clare have shown that this would account for over half of the water consumption of Ennis in a given year.
Furthermore, the centre would consume 200 megawatts, the equivalent of 210,000 homes – the number of homes in Clare, Limerick and Kerry combined. Even if the entire population reduced their energy consumption by 10%, or even more, this effort would be wiped out by the one data centre in Ennis. Practically, people all across the area would face power blackouts for extended periods of time, thus cutting off access to the internet, lighting, cooking facilities, hot water and more.
Corporate Capitulation
We can see why it is so farcical for the Irish government to demand that people take more personal responsibility for climate change, and pay more taxes on things like water and carbon, when these data centres are allowed to proliferate across the country. But why are there so many data centres in Ireland today?
The surface level answer is that Ireland has a cooler climate. These conditions are favourable for data centres, which are prone to overheating. However, that does not go very far in explaining why there are so many data centres in Ireland compared to other temperate locations.
The real cause for the disproportionate amount of data centres can be found in the longstanding capitulation of the Irish government to multinational corporations. Since the 1960s and 1970s, the Irish government has focused on ‘attracting foreign investment’ to the country – no matter the cost to ordinary people. Another example is the government’s success in nullifying Apple’s Irish tax bill of €13 billion last year, while the population was shouldering the economic strain of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Major tech companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft have pressured the government to release a new policy statement on data centres, and to direct all other government departments and state bodies to fall in line with the policy of supporting the expansion of the centres. These groups are represented by Cloud Infrastructure Ireland, whose director is former Labour TD Michael McCarthy. It is worth noting that McCarthy was a representative for the Labour Party from 2011 to 2016, during their most brutal pursuit of austerity measures and water charges. With the question of water charges once again lingering over Irish politics, one can imagine how they could be hammered down onto ordinary people to ensure cheap and plentiful water supplies for data centres.
Furthermore, there are little to no official planning regulations for data centres in Ireland. Currently, the development of these centres is done on a county council level and approved by An Bord Pleanála. In these approvals, very little consideration is given to climate concerns. As reported by Ian Lumley, Built Environment and Heritage Officer for An Taisce, “If you look at the environmental impact statement undertaken by John Spain Associates for a new Amazon data centre development near Swords, the only climate impact addressed is the truck movements for the construction phase”.
The actual amount of jobs that could be created by these centres has been vastly overstated. Outside the initial construction of the centres, a very limited amount of staff will be applied on any long term or permanent basis. As has been proven to be true with most big tech promises of ‘jobs’ for Ireland, the short-term benefits do not justify the long-term, irreversible costs.
Global Impact
Though the issue is working out at a heightened level in Ireland, the question of data centres is of global relevance. While much is being made of the growth in the production of renewable energy across the globe, this has not actually replaced fossil fuel usage. In fact, we are seeing a massive global energy expansion – both in renewable energies and in fossil fuels.
What role do data centres play in this? Proponents of the data centre expansion correctly point out that we cannot simply go back to using hard drives to store data and that the cloud is a much more efficient way of storing data. Opposition to the centres is painted as being anti-technological or primitivist – ‘the socialists want you all to stop watching Netflix!’
The reality is that the vast majority of data usage is industrial. Companies collect a huge amount of data on their products and on work practices in order to cut costs. The massive data expansion is therefore intrinsically linked with capitalist expansion.
Should we support the fossil fuel industry in collecting massive amounts of data in order to analyse and target the most fruitful areas for drilling? Should we support Amazon in surveilling its workers so that it can monitor their every step, in effect putting a manager in their pocket? What about data collection on military technology so that methods of targeting and killing people can be improved? From a socialist perspective, the answer is an obvious no.
Another major source of data generation is for marketing and advertising purposes. Websites and apps constantly collect information on users, which can then be used to sell products and services. Most people are aware and often unhappy about the surveillance of their online behaviours that takes place every day, though they may feel powerless to stop it. What isn’t often thought about is the energy needed to process all of the data they have collected on people so that it can then be used to sell products.
All of this energy consumption cannot simply be outsourced or moved to another part of the globe. Furthermore, we cannot rely on corporations like Amazon to manage their energy consumption, or worse, ‘offset’ it by making pithy investments in wind farms. This amounts to little more than greenwashing. Aside from their appalling treatment of workers, these corporations have proven time and time again that expanding their profits must come before all other concerns. We need to take these decisions out of the hands of the corporations and force the government to take action on climate change.
While we face a winter of unprecedented blackouts and power cuts, we must lay the blame squarely at the feet of the corporations and the government that facilitates them. Our government, including the ironically titled Green Party, have proven that they are both incapable of and unwilling to meet the threat of data centres head-on. Change will not be coming from our policy makers. We must reiterate that a meaningful movement on climate requires us to take on the polluting corporations, not the ordinary people.
*
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).
This is beyond disturbing. According to Dr Pierre Kory, MD, MPA, and verified by the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), 100 to 200 congressional reps and/or staff and families who contracted COVID-19 were treated with the Front Line Ivermectin protocol. [LINK and LINK]
This successful treatment is happening at the same time many congressional representatives are playing politics in favor of the vaccine; downplaying the effective anti-viral treatment and therapeutic approach with Ivermectin; and taking action to block regular American citizens from seeking similar treatment with Ivermectin.
Congress can seek treatment with a medication they simultaneously deny to others? This is well beyond a “scandal”, and needs to be investigated quickly.
Additionally, as Merck has announced a new and similar anti-viral drug called Molnupiravir, two trial studies in India have requested to exit the trials. Apparently the issue surrounds the new drug providing no benefit once a patient is moderately ill and hospitalized (READ MORE, Reuters Link).
Dr. John Campbell highlights a comparison between Ivermectin and Molnupiravir below:
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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).
In my last article “Guterres and the Great Reset: How Capitalism Became a Time Bomb”, I made the case that the time bomb justifying a Great Reset of civilization was set into motion over 50 years ago. In that location, we were introduced to a cast of characters surrounding the World Economic Forum and Trilateral Commission who played instrumental roles in bringing about a controlled disintegration of western civilization.
Despite the fact that this un-natural transformation occurred over the dead bodies of great statesmen of the 1960s, a question still lingers: HOW did the western nations… especially the United States, so deeply shaped by a love of freedom, wilfully relinquish its democratic institutions in favor of a new system of supranational governance and de-growth? How did the very people who were targeted for destruction not only let this happen but in some cases even aide and abet the perpetrators?
Epistemological Warfare in America
Here it helps to look to the writings of an imperial grand strategist who is too often championed as a defender of freedom: Aldous Huxley.
Among these creative misanthropes, Lord Bertrand Russell (another celebrated pacifist) had gone far in outlining the sort of bone chilling ideal that Darwinian laws of evolution demanded be humanity’s destiny under a scientifically managed priesthood. In his 1930 Scientific Outlook, Russell stated:
“The scientific rulers will provide one kind of education for ordinary men and women, and another for those who are to become holders of scientific power. Ordinary men and women will be expected to be docile, industrious, punctual, thoughtless, and contented. Of these qualities probably contentment will be considered the most important. In order to produce it, all the researchers of psycho-analysis, behaviourism, and biochemistry will be brought into play…. All the boys and girls will learn from an early age to be what is called `co-operative,’ i.e., to do exactly what everybody is doing. Initiative will be discouraged in these children, and insubordination, without being punished, will be scientifically trained out of them.”
“Except for the one matter of loyalty to the world state and to their own order, members of the governing class will be encouraged to be adventurous, and full of initiative. It will be recognized that it is their business to improve scientific techniques and to keep the manual workers contented by means of continual new amusements”.
Huxley would have Russell’s thesis firmly in mind when he began writing his Brave New World in 1931.
Aldous Goes to Work
Image on the right: Huxley in 1954 (Public Domain)
Having set up his base of operations in Hollywood in 1937, Aldous lived out his days in the USA writing scripts for Hollywood, exploring psychotropic drugs and coordinating a new cultural movement that would soon overtake the youth growing up amidst the insanity of the Cold War.
In an infamous 1962 speech titled “The Ultimate Revolution”, Aldous Huxley outlined the principles of this new science of governance telling adoring fans amidst the wannabe alphas in the Berkeley auditorium:
“If you are going to control any population for any length of time, you must have some measure of consent. It’s exceedingly difficult to see how pure terrorism can function indefinitely. It can function for a fairly long time, but I think sooner or later you have to bring in an element of persuasion, an element of getting people to consent to what is happening to them. Well, it seems to me that the nature of The Ultimate Revolution with which we are now faced is precisely this: That we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques, which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably always will exist, to get people, actually, to love their servitude.”
Getting people to love their servitude would be made possible by an array of new techniques outlined in both Huxley’s fiction and non-fiction writings and put into motion by the hard work of CIA-funded laboratories working under secretive umbrella of Allan Dulles’ MK Ultra. Utilizing many techniques pioneered by Nazi psychiatrists in WWII, one of the primary objectives of MK Ultra was to deconstruct the human psyche using a mix of electroshock therapy, psychotropic drugs and other conditioning in order to reconstruct personalities from scratch by professional psychiatrists. As Naomi Klein demonstrated in her famous book The Shock Doctrine, the idea behind MK Ultra was always to extend these behavioral techniques to reprogramming entire groups, societies and nations.
Within Huxley’s Brave New World, psychotropic drugs (soma), cultural norms driven by pre-adolescent sensualism, constant Tinder-esque sexual escapades, the disintegration of family units and hyper-sensualized entertainment (dubbed “feelies”) did the job nicely. Huxley’s dystopia featured a society which had successfully evolved to become a total oligarchy with a scientific priesthood managing the test tube babies bio engineered to become alphas, betas, gammas or the lowly toilet cleaning epsilons reminiscent of the sub-human Morlocks described in H.G. Wells’ earlier Time Machine. In Huxley’s world, family units have long since disintegrated with the nation state and any belief in God.
In his 1958 Brave New World Revisited, Aldous decries the ultimate evil caused by faith in scientific and technological progress as an illusion which cannot provide an escape from the ultimate determining law of humanity: overpopulation. Citing creative breakthroughs in atomic power, space exploration and medicine, Huxley bemoans how each time humanity solves a problem that allows us to save more lives, the species replicates at faster rates bringing about the inevitable Malthusian problems of future wars for resources, diseases and the breeding of the inferior races.
Huxley writes:
“In this second half of the twentieth century we do nothing systematic about our breeding; but in our random and unregulated way we are not only over-populating our planet, we are also, it would seem, making sure that these greater numbers shall be of biologically poorer quality. In the bad old days children with considerable, or even with slight, hereditary defects rarely survived. Today, thanks to sanitation, modern pharmacology and the social conscience, most of the children born with hereditary defects reach maturity and multiply their kind.”
In another speech delivered to the University of California in 1961, Huxley elaborated on this bone chilling plan saying:
“There will be in the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak. Producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel – by propaganda, or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.”
Huxley knew that if this sort of brainwashing were successfully induced, the ruling oligarchy could ensure that the hedonistic identities of those coming of age within this controlled environment would detach themselves from outdated concepts like nationalism, love of family, or religion, in order to create LSD-driven personal “micro-realities”. Honoring the past and sacrificing for the future became replaced with a new wisdom of “living in the now”.
Huxley was happy to discover that LSD-25 mixed with cannabis, hashish and mescaline was a perfect supplement for soma writing in his 1958 Revisited:
“In LSD-25 (lysergic acid diethylamide) the pharmacologists have recently created another aspect of soma — a perception-improver and vision-producer that is, physiologically speaking, almost costless. This extraordinary drug, which is effective in doses as small as fifty or even twenty-five millionths of a gram, has power (like peyote) to transport people into the other world. In the majority of cases, the other world to which LSD-25 gives access is heavenly; alternatively it may be purgatorial or even infernal. But, positive, or negative, the lysergic acid experience is felt by almost everyone who undergoes it to be profoundly significant and enlightening. In any event, the fact that minds can be changed so radically at so little cost to the body is altogether astonishing.”
During his time in the United States coordinating this new countercultural insurgency, Aldous recruited a young professor of psychiatry named Timothy Leary to his cause. Describing his interaction with Huxley as the two planned this final revolution, Leary wrote in 1983:
“We had run up against the Judeo-Christian commitment to one God, one religion, one reality, that has cursed Europe for centuries and America since our founding days. Drugs that open the mind to multiple realities inevitably lead to a polytheistic view of the universe. We sensed that the time for a new humanist religion based on intelligence, good natured pluralism and scientific paganism had arrived.”
The Creation of Organized Schizophrenia
How the counter-culture was formed in the bowels of such oligarchical psychiatric mental meatgrinders like London’s Tavistock Institute and was applied by psychiatric shock troops strategically placed across all schools, military, unions, corporate boards and government bureaucracies throughout the years is beyond the scope of this present article, although it was explored in a recent video by this author.
What must be kept in mind for our present purposes is that cultural warfare during this intense post WW2 period was full spectrum in nature- taking every major branch of human life into account and extracting all traces of creative reason, universality, Freedom, and Truth anywhere it could be found.
Whether it was in the fine arts and music or whether it was in scientific practice, new dualisms were imposed severing logical thinking from the “pollution” of subjective emotions. Where the arts became shaped increasingly by hedonism liberated from reason (with a “high” post-modern art for the elites and a “low” populist art for the dumb masses), the sciences became governed by the dogmatic faith in cold mathematical sterility governed by “statistics”, entropy, and blind fatalism.
Random paint splashes of CIA-funded artists like Jackson Pollock or the fuzzy squares of Mark Rothko became the new artistic ideal while scientists found themselves trained to think like computers modelling their minds of the methods of Bertrand Russell’s Principia, Norbert Weiner’s Cybernetics and John von Neumann’s Information Theory. Bertrand Russell’s role coordinating the CIA’s Congress for Cultural Freedom should not be lost on anyone.
With the severing of creativity from reason, the minds of those processed by this new cultural field was increasingly shaped by blind rules and axioms enforced by expert consensus rather than personal acts of discovery. Computer modelling thus found itself replacing acts of genuine human thought and within this sterile intellectual climate, a new cult of artificial intelligence began to find fertile soil to grow its perverse roots.
When mixed with heavy doses of imperial wars, assassinations, coups, and the looming threat of nuclear annihilation, the parents of the baby boomers had no clue what evil they were dealing with as their children were absorbed into a new drug/sex-ridden cultural field that no one had ever experienced before. Schizophrenic chaos in the world bred schizophrenic chaos in the culture as increasingly large arrays of youth gave up on reality in order to “tune in, turn on and drop out”.
Throughout the 1960s, patriotic forces around the world rallied to revive the spirit of scientific and technological progress which these neo-Malthusians despised so much. President John F Kennedy attempted to amplify Eisenhower’s Atoms for Peace along with large scale investments into Africa, Asia and Ibero America alongside leaders of the Pan African and Pan Arab world who were committed to ending colonialism and bringing their people into the 21st century.
After Kennedy’s murder, Charles de Gaulle worked with international co-thinkers like Quebec Premier Daniel Johnson, Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker and German Chancellor Adenauer to bring about a coalition of progress which peaked in 1968 with Bobby Kennedy’s inevitable leadership of the United States.
In this new post-1968 political climate, new scientific conferences were organized in an attempt to impose statistic modelling premised on systems analysis onto biological, economic and especially ecological systems. Extrapolating present trends into the future and disregarding the sorts of non-linear qualitative leaps caused by creative thought allowed this new breed of scientist to “predict” the inevitable crises caused by population growth and the diminishing returns on finite resources.
The iconic study for this new scientific movement was the Club of Rome-commission MIT report Limits to Growth that “predicted”, as Malthus had done two centuries earlier, the point of crisis when population pressures would outstrip nature’s bounty- giving technocrats managing humanity the tools needed to make the proper sacrifices in the present.
When figures like Mark Carney discuss the “greening of global finance” and placing monetary values upon the reduction of carbon footprints, this is the sick and unscientific foundation of their thinking. Where formerly, humanity valued economic growth via scientific and technological progress (and implicitly the support of increased numbers of people at higher standards of life), the new system of “values” promoted by these misanthropes demanded that profit be tied to the reduction of human activity on the earth.
Club of Rome co-founder Aurelio Peccei, who presented at the inaugural World Economic Forum meetings in Davos, stated:
“The economy and the ecology are inextricably united…. A strategy of generating wealth and one of safeguarding this patrimony are opposed. Activities that generate wealth but destroy the natural patrimony even more, create negative value”.
Former President of the World Federation of Mental Health during the high point of MK Ultra, Margaret Mead (wife of MK Ultra controller Gregory Bateson) presided over one such 1975 conference on the environment and atmosphere sponsored by the Club of Rome (this club also being an early sponsor of the World Economic Forum in 1971). Echoing the spirit of Russell and Huxley earlier, Mead called for the creation of a new science of statistics premised on equating pollution to climate change that would become internally consistent and shape the behavior of humanity going into the 21st century. The focus was always population control. In her speech Mead said:
“The unparalleled increase in the human population and its demands for food, energy, and resources is clearly the most important destabilizing influences in the biosphere. We are facing a period when society must make decisions on a planetary scale.”
“What we need from scientists are estimates, presented with sufficient conservatism and plausibility but at the same time as free as possible from internal disagreements that can be exploited by political interests, that will allow us to start building a system of artificial but effective warnings, warnings which will parallel the instincts of animals who flee before the hurricane. [We must] draw from the necessary capacity for sacrifice. It is therefore a statement of major possibilities of danger, which may overtake humankind, on which it is important to concentrate attention”.
Rather than seeing science as a field for optimistic problem solving, this misanthropic cult of elitists demanded that science be redefined around a “new wisdom” of adapting to problems real or imagined. This cynical science of “problematique” (the science of problems) assumed that since all creative discovery caused population growth, the real enemy was found in the naïve optimists who believe it good to promote discoveries. Mead ridiculed those cultural optimists who rejected this cynical view of science saying:
“Those who react against prophets of doom, believing that there is not adequate scientific basis for their melancholy prophecies, [for they] tend to become in turn prophets of paradisiacal impossibilities, guaranteed utopias of technological bliss, or benign interventions on behalf of mankind that are none the less irrational just because they are couched as ‘rational.’ They express a kind of faith in the built-in human instinct for survival, or a faith in some magical technological panacea.”
Using more truthful language, Club of Rome co-founder Sir Alexander King stated in the preface of The First Global Revolution (1991):
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together. But in designating these dangers as the enemy, we fall into the trap, which we have already warned readers about, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention in natural processes, and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy then is humanity itself.”
The prophets of doom who set the time bomb in place half a century ago giddily prepare their utopian Great Reset which demands vast bloodletting as an overpopulated humanity be sacrificed by a modern pagan scientific priesthood devoted to Gaia and computer models. On the other hand, the spirit of progress and open system thinking has come alive in the form of the multipolar alliance which premises its planning on an opposing set of assumptions about the nature of humanity, creative thought, value, economics, progress and natural law.
Which future wins out in this battle over humanity will be shaped by the decisions and discoveries we make (or fail to make) in the days ahead.
*
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).
A large-scale ground operation may indeed be looming over Syria’s Greater Idlib, judging by recent Turkish reinforcements.
As a show of force, Ankara established another post in the terrorist-infested region.
Turkey has dozens of observation posts, but what makes this one special is that it is in the town of Afes in the southern Idlib countryside, only a few hundred meters away from the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) positions in the town of Saraqib.
If they wanted, they could even throw stones at the Syrian troops.
In total, two battle tanks, four armored personnel carriers, three armored vehicles and about 50 troops were deployed in the post that oversees the Lattakia-Aleppo highway, the M4, and the Hama-Aleppo highway, the M5.
A recent report by the SANA confirmed the fact that was obvious for a while – the Turkish military deployed large reinforcements in Greater Idlib recently in order to impede any operation by the SAA and its allies, namely Russia.
Still, Syria is turning into a swamp for Ankara. On October 10th, two servicemen were killed and three Turkish-backed Syrian militants were wounded when their vehicles came under attack near the Syrian town of Marea. The attack was allegedly carried out by Kurdish forces, most likely the Afrin Liberation Force.
Just days earlier, on October 7th, a Turkish service member was killed in an attack that targeted a position he was manning near the village of al-Twais in the Aleppo countryside. On October 5th, an explosive device targeted a vehicle carrying Turkish officers in Greater Idlib.
Meanwhile, as Israel has done time and again – it carried out strikes at a time when developments in Syria were moving along quite well for the Damascus government.
Late on October 8th, 6 Israeli F-16 fighter jets fired 12 guided missiles at the T-4 air base in Homs province. Syrian service members were wounded in the attack.
Iranian-backed forces are known to be stationed in T4 air base. In 2019, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps moved its main weapons supply center in Syria from Damascus International Airport to the T-4 base.
Separately, in a promising sign of normalization, the UAE’s economy ministry said that a deal was signed with Syria on future plans to enhance economic cooperation and explore new sectors.
Initially, the UAE supported the so-called “moderate opposition” but as the Damascus government captured more than 90% of the country, they have switched their policy towards more acceptance of President Bashar al-Assad.
Quite a bit of progress has been made, despite all of the efforts by Turkey, Israel and the United States, among others attempting to stop it. The Damascus government is on the brink of controlling even more territory, following the successes in Daraa. Greater Idlib remains the last significant militant stronghold, and it appears that it’s only a matter of time until it is dealt with.
*
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).
In June 2021, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) told U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris in Mexico City that he wanted to end military cooperation in fighting drug trafficking and to instead promote economic development.
Launched in 2008, the Mérida Initiative aimed to combat drug trafficking with U.S. military equipment, technical support, and training for security forces in Mexico and Central America, which have received billions of dollars in aid.
Military equipment provided under the Mérida Initiative. [Source: eluniversal.com]
AMLO argues that investing in development projects would help counter not only drug trafficking but also migrant flows.
On a visit to Mexico City last week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken pledged to replace the Mérida initiative with a new bicentennial framework—though by all indication, the Biden administration remains committed to a “muscular approach to combating drug gangs,” as the U.S. News & World Report put it.
President Biden, a life-long drug warrior, is being arm-twisted into keeping the failed, murderous “War on Drugs” going by numerous U.S. stakeholders to whom he is beholden.
They include:
a) the U.S. banks which launder the billions in drug money;
b) the weapons makers which get money from the U.S. government, which buys the weapons and gives them to the Mexican army and police, and which also receive money from the narco-gangs which buy huge amounts of weapons on their own;
c) the Republicans who will use a U.S. withdrawal from the War on Drugs as a club with which to scare the population and beat the Democrats in coming elections; and
d) the huge numbers of U.S. police, border patrols, DEA agents, and a multitude of others whose jobs and livelihoods depend on continuing the drug war.
Benjamin T. Smith’s new book The Dope: The Real History of the Mexican Drug Trade (W.W. Norton, 2021) is the most comprehensive yet in detailing the violence and corruption associated with the War on Drugs in Mexico, a war that can never be won since demand for drugs in the U.S. is too high and wage levels in Mexico are too low.
Benjamin T. Smith’s new book The Dope: The Real History of the Mexican Drug Trade (W.W. Norton, 2021) is the most comprehensive yet in detailing the violence and corruption associated with the War on Drugs in Mexico, a war that can never be won since demand for drugs in the U.S. is too high and wage levels in Mexico are too low.
Rather than halting the supply rate, Smith shows that aggressive counter-narcotics policing causes traffickers to turn on one another while intensifying competition for control over rackets.
The loosening of gun restrictions—exemplified by President George W. Bush’s rescinding in 2004 of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act preventing the sale of semi-automatic assault weapons to civilians—has given cartel members easier access to firearms, resulting in a spiraling murder rate.
Weapons seized by Mexican security forces that were smuggled from the U.S. [Source: borderreport.com]
Back in the Good Old Days
According to Smith, the Mexican drug trade, until the 1970s, was relatively peaceful—certainly by today’s standards.
In the first decades of the twentieth century, it was controlled by small-scale networks of pharmacists, criminals, farmers, and merchants who were protected by local politicians who adopted a model of cooperation.
Mexico’s first narco, José de Moral, was a toothless marijuana wholesaler known as “the King of the Stoners,” who tried to appeal a five-month jail sentence by asking the judge how marijuana could be “considered dangerous for health when it is used as a medicine for infinite ailments.”
Mexico’s first modern detective Valente Quintana—the Mexican “Sherlock Holmes”—set an important precedent as a principal ally of drug traffickers in the 1920s and 1930s.
The first drug protection rackets evolved around his time. The lucrative profits from the drug trade were used to pay for government buildings, soldiers, police forces and schools.
Many leading drug traffickers of the era were revered as such in their communities. When Enrique Fernández Puertas—the “Al Capone of Ciudad Juarez”—died, people lined muddy roads to pay homage to him, and balladeers sang a new song:
“His death was deeply felt
We are always grateful,
He gave money with open hands
And ordered schools to be built
For the good of all the young people.”
Fernandez’s profits paid for the construction of at least four schools in poor communities and for the teachers’ salaries, an open air theater, and water pump.
His address book included phone numbers for senators, congressmen, the number two in the Mexican treasury and even President Plutarco Elias Calles’s personal secretary.
New local governments asserted their authority over the protection rackets by arresting or murdering the old traffickers and putting their own smugglers in their place.
This approach gave the illusion to the American and Mexican federal authorities that the new governments were serious about drug crime when they were profiting from the trade.
Baja California’s governor from 1915 to 1920, Esteban Cantú, imposed Mexico’s first off-the-books drug protection racket in which the state received money for protecting the drug business.
On the surface, Cantú prohibited the manufacture and sale of narcotics, inviting U.S. officials and newspapermen to witness major drug busts and the closing of all opium dens.
Cantú’s ruse worked so well that San Diego’s grandees invited him to their celebration of cross-border cooperation as the guest of honor.
The money from the vice trade made Baja one of the richest states in Mexico.
Tax earnings increased four-fold when Cantú was governor and Cantú used the money to make the place safe and brought in expert engineers to construct new roads.
Debunking Reefer Madness
Despite the systemic corruption, Mexico had developed some of the harshest anti-drug laws in the world by mid-century.
These policies had been pushed by Harry J. Anslinger, the legendary head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) from 1929 to 1962, who bullied and blackmailed countries into getting what he wanted.
Members of Mexico’s ruling elite claimed that marijuana “caused soldiers to commit murder without remorse” and made the people act “more Indian.”
Mexican diplomat Manuel Tello told an audience at the League of Nations in June 1939 that Mexican doctors had not found one example of a patient driven to madness by smoking the narcotic.
Tello’s outlook was influenced by the head of Mexico’s Campaign Against Alcoholism and Other Drug Addictions, Leopoldo Salazar Viniegra, who published a pathbreaking paper, “The Myth of Marijuana,” which argued based on extensive study that marijuana’s main effect was to dry the mouth, redden the eyes and cause a feeling of hunger.
Any further effect was not caused by marijuana’s chemical properties but by existing psychological disorders among the users.
Viniegra’s views foreshadowed by two decades those of Dr. Timothy Leary, who believed that narcotics did not have fixed chemical effects; their impact rather depended on the drug user’s mindset, or “set,” and his environment, or “setting.”
Legislation inspired by Viniegra created state-run morphine dispensaries, which helped many people. Harry Anslinger responded by blackmailing the Mexican government, ordering the halting of morphine sales to Mexico until the act was rescinded.
Mexico’s anti-drug laws subsequently became even more punitive than those of the U.S as Viniegra was forced out of the narcotics field.[1]
Greater Centralized Control and Corruption
By the 1940s, drug protection rackets were increasingly controlled by state governors who taxed every level of the drug business from the growers, to the buyers, to the chemists and the traffickers, and used their police forces to extort poppy growers.
The payoff was huge as state treasuries went from being millions of dollars in the red to millions of dollars in the black and government leaders could afford major public works projects while keeping taxes low.
Mexican presidents began to realize the benefit too as drug earnings were almost entirely in dollars and could pay off Mexico’s balance of payments deficit and prop up the country’s falling currency.
With time, Mexico’s Federal Security Directorate (DFS)—which worked at the service of the Central intelligence Agency (CIA) and was headed by CIA assets—came to run the country’s protection rackets, clashing at times over control of the narcotics business with the federal police (PJF).
A number of DFS staffers were professional assassins who had been employed by the government in counterinsurgency operations against leftists during the 1960s and 1970s.
In the mid 1980s, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) reported that drug traffickers commonly traveled the streets and highways with automatic weapons carrying credentials from the DFS or other federal law enforcement agencies.
Age of Aquarius and Beyond
A boom in demand fueled by the growth of the counter-culture in the U.S. during the 1960s was a crucial turning point in transforming Mexico’s narcotics business from small localized operations to a multi-million dollar business which laundered its profits in banks.
The increase in violence dating from this time was attributed more to the narcs than the traffickers. The DEA—which the Nixon administration had set up as a cornerstone of its War on Drugs—favored sadistic police officers such as Florentino Ventura Gutiérrez, who was described by one DEA agent as “the most brutal man I have ever met. And efficiently brutal … Torture to him was no more shocking than violent weather.”
Government goon squads were charged with arresting, torturing and then disposing of the bodies of drug traffickers along with left-wing insurgents. Former CIA toughs who had trained in undercover ops in Vietnam were rumored to have set up assassination squads to take out high-level traffickers.
The DEA characterized the mid 1970s Operation Condor as little more than a “vicious circle of incompetence, apathy and corruption.”
Police agents and soldiers shot up villages, ransacked houses, raped women, beat children and tortured and killed hundreds and possibly thousands of Mexican farmers.
Many at the same time profited from the drug trade. Mexico City’s police chief, Arturo “El Negro” Durazo Moreno, imported cocaine into the U.S. as part of a huge criminal enterprise which allowed him to buy a fleet of luxury cars and build an outrageous mansion.
Moreno would bust drug mules in the airport sent by his traffickers and inflate the size of the bust with milk powder. Other undetected mules would at the same time covertly provide him with his payoff.
Drug-related corruption took place on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border. A 1970s-era smuggler stated that “American cops like money as much as Mexican cops and they are cheaper to buy.”
When an El Paso Customs officer, George Hough, was caught with 11 kilos of cocaine, he said that for years he and his fellow officers had been crossing into Mexico illegally, kidnapping drug dealers and stealing the drugs which were then either sold to U.S. dealers or turned over to authorities and presented as high value Customs seizures.
In 1974, the U.S. State Department claimed that “corruption” was the “single most inhibitory factor in the entire anti-narcotics effort … It is known to exist at high levels in state and local government and police organizations.”
The DEA described Mexico’s police forces as “nothing more than an organized criminal organization that conducted their nefarious activities from behind a police badge.”
No wonder the War on Drugs never succeeded.
Kiki
The March 1985 death of Enrique “Kiki” Camarena—the drug war’s JFK assassination—was another major turning point for the Mexican drug trade and U.S. War on Drugs, which helped rearrange federal and local protection rackets, led to an increased wave of drug-related violence, and provided a justification to boost federal funding for the DEA.
The story of Camarena’s death was repeated over and over in the media and popular films as a morality play of an earnest American agent killed by the evil drug lords.
Whistleblower Lawrence Victor Hanson (aka George Marshall Davis), a 6’7” American spook, punctured the official narrative, however, by tying Camarena’s death to a web of corruption involving the CIA and its plans to fund Nicaraguan paramilitaries with Mexican cocaine money. Camarena was killed because he stumbled onto the drugs-for-arms operation, much like two Mexican journalists, one of whom had his lips sown shut with a wire.
Other witnesses pointed to the direct collusion of the CIA and to high-up Mexican government officials—notably the Minister of Defense and Minister of the Interior—openly planning Camarena’s killing and visiting the house while he was being tortured to death.
A local journalist curiously recognized one of Camarena’s DEA colleagues—rumored to be in the pay of Guadalajara traffickers—at the trial of a Guadalajara cartel operative testifying in his unofficial DEA capacity for the defense.
This has led to speculation that a bribe was passed on to Camarena, who became the fall guy after the cartel’s fields were raided and its bank deposits seized.
The significant state coordination in Camarena’s death generally exemplified that the War on Drugs was a phony war—with real victims—which was never designed to be won.
All Hell Breaks Loose
During the 1990s, increased drug profits (an estimated $30 billion for the decade) combined with declining state power put the narcos in complete control of the drug trade in Mexico.
Payoffs now overwhelmed the state and local police forces, with politicians “being at the service of the drug traffickers, rather than the other way around,” as a former government official put it. Even the Mexican Army General in charge of the nation’s War on Drugs was on the take.
President Felipe Calderón’s (2006-2012) all-out war on the cartels—with U.S. backing—was an unmitigated disaster.
It resulted in a huge spike in drug-related kidnappings and murders as violence professionals like the Zetas grew in stature and guns from the U.S. became more widely available.
Dubbed the “military cartel,” Mexican army soldiers were considered as dangerous as the traffickers. In 2009, there were 1,400 human rights complaints against them. One community activist declared that “Abu Ghraib would be a kindergarten compared to the military camp here in Ciudad Juarez.”
The drug supply rates all the while increased: In 2014, Mexico was producing ten times the amount of heroin which it had produced in the 1970s.
Learning from History?
The story of the drug trade in Mexico does not lend much faith in the human condition.
The allure of drug profits led so many men and some women to compromise their moral ethics and to behave little better than animals.
The web of corruption extended so deep that the line drawn between good guys and bad in popular fiction is completely illusory.
The only genuine good guys have been the drug reformers who promoted a liberal outlook that might have prevented much of the bloodshed and mayhem.
Mexico today under AMLO is poised to try to reverse some of the damage caused by the War on Drugs with a more enlightened approach.
One can only hope that American policy-makers will follow suit.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction Magazine. He is the author of four books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019) and The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018). He can be reached at: [email protected].
Notes
1. Ever the iconoclast, Viniegra established an experimental school of open, participative learning for Mexico City’s street kids called “the House Without Bars.”
Featured image: A cemetery in Durango where drug war victims are buried. [Source: pri.org]
Comments Off on Mexican President AMLO Pleads with Biden to End Failed Trillion Dollar “War on Drugs”—But Powerful U.S. Interests Prefer Deadly Status Quo
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).
“Whether the mask is labeled fascism, democracy, or dictatorship of the proletariat, our great adversary remains the apparatus—the bureaucracy, the police, the military. Not the one facing us across the frontier of the battle lines, which is not so much our enemy as our brothers’ enemy, but the one that calls itself our protector and makes us its slaves.
No matter what the circumstances, the worst betrayal will always be to subordinate ourselves to this apparatus and to trample underfoot, in its service, all human values in ourselves and in others.”—Simone Weil, French philosopher and political activist
We labor today under the weight of countless tyrannies, large and small, carried out in the so-called name of the national good by an elite class of governmental and corporate officials who are largely insulated from the ill effects of their actions.
We, the middling classes, are not so fortunate.
We find ourselves badgered, bullied and browbeaten into bearing the brunt of their arrogance, paying the price for their greed, suffering the backlash for their militarism, agonizing as a result of their inaction, feigning ignorance about their backroom dealings, overlooking their incompetence, turning a blind eye to their misdeeds, cowering from their heavy-handed tactics, and blindly hoping for change that never comes.
The overt signs of the despotism exercised by the increasingly authoritarian regime that passes itself off as the United States government (and its corporate partners in crime) are all around us: COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates that strip Americans of their freedom of movement and bodily integrity; censorship, criminalizing, shadow banning and de-platforming of individuals who express ideas that are politically incorrect or unpopular; warrantless surveillance of Americans’ movements and communications; SWAT team raids of Americans’ homes; shootings of unarmed citizens by police; harsh punishments meted out to schoolchildren in the name of zero tolerance; armed drones taking to the skies domestically; endless wars; out-of-control spending; militarized police; roadside strip searches; roving TSA sweeps; privatized prisons with a profit incentive for jailing Americans; fusion centers that spy on, collect and disseminate data on Americans’ private transactions; and militarized agencies with stockpiles of ammunition, to name some of the most appalling.
Yet as egregious as these incursions on our rights may be, it’s the endless, petty tyrannies—the heavy-handed, punitive-laden dictates inflicted by a self-righteous, Big-Brother-Knows-Best bureaucracy on an overtaxed, overregulated, and underrepresented populace—that illustrate so clearly the degree to which “we the people” are viewed as incapable of common sense, moral judgment, fairness, and intelligence, not to mention lacking a basic understanding of how to stay alive, raise a family, or be part of a functioning community.
It’s hard to say whether we’re dealing with a kleptocracy (a government ruled by thieves), a kakistocracy (a government run by unprincipled career politicians, corporations and thieves that panders to the worst vices in our nature and has little regard for the rights of American citizens), or if we’ve gone straight to an idiocracy.
This certainly isn’t a constitutional democracy, however.
This overbearing Nanny State despotism is what happens when government representatives (those elected and appointed to work for us) adopt the authoritarian notion that the government knows best and therefore must control, regulate and dictate almost everything about the citizenry’s public, private and professional lives.
The government’s bureaucratic attempts at muscle-flexing by way of overregulation and overcriminalization have reached such outrageous limits that federal and state governments now require on penalty of a fine that individuals apply for permission before they can grow exotic orchids, host elaborate dinner parties, gather friends in one’s home for Bible studies, give coffee to the homeless, let their kids manage a lemonade stand, keep chickens as pets, or braid someone’s hair, as ludicrous as that may seem.
This is what happens when bureaucrats run the show, and the rule of law becomes little more than a cattle prod for forcing the citizenry to march in lockstep with the government.
Overregulation is just the other side of the coin to overcriminalization, that phenomenon in which everything is rendered illegal and everyone becomes a lawbreaker.
That same overcriminalization mindset reared its ugly head again when police arrested a 90-year-old man for violating an ordinance that prohibits feeding the homeless in public unless portable toilets are also made available.
It’s no coincidence that both of these incidents—the fishing debacle and the homeless feeding arrest—happened in Florida.
Despite its pristine beaches and balmy temperatures, Florida is no less immune to the problems plaguing the rest of the nation in terms of overcriminalization, incarceration rates, bureaucracy, corruption, and police misconduct.
A few years back, in fact, Florida officials authorized police raids on barber shops in minority communities, resulting in barbers being handcuffed in front of customers, and their shops searched without warrants. All of this was purportedly done in an effort to make sure that the barbers’ licensing paperwork was up to snuff.
As if criminalizing fishing, charity, and haircuts wasn’t bad enough, you could also find yourself passing time in a Florida slammer for such inane activities as singing in a public place while wearing a swimsuit, breaking more than three dishes per day, farting in a public place after 6 pm on a Thursday, and skateboarding without a license.
In this way, the Sunshine State is representative of the transformation happening across the nation, where a steady diet of bread and circuses has given rise to an oblivious, inactive citizenry content to be ruled over by an inflexible and highly bureaucratic regime.
America has gone from being a beacon of freedom to a locked down nation. And “we the people,” sold on the idea that safety, security and material comforts are preferable to freedom, have allowed the government to pave over the Constitution in order to erect a concentration camp.
The problem with these devil’s bargains, however, is that there is always a catch, always a price to pay for whatever it is we valued so highly as to barter away our most precious possessions.
We’ve bartered away our right to self-governance, self-defense, privacy, autonomy and that most important right of all—the right to tell the government to “leave me the hell alone.”
In exchange for the promise of an end to global pandemics, lower taxes, lower crime rates, safe streets, safe schools, blight-free neighborhoods, and readily accessible technology, health care, water, food and power, we’ve opened the door to lockdowns, militarized police, government surveillance, asset forfeiture, school zero tolerance policies, license plate readers, red light cameras, SWAT team raids, health care mandates, overcriminalization, overregulation and government corruption.
In the end, such bargains always turn sour.
We relied on the government to help us safely navigate national emergencies (terrorism, natural disasters, global pandemics, etc.) only to find ourselves forced to relinquish our freedoms on the altar of national security, yet we’re no safer (or healthier) than before.
We wanted criminals taken off the streets, and we didn’t want to have to pay for their incarceration.What we’ve gotten is a nation that boasts the highest incarceration rate in the world, with more than 2.3 million people locked up, many of them doing time for relatively minor, nonviolent crimes, and a private prison industry fueling the drive for more inmates, who are forced to provide corporations with cheap labor.
A special report by CNBC breaks down the national numbers:
One out of 100 American adults is behind bars — while a stunning one out of 32 is on probation, parole or in prison. This reliance on mass incarceration has created a thriving prison economy. The states and the federal government spend about $74 billion a year on corrections, and nearly 800,000 people work in the industry.
According to the Washington Post, these funds have been used to buy guns, armored cars, electronic surveillance gear, “luxury vehicles, travel and a clown named Sparkles.” Police seminars advise officers to use their “department wish list when deciding which assets to seize” and, in particular, go after flat screen TVs, cash and nice cars.
In Florida, where police are no strangers to asset forfeiture, Florida police have been carrying out “reverse” sting operations, where they pose as drug dealers to lure buyers with promises of cheap cocaine, then bust them, and seize their cash and cars. Over the course of a year, police in one small Florida town seized close to $6 million using these entrapment schemes.
We fell for the government’s promise of safer roads, only to find ourselves caught in a tangle of profit-driven red light cameras, which ticket unsuspecting drivers in the so-called name of road safety while ostensibly fattening the coffers of local and state governments. Despite widespread public opposition, corruption and systemic malfunctions, these cameras—used in 24 states and Washington, DC—are particularly popular with municipalities, which look to them as an easy means of extra cash.
One small Florida town, population 8,000, generates a million dollars a year in fines from these cameras. Building on the profit-incentive schemes, the cameras’ manufacturers are also pushing speed cameras and school bus cameras, both of which result in heft fines for violators who speed or try to go around school buses.
As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, this is what happens when the American people get duped, deceived, double-crossed, cheated, lied to, swindled and conned into believing that the government and its army of bureaucrats—the people we appointed to safeguard our freedoms—actually have our best interests at heart.
Yet when all is said and done, who is really to blame when the wool gets pulled over your eyes: you, for believing the con man, or the con man for being true to his nature?
It’s time for a bracing dose of reality, America.
Wake up and take a good, hard look around you, and ask yourself if the gussied-up version of America being sold to you—crime free, worry free, disease free and devoid of responsibility—is really worth the ticket price: nothing less than your freedoms.
*
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).
A “Physicians’ Declaration” produced by an international alliance of physicians and medical scientists strongly condemns the global strategy to treat COVID, accusing policy-makers of potential “crimes against humanity” for preventing physicians from providing life-saving treatments for their patients and suppressing open scientific discussion.
The document states that “one size fits all” treatment recommendations have resulted in needless illness and death.
As of 1:00 Friday afternoon, the declaration had garnered over 3,100 signatures from doctors and scientists around the world. (See below for updated number).
A group of physicians and scientists met in Rome, Italy earlier this month for a three dayGlobal Covid Summit to speak “truth to power about Covid pandemic research and treatment.”
The summit, which was held from September 12 to September 14, gave the medical professionals an opportunity to compare studies, and assess the efficacy of the various treatments that have been developed in hospitals, doctors offices and research labs throughout the world.
The Physicians’ Declaration was first read at the Rome Covid Summit, catalyzing an explosion of active support from medical scientists and physicians around the globe. These professionals were not expecting career threats, character assassination, papers and research censored, social accounts blocked, search results manipulated, clinical trials and patient observations banned, and their professional history and accomplishments altered or omitted in academic and mainstream media.
Dr. Robert Malone, architect of the mRNA vaccine platform, read the Rome Declaration at the summit.
Dr. Robert Malone reads Rome COVID Summit “Declaration” signed by over 3,000 doctors and scientists accusing Covid policy-makers of potential “crimes against humanity”https://t.co/bIosbeYsZs
Thousands have died from Covid as a result of being denied life-saving early treatment. The Declaration is a battle cry from physicians who are daily fighting for the right to treat their patients, and the right of patients to receive those treatments – without fear of interference, retribution or censorship by government, pharmacies, pharmaceutical corporations, and big tech. We demand that these groups step aside and honor the sanctity and integrity of the patient-physician relationship, the fundamental maxim “First Do No Harm”, and the freedom of patients and physicians to make informed medical decisions. Lives depend on it.
We the physicians of the world, united and loyal to the Hippocratic Oath, recognizing the profession of medicine as we know it is at a crossroad, are compelled to declare the following;
WHEREAS, it is our utmost responsibility and duty to uphold and restore the dignity, integrity, art and science of medicine;
WHEREAS, there is an unprecedented assault on our ability to care for our patients;
WHEREAS, public policy makers have chosen to force a “one size fits all” treatment strategy, resulting in needless illness and death, rather than upholding fundamental concepts of the individualized, personalized approach to patient care which is proven to be safe and more effective;
WHEREAS, physicians and other health care providers working on the front lines, utilizing their knowledge of epidemiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, are often first to identify new, potentially life saving treatments;
WHEREAS, physicians are increasingly being discouraged from engaging in open professional discourse and the exchange of ideas about new and emerging diseases, not only endangering the essence of the medical profession, but more importantly, more tragically, the lives of our patients;
WHEREAS, thousands of physicians are being prevented from providing treatment to their patients, as a result of barriers put up by pharmacies, hospitals, and public health agencies, rendering the vast majority of healthcare providers helpless to protect their patients in the face of disease. Physicians are now advising their patients to simply go home (allowing the virus to replicate) and return when their disease worsens, resulting in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary patient deaths, due to failure-to-treat;
WHEREAS, this is not medicine. This is not care. These policies may actually constitute crimes against humanity.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS:
RESOLVED, that the physician-patient relationship must be restored. The very heart of medicine is this relationship, which allows physicians to best understand their patients and their illnesses, to formulate treatments that give the best chance for success, while the patient is an active participant in their care.
RESOLVED, that the political intrusion into the practice of medicine and the physician/patient relationship must end. Physicians, and all health care providers, must be free to practice the art and science of medicine without fear of retribution, censorship, slander, or disciplinary action, including possible loss of licensure and hospital privileges, loss of insurance contracts and interference from government entities and organizations – which further prevent us from caring for patients in need. More than ever, the right and ability to exchange objective scientific findings, which further our understanding of disease, must be protected.
RESOLVED, that physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM. Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments. These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death. The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option, must be restored to receive those treatments.
RESOLVED, that we invite physicians of the world and all health care providers to join us in this noble cause as we endeavor to restore trust, integrity and professionalism to the practice of medicine.
RESOLVED, that we invite the scientists of the world, who are skilled in biomedical research and uphold the highest ethical and moral standards, to insist on their ability to conduct and publish objective, empirical research without fear of reprisal upon their careers, reputations and livelihoods.
RESOLVED, that we invite patients, who believe in the importance of the physician-patient relationship and the ability to be active participants in their care, to demand access to science-based medical care.
*
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.
Debra Heine is a conservative Catholic mom of six and longtime political pundit. She has written for several conservative news websites over the years, including Breitbart and PJ Media.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
Tucker Carlson on Monday night unleashed a monologue for the ages. The Fox News primetime host’s timely message is a political touchstone for much of what is wrong with Biden’s America.
The host broke down the Biden White House’s “purge” of the unvaccinated from society as an unprecedented vendetta in American history. It is not a noble agenda driven by a concern over public health, but rather an illogical and reckless drive for political power, he argued.
Tucker opened by referencing a speech Joe Biden gave outside of Chicago, Illinois that was attended by billionaire Governor J.B. Pritzker. In the speech, Biden made a number of unscientific claims in the course of demonizing millions of Americans that do not intend to get the Covid-19 shots.
“Joe Biden showed up at a construction site in Illinois last Thursday to explain what a terrific job he’s been doing,” he began. “Biden’s poll numbers, you may have noticed, have declined recently, not just by a little bit, but by such a dramatic margin that some prominent Democrats are openly worried about it. The midterms are in a year.”
“So the point of last week’s appearance outside Chicago was to remind all of us in the country that our perceptions of Biden’s performance are silly and baseless,” he said. “Actually, Joe Biden is a great president. He’s totally aware of what’s happening. He’s completely on top of things. He knows exactly what he’s doing and he’s got your well-being at heart. Not the narrow economic interests of some soulless multinational corporation that hates America and your family. No, you! Because Joe Biden is awesome.”
“And to prove it. Biden talked at length about the COVID vaccine,” Tucker said. “His greatest achievement, he said. Now, strangely, Biden didn’t say a lot about the vaccine itself. He did note that if you get the shot, you could not spread COVID to other people. And if there were doctors in the audience, they might have been confused because that is ridiculously and provably untrue. Of course, the vaccinated can spread COVID, and they do.”
“But Biden didn’t pause and dwell on the science such as it is,” he continued. “Instead, Biden spent virtually his entire speech attacking any American who hasn’t yet gotten the shot. Now you’ve heard him say that a lot, but it’s worth taking a closer look at what Joe Biden said last week outside Chicago. Go, look it up for yourself. It’s on the C-SPAN website.”
“As you watch it, ask yourself, ‘Has any president in our history ever talked about millions of American citizens like this?’” he asked rhetorically. “This is the way presidents talk about foreign enemies or dictators talk about enemies in their midst. It’s not the way American presidents talk or ever have ever, for any reason, under any circumstance. We can’t think of a single example, even during the Civil War.”
“And yet according to Joe Biden, unvaccinated Americans are the root of this country’s problems,” Tucker said. “They are destroying our economy. They are killing our people. The unvaccinated, Biden said, are solely responsible for the outbreak of the Delta variant of Covid. The outbreak that has left tens of thousands of Americans dead.”
“Biden noted this to the morbidly obese governor of Illinois, who nodded from behind his mask as if all of this was settled science. And then Joe Biden kept going,” Tucker added. “The unvaccinated are dangerous, he announced, they are diseased, dirty, unpatriotic, they are selfish, they are pathogens in human form. They have caused this deadly virus to ‘spread to our children,’ to spread throughout society. They suffered because of their absurdity, and their self-inflicted suffering burdens the rest of us. They ‘overcrowd our hospitals’ like a plague of swarming gasping insects. As they lie there ventilated, dying, reaping the rewards of their own sins, these miscreants ‘leave no room for someone with a heart attack or in need of a cancer operation’.”
“These people get no sympathy, because they are barely people,” Tucker added. “The unvaccinated, Biden told us, die their much-deserved deaths, but even as they die, they burden the rest of us. That’s how horrible they are, they are subhuman wreckers of a nation.”
“We are not overstating any of this by the way,” Tucker said. “Go watch the speech, it is online. The question is, ‘once you identify a diseased fifth column like this within the country that you run, what do you with it?’ Biden got to that at the end of his speech.”
JOE BIDEN: These requirements work, and as the Business Roundtable, others told me when I announced the first requirement that encourage businesses to feel they could come in and demand the same thing of their employees. More people are getting vaccinated, more lives are being saved. Let’s be clear: when you see headlines and reports of mass firings and hundreds of people losing their jobs, look at the bigger story. … Over the past week we’ve seen American, Southwest, Alaska, JetBlue Airlines all announce requirements.
“Yeah, there have been mass firings, the president said. But when you see reports of mass firings of law-abiding American citizens, Joe Biden told us, what you’re really seeing is progress. You should celebrate,” he continued.
“Think about that,” Tucker said. “No American president has ever made a statement like that, cheering the firing of law-abiding Americans in the multitudes. But Joe Biden did. He didn’t even pause. He says things like that regularly. Now, that’s fine if you’re on Joe Biden’s side, apparently.”
“But what if Joe Biden was talking about you?” he asked. “What if he was talking about your livelihood, your career, the future of your family? How would you feel? We should consider that, because these are Americans he’s talking about, and as we do consider that, think about what happened to air travel in America over the weekend.”
“Southwest Airlines, you may have read this, one of our biggest carriers all but shut down on Saturday and Sunday, the airline canceled thousands of flights. It threw the nation’s famously efficient system of air travel into total chaos. It’s stranded countless travelers in airports. Again, you saw it on the news,” he continued.
“The question is how did this happen?” he asked. “Well, the official explanation came right away. It was bad weather on the eastern seaboard. There were thunderstorms. There were also unspecified issues with air traffic control and all of that together forced Southwest Airlines, alone among airlines, to cancel its flights.”
“That’s what the company Southwest Airlines claimed,” he added. “They claim that in a statement to us today, a long statement. It’s what many media outlets have repeated uncritically for the past two days.”
“And yet we can tell you it is untrue,” Tucker said. “All of that is a lie. It’s not what happened. We’ve spoken to several people with direct knowledge of what actually did happen. We can tell you that the shutdown of Southwest Airlinesover the weekend was a direct consequence – it was a reaction to – Joe Biden’s vaccine mandates.”
“It began last week when Gary Kelly, who is a CEO of Southwest, sent an internal memo to his employees declaring that, per Joe Biden’s directive, any Southwest employee who was not fully vaccinated by the 8th of December will be fired,’ he said. “Canned. Done. Right before Christmas.”
“Now, this would include not simply pilots on Southwest and flight attendants, of course, but ramp workers, mechanics, dispatchers, schedulers, ticket agents, people from the top to the very bottom,” he added. “Many thousands of people.”
“Now, some unknown but apparently large number of these people have still not been vaccinated,” he said. “Why is that? Well, many of them have already recovered from COVID. They have antibodies that offer them greater protection than any vaccine ever could. That’s the science. So they don’t want the vaccine.”
“Others have sincere religious objections,” he continued. “They object to the use of aborted fetal tissue in the development of pharmaceuticals. So they don’t want it. They believe it violates their faith. Still, others have friends or co-workers or relatives who have suffered severe side effects from the vaccine, and therefore they are afraid to take it. That makes sense. Don’t make fun of them. That’s real.”
“And yet others are taking a stand purely on principle,” Tucker continued. “They believe that in a free country, politicians should never be allowed to force citizens to submit to medical treatment they don’t want. These are Americans who grew up in a country where that fact was taken for granted, everybody assumed it, and they want to preserve that country for their children. That’s their motive.”
“But whatever their various reasons, the unvaccinated employees of Southwest Airlines, the many of them, are decent, high-functioning Americans, and they have watched as their own government has dismissed them out of hand as criminals for reasons that don’t even make sense,” Tucker said.
“Consider the argument they’re hearing from Joe Biden: You must get the shot for the sake of people who’ve already gotten the shot because the shots don’t work well enough to protect the people who’ve already gotten them,” he continued. “That’s what Joe Biden and the entire American health establishment is telling them. So imagine making that argument to an airline pilot, someone whose entire job is based on logic. It is utterly bewildering to them, because it doesn’t make sense. It’s just too unreasonable.”
“I’ve flown military jets in three different war zones,” one pilot told us this weekend. ‘I have never lost sleep like this. The stress is beyond belief. It’s dangerous.’ People are melting.”
“So this weekend in protest, a large number of Southwest pilots called out sick and they effectively shut down their airline,” Tucker noted. “And many of them, you should know, admire the company they work for. They love Southwest Airlines, but they felt they had no choice but to do this. Nobody was standing up for them, not the United States Congress, which, by the way, has exempted itself from vaccine mandates, not even their labor union, which exists and is paid to defend them. But they’re not.”
“So in desperation, the pilots committed the most basic act of nonviolent civil disobedience, something we used to celebrate in this country,” Tucker said. “They stayed home. Now, at the same moment, they decided to do this, a large group of air traffic controllers apparently reached the very same conclusion. An estimated 6,000 federal air traffic controllers have not yet received the Biden-mandated shot. That’s nearly half of all air traffic controllers in this country. And they all, as federal employees, have until next month to submit or they will be fired. And when they are fired, our air traffic control system, which is already dangerously short-staffed, ask anyone who works in it, will stop. It will cease completely just in time for the holidays.”
“Now, once again, the controllers union has been no help to them,” Tucker said. “And once again, the media have aligned with the Biden White House to vilify them, not as people who are being persecuted as a matter of conscience, but as criminals.”
“So on Friday, apparently, they took action,” he said. “The air traffic control headquarters in Jacksonville, Florida, known to all pilots as Jacksonville Center, shut down. This never happens. It didn’t even happen when there was a fire in a Chicago air traffic control center. They managed to keep air traffic control going.”
“But this weekend, Jacksonville Center shut down because there was simply no one to man it,” he said. “There was no one there. The effects of this were profound, and they were immediate. Jacksonville Center controls the airspace in this country from Orlando to Raleigh, North Carolina, as well as far out over the Atlantic Ocean. That’s some of the most crowded air routes in the world.”
“Air traffic controllers in Atlanta watched as planes headed for South Florida, rerouted west, and wound up over the Mississippi River,” he said. “That would be the world’s longest detour. And for a moment, in the chaos, it became clear that Joe Biden is not the only person in this country who has power. It turns out there is a limit to how far you can push some Americans.”
“So in that way, it might have been cast as an inspiring story – man against the machine,” he added. “But the media had no interest in telling that story. In fact, some on the corporate left suggested the Southwest pilots had somehow committed what is known as an illegal job action. Illegally not showing up for work, as if politicians have a right to force Americans to labor against their will.”
“Now, some of us had assumed that was a condition we would recognize as the textbook definition of slavery,” he continued. “But no, it’s illegal not to work, they told us. And then at least one outlet describe what the pilots had done as ‘domestic terrorism.’ Get to work immediately wage earner or you’re al Qaeda.”
“There were more cancellations at Southwest Airlines today, no doubt there will be more to come and not just of airline flights,” he said. “At least two Amtrak train routes in the Northeast were canceled over the weekend and, so was a regularly scheduled car ferry in Washington state out to the San Juan Islands. In all cases, the employees in question, who have been told to get the shot, did not show up.”
“Were these also protests against the Biden shot mandates?” Tucker asked. “We can’t say for certain. It certainly wouldn’t surprise us, because that’s our future. Thousands and thousands of Americans, the best among us in many cases, will be stripped of their livelihoods, of their lives by the Biden White House’s mandates.”
“This is not a small thing. As of tonight, more than 50,000 U.S. Marines still have not received the shot, as well as a large percentage of the Navy SEAL teams,” he said. “What will happen when these people are gone from the force? Who’s going to protect this country? Who’s going to protect our cities?”
“In Seattle, to name just one example, the city is moving forward toward firing fully 40 percent of the entire police force over the Biden shot mandates,” Tucker said. “Good luck getting your emergency calls answered after that, and so on.”
“Our hospitals, our schools, our national labs, scientists and researchers at Oak Ridge and Los Alamos, among others,” he continued. “All torn apart by a purge overseen by Susan Rice that has nothing whatsoever to do with public health and everything to do with the accumulation of political power.”
“That is happening right now,” Tucker continued. “Make no mistake, it will continue to happen unless good people work immediately to stop it.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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).
At a time when the peoples of the earth are in great distress because they are being denied their previous humanity and pure existence by the ruling “elite” and their political accomplices, I am not hesitating to recall the motto of the German philosopher and Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724 to 1804) “Sapere aude!” (“Dare to be wise!”), which has already been quoted several times once again. For the question of how people can stop the disastrous political, economic and social development has not yet been answered.
Since only free-thinking, courageous and compassionate citizens will steer the world on a different course, we must think beyond the day and take precautions. Therefore, it is the need of the hour for all those involved in education to refrain from making the rising generation obedient and docile on their way to adulthood with authoritarian educational methods. Instead, they must be helped to develop their own nature without being restricted by a denomination.
Thanks to the insight of deep psychology, we know today that man is to such an extent the product of his upbringing that we may cherish the hope of being able, through psychological educational methods, to train people who can think for themselves, are immune to the entanglements of power madness and no longer show any obedience to the cadre.
Kant: “Have the courage to use your own mind!”
The exceptional global situation demands that we be wise and act accordingly. If people in the Age of Enlightenment succeeded in freeing themselves from medieval thinking and using reason, becoming independent of arbitrary authority and extending personal freedom of action (emancipation) – then “modern” man should also succeed in giving up fear and using his own mind without the guidance of another.
But if we humans continue to behave immaturely and are too lazy or cowardly to think for ourselves, it is easy for others, according to Kant, to set themselves up as “guardians” of immature humans. These guardians would also do everything to ensure that the immature people not only consider the step towards maturity to be arduous, but also dangerous. (1)
Common sense instead of authority and a magical world view
In order to drive common sense out of us citizens and demand absolute obedience, rulers of all stripes use fear as a means of discipline and domination. But education according to strict religious and military principles can also lead to absolute obedience. A vivid example of this psychological problem is provided by the autobiographical notes of Rudolf Höß, the former commandant of Auschwitz, and the curriculum vitae of his “kindred spirit” Adolf Eichmann. Both learned blind obedience, dutifulness and the non-questioning of “higher” orders in their childhood and therefore reacted with a “cadaver obedience” as adults.
Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit Order, wrote an illuminating text in the mid-16th century to which the word “cadaver obedience” can be traced:
“We should be aware that each one of those who live in obedience must allow himself to be led and guided by Divine Providence by means of the Superior, as if he were a dead body to be taken wherever and treated in whatever way, or like a staff of an old man to serve wherever and for whatever the wants to use him.” (2)
Long before Ignatius of Loyola, Francis of Assisi (1181/82-1226) compared the perfect and highest form of obedience (perfecta et summa obedientia) to one’s superior to a dead, disembodied body (corpus mortuum, corpus exanime) that can be taken wherever one wants without resistance or grumbling.
Counteracting with psychological education methods
Parents, educators and priests must urgently abandon this kind of education and counteract it with psychological educational methods. Pedagogy in the parental home and school must renounce the authoritarian principle – which for centuries was regarded as the unquestionably valid basis of educational behaviour – and any use of violence. The spoiling and pampering style of education, which is characterised by the tendency of educators to take even simple tasks from children with a protective intent, is also a form of violence.
Educators have to adapt themselves with true understanding to the free development and unfolding of the child’s soul life, to respect the child’s personality and to turn to him in a friendly way. Such education will produce a type of human being who does not have a “subject mentality” and will therefore no longer be a docile tool for those in power in our 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.
Dr Rudolf Hänsel is an educationalist and qualified psychologist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Notes
(1) Hänsel, Rudolf (2020). Handing over power to no one! A psychological manifesto of common sense. Gornji Milanovac /Serbia. Parts I and II and abridged version in: “Neue Rheinische Zeitung” and “Global Research”.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
While on a ‘farewell’ visit to Israel, outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Sunday in Jerusalem at a joint press conference alongside Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett that negotiations in Vienna over the return to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal have entered “very decisive weeks.” She noted, “I never considered the JCPOA to be ideal, but it’s better than having no agreement.”
When it came to Bennett’s turn to speak, to be sure, he didn’t fail to highlight the danger that Iran’s nuclear program poses to the world, and pledge that Israel would do what it takes to stop Tehran from reaching nuclear weapons capability.
But there was no Netanyahu-style sabre rattling. Instead, Bennett concluded, “This is a critical point, and Germany’s position is especially important.” Israel’s resignation that the Biden Administration shall not be deflected from the path of negotiations to revive the JCPOA is self-evident.
The Biden Administration is preparing a soft landing for the lifting of US sanctions against Iran with the Secretary of State Antony Blinken scheduling meetings with Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid and the UAE Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan on October 13 in Washington in separate bilateral meetings and then in a trilateral setting.
Meanwhile, last Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian called for “practical actions” to underscore the US’ sincerity of purpose. Earlier, after returning from New York, where he had a crowded schedule on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session, Amir-Abdollahian had specifically urged Washington to release “some of Iran’s blocked funds.”
On Friday, the Biden administration removed two Iranian firms alleged to have been involved in Iran’s ballistic missile program from the US’s sanctions blacklist. The Trump administration had alleged in August 2020 that these companies “are key producers and suppliers of military-grade, dual-use goods for Iran’s missile program.” The Biden Administration has not cared to explain why the two Iranian firms are now being removed from the US sanctions list. Presumably, there is some messaging here.
After all, it was only the previous day that Amirabdollahian had said,
“It is important that we receive signals from the other side (Western powers), including from the United States, showing that they are intent on returning fully to their commitments. We are assessing the behaviour of the United States. If it reflects a full return to their commitments, we can be optimistic about the Vienna talks.”
Curiously, on Thursday, the US special envoy for Iran Robert Malley spoke with South Korea’s First Vice Foreign Minister Choi Jong-Kun to discuss the nuclear negotiations! Now, two South Korean banks hold $7 billion of Iran’s funds from the time when Seoul was purchasing oil from Tehran before full US sanctions on Iran’s crude exports were imposed in May 2019.
Tehran has been hinting that Washington should release the frozen Iranian funds before it returns to the talks. According to the South Korean media, Malley asked for Seoul to play a “constructive” role in efforts to resume the negotiations, without specifying what on earth South Korea has got to do with the JCPOA!
The South Korean news agency Yonhap quoted the foreign ministry in Seoul as saying Choi reiterated to Malley South Korea’s willingness to provide support necessary for the resumption of the nuclear talks “in consideration of the importance of Seoul-Tehran relations.” Evidently, the Biden Administration is open to releasing the frozen funds.
These are tell-tale signs. A broader shift is also visible in the US’ Middle East strategy as a whole. Clearly, the Biden Administration takes no interest to impose sanctions under the so-called Caesar Act, which came into force last year with the intent of adding to the pressure on President Bashar al-Assad, although the Arab allies of the US — UAE, Jordan, Egypt — are lately stepping up efforts to bring him in from the cold by reviving economic and diplomatic ties with Damascus.
King Abdullah of Jordan spoke to Assad for the first time in a decade this month and the border between Syria and Jordan was fully reopened for trade last month. Without an explicit US acquiescence, Amman couldn’t have pushed through the recent deal to pipe Egyptian natural gas to Lebanon via Syria.
On the other hand, the Biden Administration seems to be watching impassively the Iran-Saudi talks to normalise relations which are making headway. In a lengthy interview last week with France 24, Saeed Khatibzadeh, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said,
“We are now in a position with great hope that we can have clear and frank talks with our Saudi friends; I believe that if we see a change in approaches, we will see good results and a good outcome of these talks.”
The bottom line is that the Biden Administration is reviewing its old US approach to Iran.Significantly, a sub-text of the announcement by the CIA chief William Burns on Thursday regarding the reorganisation of the agency’s work by creating two new mission centres — one focused on China, the other focused on emerging technology, climate change and global health — is that the Biden administration is also undoing what the previous administration did by creating mission centres focused on North Korea and Iran.
Those two mission centres are now being folded back into regional centres focused on the Middle East and East Asia. The Iran mission centre was a sign of the Trump administration’s hard line on Iran and its chief Michael D’Andrea was known to be a passionate advocate of a muscular approach towards Iran. (D’Andrea is now retiring from the CIA.)The winding up of the CIA mission centre implies that the Biden administration is abandoning the regime change agenda on Iran.
However, Iran will not lower its guard, given the vagaries of the US policies and a long history of US interference in Iran’s internal affairs. In fact, Iran has reacted warily to the ISIS attack on the Shias in Kunduz last week.
A lengthy statement by President Ebrahim Raisi said,
“It is no secret that the development of this Takfiri terrorist movement (ISIS) has taken place with the support and plans of the United States, and in recent years, the United States has facilitated the expansion of the activities of ISIS criminals in Afghanistan and prevented their eradication.
“I hereby express my concern over the continuation of terrorist acts and the combination of religious agitation with ethnic agitation, which is part of the new US security project for Afghanistan.”
*
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).
An Ontario town prohibits engaged couples who have chosen not to take the COVID shots from obtaining a marriage license.
Oakville’s regulations require that anyone who wants a marriage license from now on must show proof of inoculation.
“Appointments for marriage licenses and ceremonies that have already been booked prior to September 22 will not require proof of full vaccination,” the city website says. “[H]owever, any new appointments for marriage licences [sic] and ceremonies will be required. Ceremonies will be held inside town hall as of November 4, 2021.”
A marriage license is required to get legally married in Canada, meaning that Oakville’s rules effectively prohibit people who refuse the COVID shots from tying the knot. Couples cannot obtain a license online.
“You must schedule an appointment to receive your marriage licence,” the city’s website says. “To be eligible for an appointment, please ensure that the intended date of your marriage is finalized and you have an officiant that has agreed to perform the marriage.”
However, even proof of vaccination may halt plans to legally wed.
“When you arrive at Town Hall for your scheduled appointment, you will be required to complete a COVID-19 self-assessment,” the city said. “If you do not successfully meet the screening criteria, you will not be allowed to enter the building and your appointment will be cancelled.”
There could be a way around the COVID jab passport system for now, as not every city in Ontario requires proof of the jabs in order to obtain a marriage license. Halton Hills, for example, does not currently require inoculation proof to get the government marriage license.
The new restriction on people who haven’t taken COVID-19 jabs fits in well with the province’s general approach to requiring the shots to access public places of business such as restaurants and movie theaters.
Ontario has implemented a “vaccine passport” system for a host of private businesses as of September 22.
The passport system applies to places such as bars, restaurants, gyms and theaters, according to CBC.
“[S]taff must ask patrons to show certification that they received two doses of an approved vaccine at least two weeks before, along with identification that matches their vaccination document,” CBC reported.
“It is not stated in the policy how businesses are expected to enforce the measures,” LifeSiteNews previously reported. “With the amount of people who may come and go in an establishment at a given time, it will not be practical for employees to diligently enforce the segregation mandate at all times.”
Also in tune with restrictions in the province, an Ontario school board has barred unvaccinated children from participating in extracurricular activities.
“The Limestone District School Board in Kingston, Ontario, unveiled a new policy on Tuesday that bans unvaccinated children from school sports teams and clubs,” LifeSiteNews reported October 6. “[A]ll eligible participants (born 2009 and earlier) including students, staff, officials and volunteers in all inter-school sports and some high-risk activities like extra-curricular music programs must be fully vaccinated (two doses plus 14-day waiting period),” the school board’s education director said.
Canadian citizens have repeatedly rallied against inoculation segregation laws.
“Nearly 500 people took to the streets of Calgary on picnic blankets Sunday to protest the COVID-19 vaccine passports now required of restaurants and other businesses in Alberta,” LifeSiteNews reported September 28.
“This is our protest because all the businesses in Alberta have denied access to unvaccinated people,” one attendee said. “So we have taken it to the streets and have created our own picnics. We have empty patios, busy streets.”
Hundreds of police officers and other citizens joined together in Toronto on September 2 to reject COVID mandates and vaccine passports.
*
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).
An independent Dutch Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry set up in 2020, has new evidence it presented to the International Criminal Court in The Hague about the harmfulness of the Corona vaccinations.
The BPOC 2020 is a committee set up by citizens and is completely separate from government, business and politics. The committee was set up by Pieter Kuit and his daughter Jade Kuit.
“It comes from a sense of justice. People have needlessly lost their freedoms. But everything the government says is widely reported in the media. You can hardly find any other information.”
Kuit says he receives about 600 to 700 e-mails and 80 telephone calls a day from people who have the same concerns about the government’s lack of transparency. According to Kuit, the government “cannot provide any scientific substantiation”.
The committee has examined the proportionality of the policy and measures with regard to Covid-19 and also investigates whether the government is complying with the law. To this end, the committee hears experts such as doctors, scientists, lawyers and professors, who focus on the following question:
“Why have restrictive measures been imposed in our country since March 15, 2020 due to Covid19, are these measures effective and are the measures imposed in proportion to the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus?”
The interviews with experts are public, filmed and streamed. A written report is made of the information sessions. Interim reports and ultimately a final report with findings and conclusions are drawn up which are presented to the House of Representatives and all relevant social authorities such as youth care, trade unions and the National Ombudsman.
Right of Parliamentary Inquiry
The House of Representatives can independently conduct research into policy and projects and have that research carried out by MPs. Several instruments can be used for this. The most efficient means is research based on the Parliamentary Inquiry Act. Since 2016, the House of Representatives has also been able to hold a parliamentary inquiry.
Thus a large number of views from experts, doctors, virologists, mathematicians, economists, but also entrepreneurs have been videotaped without any editing and live-streamed on Facebook as befits a transparent parliamentary democracy.
Covid vaccines are not safe
The experts consulted by the BPOC2020 believe that the vaccines are not safe for use. This is also apparent from the reports received by the Committee’s Vaccination Reporting Center.
Until October 8, 2204 deaths and 2835 cases of serious injury after the Corona vaccine have been registered by the vaccine adverse reaction hotline. The government’s database on adverse events Lareb, however refuses to process these reports.
The Rutte administration does not wish to take note of the reports
Cases of serious health damage, leukemia in young people, miscarriages, myocarditis and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome have been noted.
The BPOC2020 is convinced that the Dutch government is aware of the deaths and serious cases of health damage that have occurred and still occur daily after vaccination.
However, the government does not wish to take cognizance of the reports. Larebis also silent about the investigation into the reports that have been received at the center.
This has been the reason for the Committee to hand over all its evidence regarding the deaths and serious vaccine injuries reported, to the International Criminal Court for investigation.
The BPOC2020 also handed over the interview reports of its visit to the Ministry of Health and visit to the Lareb to the ICC. It is not yet clear what will happen to the evidence.
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: The premises of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands. (Source: Wikipedia)
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).
Belgian psychologist Dr. Mattias Desmet may be the most articulate voice on the most clear and present danger facing us: the mob-baiting now being pursued by formerly democratic governments.
The most significant obstacle to our developing the necessary capacity to fight back against what is engulfing us is an imaginative block preventing us conceiving of the possibility that what seems to be happening could actually be happening. These things could not be happening here, now, for the very simple reason that they are the kind of thing that used to happen far away, in different times, to people who were not as ‘intelligent’ or ‘educated’ or ‘advanced’ as we are.
Dr. Mattias Desmet begs to differ with such perilous smugness. He is a professor of Clinical Psychology at Ghent University in Belgium. He lectures on Individual psycho-analytics psychotherapy, and the psychology of the crowd. He holds a master’s degree and PhD in clinical psychology, and a master’s in statistics.
As the Covid subterfuge shifts from the manufacture of mass terror concerning a dubious virus — and a related indoctrination with spurious medical data — to the mass mobilisation of mesmerised populations in silencing voices threatening to expose these crimes, Dr Desmet has emerged as the clearest and most meticulous voice describing the dangers and intimating what we need to do to offset them. A selection of his remarkable video interviews can be found at the end of this article, which I have written by way of an introduction to his thoughts and interpretations, which I believe are among the most crucial things we might hear at this precise moment.
Dr. Desmet’s observations over the past 18 months have led him to conclude that the overwhelming majority of the world’s population has indeed fallen under a kind of spell. It is not literally a spell, he stresses, but a ‘mass formation’, a term first used by Gustave Le Bon, the French philosopher who 126 years ago in The Psychology of Crowds, was the first thinker systematically to outline how herd psychology differs from that of the individual. Le Bon it was who observed that the consciousness bestowed by membership of a crowd can be transformative, possessing individual members with ‘a sort of collective mind which makes them feel, think and act in a manner quite differently from that in which each individual would feel, think and act were that person in a state of isolation.’ In such a ‘psychological crowd’, individual personality disappears, brain activity is replaced by reflex activity: a lowering of intelligence, provoking a complete transformation of sentiments, which collectively may manifest as better and worse than those of the crowd’s constituent members. A crowd may just as easily become heroic or criminal, but is generally disposed towards destruction.
‘The ascendancy of crowds,’ wrote Le Bon, ‘indicates the death throes of a civilisation.’ The upward climb to civilisation is an intellectual process driven by individuals; the descent is a herd in stampede. ‘Crowds are only useful for destruction.’
These symptoms are manifesting now, perhaps as never before, in our once free Western world, in a process substantively resembling mass hypnosis, as a collective psychological response to the unrelenting, single-focus campaign of fear to which we have all been subjected for a year and a half. Indeed, we may now have reached a stage in this process that even Le Bon did not anticipate, for now the mesmerisers have available to them tech and techniques he could scarcely have envisaged. Using electronic means, it is infinitely easier to convert the individual to the collective mindset than if he were a member of an actual physical crowd. The advent of social media has made the present situation not merely possible, but possibly inevitable.
In his own time, approaching the end of the nineteenth century, Le Bon perceived a shifting in the nature of human reflection and attention. In an odd way, his words read to us now as quasi-contemporaneous: They might have been uttered just a handful of years ago.
‘The present epoch is one of these critical moments in which the thought of mankind is undergoing a process of transformation. Two fundamental factors are at the base of this transformation. The first is the destruction of those religious, political, and social beliefs in which all the elements of our civilisation are rooted. The second is the creation of entirely new conditions of existence and thought as the result of modern scientific and industrial discoveries.’
What is called progress comes at a cost, sometimes a great cost, and that cost is rarely visible until considerably after the fact of its causation, which then becomes prone to the phenomena of historical disconnectedness and plausible deniability.
‘Nature has recourse at times to radical measures, but never after our fashion, which explains how it is that nothing is more fatal to a people than the mania for great reforms, however excellent these reforms may appear theoretically. They would only be useful were it possible to change instantaneously the genius of nations.’
The effects of such changes, mediated via the psyches of human beings, may in time provoke consequences that not only were unforeseen to begin with but may perhaps undo and outweigh any beneficial aspects. Societies craving change for its own sake are especially vulnerable. A society in tumult is ripe for destruction. But the crowd always seek to justify that which it has been told is good, and demonise that which it has been warned to eschew.
‘The masses have never thirsted after truth,’ wrote Le Bon. ‘They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim. An individual in a crowd is a grain of sand amid other grains of sand, which the wind stirs up at will.’
Facts are as nothing to crowds, which function via a kind of collectivised imagination, operating off images and the slogans which evoke them.
‘A crowd,’ Le Bon elaborates, ‘thinks in images, and the image itself calls up a series of other images, having no logical connection with the first. . . . A crowd scarcely distinguishes between the subjective and the objective. It accepts as real the images invoked in its mind, though they most often have only a very distant relation with the observed facts.’
Le Bon’s is one of the names most frequently dropped by Dr Mattias Desmet in the course of the interviews he has been giving in recent months, having spent some time reflecting on the situation facing the world in the light of what history and its sages has to tell it, and what he himself knows of the modern world. His interviews can be mixed in quality, but this is usually to do with the quality and interventions of interviewers, some of whom do not play to his remarkable strengths, which reside in exploring the granular nature of psychological processes as they play out in reality, and especially in collective reality. He is excellent on the way people’s projection of their own free-floating personal anxieties, frustration and aggression on to the Covid/lockdown sagas enables the ‘mass formation’ process.
Mass formation, he explains, is a form of hypnosis imposed on a crowd, a factor which we have explored in previous articles here. He is in no doubt that we speak of a literal hypnosis, with all the potential effects and symptoms of same.
He explains many aspects of what we have been witnessing, including the strange phenomenon of people’s apparent indifference to their own deprivations, hurts and incurred damage arising from the lockdowns of the past 18 months: loss of freedoms, loss of work, income, education, human contact, leisure et cetera. During mass formation, he describes, there is ‘a narrowing of the field of attention’, which allows the crowd’s constituent members to close out everything but that which the hypnotist tells them is important, which results in insensitivity to personal losses, and a willingness to sacrifice everything — education, jobs, homes, romance, health — and to disregard the losses and griefs of others. By offering a strategy to deal with the anxieties imposed by the crisis, the would-be totalitarians are able to create a bogus solidarity in a society that has destroyed true solidarity.
He is remarkably open about his own history of engagement with the Covid ‘pandemic’, acknowledging his early doubts about some of his own pronouncements. In the very early days, he briefly bought into the idea of a pandemic, but his suspicions were soon aroused by the disproportionality he observed between the measures being introduced and what he understood about the visible levels of risk from the virus. In those early weeks of the crisis, he wrote a paper titled The Fear of the Virus is More Dangerous than the Virus Itself.
Occasionally, in the early weeks, (April/May 2020) he worried that he might have been wrong to publish this paper, but by the end of May was satisfied that his thesis was entirely correct. Looking at the data from a statistical perspective, he rapidly came to the conclusion that the danger was overestimated. He believed the psychological aspects were more threatening than any biological danger. Yet, he observes, ‘the narrative continued as if the initial models were correct.’
‘From the beginning I was afraid of the societal dynamics that were going on,’ he says, and this fear appears to have been the prime motivation for his recent interventions.
By August 2020, he had come to see that he could describe how this process occurred. ‘We were dealing with a massive phenomenon of mass formation.’
He also, interestingly, speaks of how, in December 2019, some weeks before the crisis erupted in China, he had some kind of premonition of impending menace. He went to his bank and paid back his mortgage — because he felt ‘the society was moving towards a tipping point.’
‘I wanted to be as free as possible,’ he says. He remembers telling the bank manager: ‘All the negative parameters of society have started to rise exponentially.’ He believed that a major catastrophe was on the way, but is not entirely sure why he knew this.
He says there are four conditions that need to be in place to enable mass formation to occur in a society. The first is the presence of large numbers of socially isolated, atomised, people. The social bonds between people need to have been weakened. This is the most important, and the other conditions follow from it. Secondly, there will be large numbers of people who experience lack of sense-making in their lives and work — people who feel that their jobs are senseless, meaningless. Thirdly, there requires to be ‘a lot of free-floating anxiety’ — i.e. anxiety that is not connected to a mental representation so that the sufferer doesn’t know why he is anxious and afraid. And fourthly, there needs to be a lot of ‘free-floating psychological discontent’ — anger and frustration at, again, apparently nothing in particular.
And you also need mass media — without which mass formation would be impossible. Desmet does not explicitly say so, but of course it is also essential that these media be biddable and readily prone to corruption.
These conditions, he says, existed in Western societies long before the Covid crisis. There was, he says, ‘an epidemic of burnout’. He says something between 40 and 70 per cent of people in modern societies experience their jobs as senseless. He points also to the escalating use of psycho-pharmaceutical medicines to treat anxiety and depression.
As evidence of the presence of these conditions in Western society prior to the pandemic, he instances the consumption of anti-depressants n Belgium, his own country. There, a population of 11 million was using 300 million doses of anti-depressants per annum.
According to Desmet, the key root mechanism of mass formation, free-floating anxiety, is the most painful psychological phenomenon a human being can experience. It refers to anxieties that have no clear focus: The sufferer does not know why he feels anxious.
‘Free-floating anxiety is very serious. It leads to panic. When a society is saturated with it, sufferers are desperate to connect it to a representation, and if someone presents a narrative in the mainstream media that offers an object of anxiety, and at the same time presents a strategy to deal with this anxiety, there is a good chance that all this free-floating anxiety in the society will connect to this object of anxiety indicated by this narrative presented by the mainstream media, and that there will be a huge willingness to go along with the strategy.’
The orchestrators of the mass formation are able to appropriate these variegated anxieties and direct them in their entirety at a single point of focus, in this case a virus. By then offering a strategy to deal with the virus crisis, the mass formation process also offers sufferers relief from their anxieties. The same happens with frustration and aggression, all of which were, in a sense, piled on to the Covid basket.
This is where the ‘narrowing of the field of attention’ enters in. The members of the hypnotised mass are enabled to close out everything but that which the hypnotist tells them is important. They acquire not just an indifference to the losses of others, but an insensitivity to losses of their own. They become willing to sacrifice everything under the attrition of the collective injunction — in this case, at least initially, the project of ‘saving lives’. People do not see the consequences of the lockdown, nor feel empathy for the victims. Their relief at being relieved of their free-floating anxieties is enough to have them cleave to the newly-formed mob. It’s similar, he says, to when a person is under hypnosis: It is possible to use the hypnosis as an anaesthetic to cut into the person’s flesh, having thus made the patient completely insensitive to pain.
In these circumstances, the mesmerised acquire meaning and purpose they previously lacked. In a society in which solidarity has already been destroyed, a new bogus solidarity is formed. Once the solution/strategy is offered, he says, ‘people start a collective and heroic battle with this object of anxiety.’ This results in what he calls a ‘mental intoxication’ and it is this that makes mass formation indistinguishable from hypnosis.
Arising from this combination of factors, people acquire an intense interest in believing the dominant narrative. ‘It doesn’t matter whether the narrative is wrong. It’s all about that they don’t want to go back to this painful state of free-floating anxiety.’
‘The more absurd a narrative is the better it functions as a ritual,’ says Desmet. ‘Whether the narrative is correct or incorrect doesn’t make any difference.’
As part of the same process, he says, politicians who may have lost their grip on the people, now have a way of becoming ‘true leaders’ again. There is, therefore, at this stage of the totalitarian process, a symbiosis of motivation between the leaders and the led; or, more correctly, the rulers and the ruled.
These circumstances combine to ensure that people don’t want to go back to the ‘old normal’. This is important: Many among the mesmerised do not want their prior meaningless lives back.‘We need to avoid giving people the impression that we want them to go back to the old normal,’ cautions Desmet. We need instead to ‘show them there are other ways to change this “old normal”. We need to tell people that we don’t need a crisis like this to create a new social bond.’
In such a crucible of explosive feeling and foreboding, some unsettling dynamics soon become visible. People begin to regard each other as either friends or foes. The ‘friends’ are to be cherished and cleaved to; the foes are to be excoriated and, where possible or necessary, banished or destroyed.
There are, in situations of mass formation, says Desmet, three distinct groups that manifest themselves. Only 30 per cent, he says, are really hypnotised, and cannot be reached in any way. In addition, however, there are about 40 per cent who usually follow the crowd, and from the outset go along with that 30 per cent of total believers. There is another cohort of about 30 per cent who are not hypnotised, who try to speak out and resist. This group, he says, is extremely heterogeneous and disunited. If these people could unite, he says, they could bring the whole thing quickly to an end, but this seldom proves possible.
The reason some people appear to be immune to the hypnoidal power of the mass formation, he says, has to do with underlying ideological outlook. In this present situation, he says, the ultimate destination-point of the totalitarianism is to effect the total acquiescence of the global population in a transhumanist project in which, in substance and effect, man will be absorbed into the world of the machine. He thinks that essentially the objectors are people with an aversion to this unnatural way of seeing the human person. This is an interesting theory, and may help to explain why so many religious-minded people are opposed to the lockdown, vaccines et cetera: Many of them, having had a deeper inculcation in fundamental anthropological understandings, instinctively or reasonably object to the unknowable and unnatural dimensions of what is proposed. Desmet may be on to something important here: that, although not yet explicit, the transhumanist agenda is already visible as the distant destination-point, with its meanings already saturating the playing area in the context of mandatory vaccines, biometric ID, social credit schemes and the accompanying surveillence regimes, restrictions, penalties, et cetera.
Intelligence, he says, is no guarantee of resistance to the hypnoidal attack. ‘In mass formation, highly intelligent, highly educated people become exactly as intelligent as everybody else in the masses — everybody becomes equally intelligent, which usually means extremely stupid, in the masses.’ At the start of the lockdown, many people said to him, ‘Yes, it is terrible, but we can stop the rat-race for a while.’ This was mainly the well-off, who had less concerns about the economic destruction threatened by the lockdowns. The anxiety of the educated become fixated on different things, perhaps on the possibility of ‘populists’ taking advantage of the crisis. This is how the ludicrous ‘far right’ trope, stoked by cynical media, gained ground.
He speaks, too, about the dynamics of totalitarianism and what makes the present episode different to, for example, the totalitarianisms of the twentieth century. In this, and much else, he draws on the writings of the brilliant German philosopher Hannah Arendt, whose book The Origins of Totalitarianism remains the definitive deconstruction of the totalitarian process, which she characterises as an entirely new phenomenon of the twentieth century.
He reiterates Arendt’s core point about the radical differences between totalitarianism and ‘traditional’ forms of dictatorship. Classical dictatorships are primitive and simple — a single dictator using uncomplicated fear. But in a totalitarian state, the psychological and societal basis of the tyranny is mass formation.
In a totalitarian state, a large part of the population believes in the narrative and is psychologically convinced that the proffered object of anxiety is the cause of all their concerns.
These beliefs, he says, are related to the penetrative effects of mass media but also the image of man as a machine — in part a consequence of industrialism, in part due to an ‘obsession with science’, another core theme of Arendt’s, who emphasises also the key role of ideology as a nutrient of totalitarianism.
He is not convinced of the ‘psychopathy’ thesis of totalitarianism, with particular reference to the Covid despotisms. The people who organise and impose this tyranny, he says, ‘often do not believe in the things they say, but they do really believe in the ideology they promote, and they really believe that the best way to organise society is to treat people like cows on a large farm. They really do believe in this mechanistic, materialist, biological, reductionist ideology.’
Again, Desmet is citing Arendt, who did much to uncover and describe the ugly underbelly of Nazi machinations, in particular the propaganda and psychological elements. Totalitarianism, she believed, has specific characteristics that are constructed to appear random, arbitrary and senseless, when really they amount to a complex interworking of manipulations designed to break and isolate the human person, to lead him methodically out of his ‘ordinary’ life of hoping, working, thinking, loving, into a world where his every moment is dominated by the imposed irrationality that leads to a new, dehumanised existence for others and himself, and to a new, irrational form of ‘sense-making’.
Arendt wrote:
‘While the totalitarian regimes are thus resolutely and cynically emptying the world of the only thing that makes sense to the utilitarian expectations of common sense, they impose upon it at the same time a kind of supersense which the ideologies actually always meant when they pretended to have found the key to history or the solution to the riddles of the universe. Over and above the senselessness of totalitarian society is enthroned the ridiculous supersense of its ideological superstition. Ideologies are harmless, uncritical, and arbitrary opinions only as long as they are not believed in seriously. Once their claim to total validity is taken literally they become the nuclei of logical systems in which, as in the systems of paranoiacs, everything follows comprehensibly and even compulsorily once the first premise is accepted. The insanity of such systems lies not only in their first premise but in the very logicality with which they are constructed. The curious logicality of all isms, their simple-minded trust in the salvation value of stubborn devotion without regard for specific, varying factors, already harbors the first germs of totalitarian contempt for reality and factuality.’
Ideologies are always dangerous reductions of reality, in many instances comprising pseudo-science masquerading as the real thing, rendering them exceptionally well-adapted to totalitarian rule. For the sake of justifying and validating the ‘supersense’ — the final triumph of the ideology — Arendt declared, it is necessary for totalitarianism to completely destroy human dignity. This is because the recognition of their dignity implies an acceptance of our fellow men as co-builders of a world held in common on the basis of individual and consensual choice. This, to the totalitarian, is out of the question. An ideology which lays claim to interpreting all events of the past, and setting in train all events of the future, can have no place for the plans and choices of mere citizens. The danger lies in the very creativity of the human, which may seek to introduce something that is not foreseen in the ideology, and therefore likely to undermine it. Thus, totalitarianism requires the complete transformation of the individual and the collective, so as to align the minds of men with the perspectives and objectives set down in the ideology. Once the supersense is installed, men will think only what the ideology allows.
Before Hitler and Stalin, wrote Arendt, such things were not imagined. Ideology is, literally, ‘the logic of an idea’, a schema of pseudo-thinking that creates a web of delusion. ‘Its subject matter is history, to which the “idea” is applied; the result of this application is not a body of statements about something that is, but the unfolding of a process which is in constant change. The ideology treats the course of events as though it followed the same “law” as the logical exposition of its “idea”. Ideologies pretend to know the mysteries of the whole historical process — the secrets of the past, the intricacies of the present, the uncertainties of the future — because of the logic inherent in their respective ideas.
‘Ideologies are never interested in the miracle of being. They are historical, concerned with becoming and perishing, with the rise and fall of cultures, even if they try to explain history by some “law of nature”.’
As Václav Havel has elaborated, ideology is an instrument for presenting time and history as immutable successions of events and ‘progressions’, indifferent to human longing or wishes.
The question at the heart of our exploration of the nature and meaning of totalitarianism, wrote Arendt, is: ‘[W}hat kind of basic experience in the living-together of men permeates a form of government whose essence is terror and whose principle of action is the logicality of ideological thinking?’
This is the most chilling aspect: that totalitarianism finds its roots in some dislocated aspect of the human that is still human, that arises from actual human wants and needs — for peace, for serenity, for love.
‘That such a combination was never used before in the varied forms of political domination is obvious,’ she added. ‘Still, the basic experience on which it rests must be human and known to men, insofar as even this most original of all political bodies has been devised by, and is somehow answering the needs of, men.’
Totalitarianism in its full-blown form, then, is something that comes after, but ‘after’ what? It comes after a lengthy ‘preparation’, not necessarily planned with malign intent, in which human beings become isolated, atomised, alienated and lonely — conditions for which the totalitarian has ready solutions in the promulgation of bogus community and imagined bonds of mutual hatreds. The negative undertones of these processes suggests some form of prior error, and this may well have been present, perhaps in the pursuit of greed or exploitation, but this is not any longer admissible. Totalitarianism is like a secondary condition that descends on a society that has first of all been subjected to certain processes of modernity: technologisation, industrialisation, individualisation, atomisation. It is, in a sense, like the lung cancer that ensues from a lifetime of smoking, or the type 2 diabetes that results from an excessively sweet tooth. But it is not ‘secondary’ in the sense suggesting ‘lesser’ or ‘minor’ or ‘subordinate’: When it arrives, totalitarianism announces itself as the actual purpose and destination-point of the entire historical process, the discovery of the actual meaning of history. It follows, but is not collateral to, the events which preceded it. Indeed, its arrival announces a coherence to those previous events that had not hitherto been perceived: It ‘makes sense’ of the drifts and apparent randomness of the past, and in doing so turns common sense on its head and compels man to admit his prior errors of understanding and accept that the true direction of history has now been revealed.
The totalitarian leader, unlike the classical kind, who becomes more benign as opposition falls away, becomes more vicious when unopposed, stoking up the masses to carry out atrocities, long after he has suppressed all dissent. This is why every voice of dissent is so vital: to delay the moment when the totalitarian has a free rein.
There is a distinction, Desmet emphasises, between ‘totalitarian thinking’ and ‘totalitarian regime’. Totalitarian thinking, he says, is characterised by absurd argumentation and illogic, which seems extremely persuasive and ‘drives a society across all ethical boundaries.’ Eventually, by traversing the wastes of senselessness, the society evolves a totalitarian regime that uses totalitarian thinking to rule. Right now, he believes, we are at an advanced stage in totalitarian thinking. ‘They consider the human being to be a biological organism who should be manipulated and controlled through biological means. That’s the ideology by which institutions like the WHO and individuals like Bill Gates start. It’s tempting to say that these people are sociopaths or even psychopaths, but I don’t think it is right. They are people who are ideologically blind. That is their main characteristic.’ Gustave Le Bon, he points out, said that ‘the hypnosis is even deeper in the leaders of the masses than in the masses themselves. They are more convinced of the ideology than the population. They have the feeling that in the end when they have reshaped society according to their ideal image, they will end up in a technological transhumanistic paradise, almost without human suffering, and that is why they feel it is justified to inflict a lot of damage and a lot of suffering, because in the end the result of this revolution will be so marvellous that it justifies everything they do now.’
He also believes that we ought not to presume that every apparent phenomenon and effect of the tyrannical circumstances we endure are necessarily the outcome of a strategy or plan of the perpetrators. Totalitarianism metastasises. ‘I think that once a society is grasped by one narrative, and once this mass formation emerges, I think that, more or less in a spontaneous way, it organises the entire dynamic of a society — very often without people being grasped by it, being aware that they actually reinforce and contribute to the dynamics. Things that seem to be intentional are often spontaneous outcomes of the processes.’
Now we may be at or approaching the most difficult phase of the totalitarian thinking process: when the mob, like an attack dog, awaits the instruction to go for its designated enemy. Dr. Desmet again cites Gustave le Bon: ‘The masses only exist if they have an enemy.’ In the beginning, the ‘enemy’ was the virus; now it is those who are not in thrall to or in fear of the virus, who question its severity and challenge the legitimacy of the official global response — those who refuse to go along with the official narrative. This causes the majority to bond together in a new way against the new object of anxiety, having formed a new ‘social bond’ against the dissenting group, providing itself with a new meaning in life. This, says Desmet, gives rise to a ‘mental intoxication’, providing a ‘new deeply fundamental type of satisfaction for a human being’.
Under mass formation, people become ‘radically intolerant of dissonant voices’, while at the same time being ‘radically tolerant’ of their lying leaders.
Again, he cites Hannah Arendt on the ‘atomised subjects’ who have no connection with the larger whole — now, in fighting the new object of anxiety, their negative state becomes positive. Social isolation is replaced by an experience of a strong social bond, ‘which is the reason why people are continuing to believe in the mainstream narrative — even when it is blatantly wrong and utterly absurd. . . . They do not believe in the narrative because it is correct, but because it leads to this new solidarity, to this new kind of social bond, to this mental intoxication of feeling.’
‘Usually this only stops after a lot of destruction,’ he warns. Crowds are always ‘intrinsically self-destructive,’ as Le Bon repeatedly stated. ‘The only positive way this comes to an end is if people can discover the real reasons for their dissatisfaction and [find] a new meaning. But once a mass emerges, it’s hard to get people to search for the real reasons for their anxiety.’
Society, he says, was being prepared for such a narrative for a long time. For centuries, the dominant view of man has been a mechanistic-materialist view: Man is a machine, a little part of the larger machine of the universe — ‘that is the ideology that has prepared the world for mass formation, and for connecting all our anxiety to a mechanistic-materialist organism such as a virus.’
The chief characteristics of modern masses, according to Hannah Arendt, is that they ‘do not believe in anything visible, in the reality of their own experience; they don’t trust their eyes and ears but only their imaginations, which may be caught by anything that is at once universal and consistent in itself. What convinces masses are not facts, and not even invented facts, but only the consistency of the system of which they are presumably part. Repetition, somewhat overrated in importance because of the common belief in the masses’ inferior capacity to grasp and remember, is important only because it convinces them of consistency in time.’
Imagination, again, is the key — the process of engaging with reality through a gauze of fantasy. It is important that we grasp this: In the average victim of Covid propaganda, we are not dealing with the same person in the way we have known him or her hitherto. We encounter someone who has been fed with, and swallowed, a grotesquely distorted view of reality. She does not see what we see, or know what we know. And, on detecting this dissonance, she becomes, as she has been programmed to become, highly alert and intensely suspicious. Our disbelief in the things she cleaves to is connected in her mind with a danger to herself. We ought not to underestimate the dangers of this, or its potential for leading rapidly to confrontation and even violence. We are not dealing with people in control of themselves; we are not dealing even with people who remain themselves. The word ‘hypnosis’ must here be treated with the utmost respect and literalism.
We deal with extraordinarily powerful and largely unbridled forces. We ought not to approach our fellows in this condition with the mindset that we might change their minds. That is folly indeed. Instead, we must wait, watch, choose our moments, and strike delicately and precisely.
The most important thing, Desmet says, is to continue speaking out, to keep saying that we do not agree with the mainstream narrative, to interrupt the constant flow of lies (propaganda) with the truth. This unsettles the hypnosis, causing the mesmermised to turn in their sleep.
Desmet says we have to continue to share rational counter-arguments, in the hope of breaking the link of free-floating anxiety to the virus, which he describes as a kind of welded joint created at the highest level of anxiety. Warning people of the dangers of a totalitarian state — itself a possible new object of anxiety — might cause this joint to be broken and a new one formed.
The presence of alternative voices also serves to curb the viciousness of the rulers and constrains the mob in its excesses. ‘Alternative voices, as Le Bon said, do not succeed in waking up the masses, but if the same group continues to talk and utter a different story, and ensure there is a different voice in the public space, then the masses might not become very cruel.
‘We have to aim to keep a path for the small group that doesn’t want to conform to the mainstream narrative. We have to continue to talk and to establish a parallel society that produces its own foods, its own clinics and hospitals and that can provide the means of surviving outside mainstream society.
‘Mass formation gets deeper as the narrative is repeated and as other narratives disappear. The only way to prevent it becoming deeper and more intense is to make sure there is another narrative that leads to a certain cognitive dissonance that at least means that people will be a little confused while following the mainstream narrative.’
And, yes, he agrees, the short-to-medium-term outlook is bleak. When a society reaches the point of transgressing all ethical limits, there are no longer any guarantees. We must not be in any doubt as to the suggestibility of our neighbours. If we doubt that it could go much further, he warns, we should consider how far it has gone already. He ironically asks of people who are prepared to vaccinate children, to force pregnant women to wear face masks, to allow old people die alone, ‘Why don’t we move to the next step and build concentration camps for people who test positive for Covid?’ Their answer? — ‘Why not?’
When he asks people how far they think the tyranny should go, they reply: ‘Until the end of the [Covid] danger’.
‘Do not believe that we could not end up with the same kind of measures that Hitler considered necessary to create his pure race. To be honest, I think it will be difficult to avoid ending up in some kind of new totalitarianism. But it will be a newtotalitarianism. It will be, on the one hand, the same as the totalitarianism of the first half of the twentieth century, but it will also be radically different, because it will be a worldwide totalitarian system. It won’t have external enemies; it will only have internal enemies, and it will treat these internal enemies in a different way — as the external enemies were treated. This is something that is essential for the logic of totalitarian systems — totalitarian systems need an enemy; without an enemy they collapse. So I think there is a good chance that the new totalitarian systems will tolerate the existence of the enemies, but it will marginalise them, push them outside of mainstream society.’
Which, up to a point, will suit the dissenters, who have never wanted much more than simply that they be let alone.
His dark prognostications notwithstanding, he is a little optimistic. We should remember, he says, that ‘totalitarianism and mass formation always ends up destroying itself.’ All we have to do is to make sure that our story survives and that we survive outside the system ‘for a few years’.
How might it happen?
‘If the masses wake up, they start to realise what has happened.’
Then what?
‘Then they kill their leaders.’
‘You will see that the small group will survive and, in one way or another, after the collapse, it will play an important role in the rebuilding of a society according to more human and more ethical principles.’
We may have some distance to travel, he says, but he believes this model of totalitarianism will destroy itself much more quickly than those of the twentieth century, because none of those systems intruded on the personal lives of the people to the extent that this one has ‘in such a systematic and straightforward way’. He cites vaccines as a cardinal example of this form of intrusion and expresses the belief that the vaccination campaign may end up as ‘the most spectacular disaster we’ve ever seen.’
There is, although it may not be obvious, something of an anomaly here in the phenomenon of a clinical psychologist offering a critique of materialist-mechanistic society, in the sense that the discipline of psychology is itself part of the mechanisation of man, part of the apparatus that seeks to break human behaviour and responses into a set of instrumental principles and patterns which, although they can often appear to have individual application, have not, in general produced overall beneficial results. Indeed, as I’ve pointed out elsewhere, the discipline of psychology has all but destroyed the art of fiction. The reduction of understandings of the human to manmade scientific polarities has destroyed the mysteriousness that was once the forte of the novel and short story. In the realm of modern literature, the once revered novelist — the source of so much of our understandings of the human — has been demoted by psychology to the role of bumbling amateur who, to be taken ‘seriously’, has to immerse him/herself in Freud and adhere religiously to what he appeared to be saying.
Sigmund Freud was undoubtedly a genius — an artist, in fact, in his own right, who took us on epic journeys within our own minds. His ruminations on, for example, conscience and (though reductionist) happiness, have given us much food for self-scrutiny. But Freudianism, the pseudo-science that grew out of this remarkable corpus, has done untold damage, being absorbed into the societal machines of Western societies to impose itself on actually breathing humans as a form of Holy Writ. In the wrong hands, it can be lethal to human happiness, functioning and freedom. Psychoanalysis, too, has rendered instrumental everything about the human person, reducing the possibilities concerning human action to comprehensible, even simplistic pathologies and crypto-mechanical processes. This enabled the elevation of psychiatrists, psychoanalysts and psychologists to the status of engineers of human souls, capable of diagnosing patterns of behaviour in a stranger in much the way an old-style mechanic would detect the source of a rattle in the gearbox of a 1984 Volkswagen Mk2 GTI. Perhaps more than anything — yes, even more than the notion of chemical imbalances in the human brain — these developments caused the human person to think of himself as a sort of, well, Volkswagen.
So there is, as I say, this anomaly (even a dangerous anomaly) in people like Mattias Desmet (and, to give another example, Jordan Peterson) voyaging forth to diagnose the condition of the human person in these opening decades of the third millennium. A human person seeking self-understanding could, as quickly as becoming enlightened, feel hit over the head with Dr. Peterson’s 25,000 hours of clinical practice. If anything, the problem with the modern world is a surfeit of experts telling us not just what is good for us, but what we are actually doing and thinking wrongly, and why — and what we supposedly need to do.
But there is also an upside. One could also note that all these practitioners have, in the era of YouTube, started to stray outside their disciplines, to commentate on macro, collective trends in human psychology, and this may actually be where they redeem themselves and their role. There is a lacuna in the conversation of modern society in relation to the actions and ‘thought-processes’ of mobs. Most of the more interesting reflections on this aspect of human coexistence occurred in the last century or towards the end of the one before. For the past half-century, there have emerged no substantial practitioners in the precise area of crowd behaviour, perhaps because there are no ‘patients’ and few enough potential clients with a monied interest in exploring these matters. And it is hard to avoid thinking that there is nowadays something of an omertà concerning the differences and interactions between individual responses and those of the crowd. YouTube — probably unwittingly — has provided a generation of psychologists with a platform to begin filling in this lacuna.
In general, the new trend we perceive involves clinical psychologists co-opting the work of thinkers like Le Bon and Arendt, and merging it with their own clinical experience in the individual context. This is not without value, but it is also beset by the contradiction already mentioned: that the interpretations of engineers of human souls must be taken with a soupcon of axle grease when it comes to arriving at any definitive understandings of flesh-and-blood beings. This discussion remains preliminary and tentative. There is a huge gap between the condition of (approximately) the first half of the twentieth century — dominated by Gustave Le Bon, Hannah Arendt, Jacques Ellul and Joost Meerloo — and the present, a span of time in which nothing radically innovative was added to our understanding of what we shall but loosely call collective psychology and its seemingly osmotic inclination towards totalitarian patterns — and this during a time of the most rapid growth in the promulgation of technologies lending themselves to the manipulation of collective psychology as never before. The great masters — Le Bon, Arendt, Ellul, Meerloo — are all gone and have had no significant successors to update or revise their thoughts in the light of an avalanche of tech diversion, tech addiction, tech toxicity, cyber-censorship, mass baiting and herding, and sundry other pathologies of this ‘most modern’ moment. It is to the end of updating these understandings, rather than the application of more elaborate or dubious schemas to the condition of the individual, that clinical psychology might today make itself most useful.
Desmet, Peterson and others — the British psychologist Richard Grannon, for example — are with us, have read their Le Bon and Arendt, and are capable of hypothesising us into some form of (albeit restricted) collective reflection on our plight. Desmet has so far emerged as the most interesting voice on the Covid totalitarian play, discoursing brilliantly on mass psychology and how it might be manipulated. Peterson has adhered to the continuing Combine-enforced omertà.
And none of these figures shows signs of having yet read their Jacques Ellul — another serious lacuna. For this and other reasons, I propose to devote Part II of this article/essay to the mid-twentieth century reflections of that remarkable Frenchman on the emergence and consequences of the ‘technique society’ – (something more, and more ominous, than mere technology).
Here is a short selection of recent interviews with Dr. Mattias Desmet. Some are better than others and I have placed them in order of quality of content. The first is the best; the other two get better as they go along (skip the first half hour of each!). There are other interviews, and more are now being added with every passing week.
*
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).
Joe Biden’s federal vaccine mandate is toothless. He cannot make it work. He cannot enforce it, and so the federal government has tried to ‘back door‘ a national vaccine mandate by pushing corporations to do their dirty work. Maybe the feds can’t really order you to take the jab, but if they can prevent you from earning a living without the vaccine, they can achieve the same objective.
It seems simple enough and strangely fitting for a government that is increasingly indistinguishable from giant multinational corporations, Big Tech, and the oligarchs that run the entire enterprise.
Except, a funny thing is happening. The people, those Neanderthals clinging to their Bibles and guns, who are supposed to do what they are told, pay taxes and fight the corporate wars are pushing back. Deserted by their elected representatives, who answer to their corporate masters, average Americans are refusing to comply.
Take a look at Southwest Airlines, and you will see exactly what this new civil disobedience looks like. You may also see the future.
The White House has pressed the airlines to adopt vaccine mandates using the leverage of federal contracts. United knuckled under first and announced a vaccine requirement. Southwest recently announced its employees had until December 8, 2021, to get vaccinated or lose their jobs.
The pilot’s union for Southwest Airlines responded to the mandate by filing suit and trying to block the action, but the pilots themselves are not waiting for court action to make clear where they stand. They have started using vacation and sick days and refusing to show up for work. Other employees have followed suit.
The entire airline has been brought to a standstill. The pushback began Friday when a grand total of 3 out of 35 employees showed up for work at the Jacksonville center. Almost every flight out of Orlando had to be canceled. Almost 50% of Southwest pilots remain unvaccinated. There is no indication that any large numbers are moving to get the vaccine. As bad as things are, they are going to get a lot worse.
Over the weekend Southwest canceled 1900 flights. As of the time this article was published it had already canceled 365 flights for Monday, and 600 more are “delayed.” Southwest Airlines is effectively shut down.
Southwest Airlines’ stock fell more than 4% on Monday when trading opened.
From my dad who is a pilot about the current situation with Southwest airlines pic.twitter.com/44tFnM3tYz
Southwest Airlines is continuing to maintain that there is no work stoppage in progress and blaming cancellations on mythical weather problems or air traffic control issues. The pilot’s union is keeping silent because any official action on its part would likely be considered illegal. In reality, their position is largely true. Pilots are not calling out, because they have been ordered to do so. They are calling out because they have had enough.
Southwest pilots are drawing a line in the sand. They, like so many other Americans, are done with the creeping tyranny, and they have grasped that in Washington no one is going to stand up for them and push back. It is time for citizens to act on their own.
It’s not just Southwest Airlines…Other pilots are starting to stand up. I stand with the pilots, the truckers, the conductors and the captains 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/stOz76I0Lc
This is the beginning, not the end. Other airlines are already reported to be seeing the same issues as Southwest. Those issues will expand. Rumors are swirling that United pilots may join the “sickout” any time.
Amtrak just announced the cancellation of several scheduled trains, because personnel are not showing up to work. The expectation is that such actions will spread.
Amtrak Train Crews Allegedly Joins The Walkout Started By Air Traffic Controllers And Southwest Pilots – MSM Ignores The Walkout https://t.co/VBy4HU4BSx
Across the country, in recent months there has been an increasing number of “walkouts” by various professional groups protesting vaccine and mask mandates. These have all been designed to bring attention to the issues at hand. The Southwest action and those that will follow it are fundamentally different.
This action by the Southwest pilots is not designed to attract attention. It is designed to use economic leverage to compel Southwest to change course. The pilots are not saying they want a conversation. They are saying that if Southwest does not change its policy, they will destroy the company.
In 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama Rosa Parks, a black woman, refused to give up her seat on a city bus to a white person. When Rosa was thrown off the bus the entire black population of Montgomery stopped riding the bus. They made up 60% of the ridership at the time.
Within a matter of months, Montgomery’s Jim Crow law about black people sitting in the back of the bus went away. Turns out dollars that come out of the pockets of black people are just the same as those that come out of white pockets. The bus company folded.
This is where we have come to today in America on issues of personal freedom. The Oligarchy thinks it owns us. Our “representatives” seem unable to act on our behalf. Increasingly, it is now up to us as individuals to simply refuse to comply.
Southwest Airlines is on the verge of collapse. We are seeing a glimpse of the future and of hope.
*
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).
In what is likely a deceptively positive development in policy between the US and Russia, the two countries have lifted targeted sanctions to allow U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland to visit Moscow. Meaning that sanctions were lifted from just one person on each side.
As a senior state department official, Nuland took an active part in what transpired in Ukraine back in 2014, namely the Euromaidan. She visited Kiev on several occasions during the height of the protests.
From 2019 onwards she’s been entirely banned from entering Russia. Her visit on October 11th was completely at the initiative of the American side.
Nuland who was a part of the “very successful” destabilization efforts in Kiev is now being sent to Moscow in order to foster “stable and predictable” relations.
And to highlight that, Nuland said that alongside Russian officials, she is to meet with representatives of business, as well as various individuals who graduated exchange programs with the US, i.e., she plans to check “the ranks” of American influence agents in the Russian Federation.
It is, however, puzzling that Victoria Nuland came in such a rush, the US side quickly proposed the meeting, and agreed on the sanctions being lifted. She will not meet with top Russian politicians, like Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, but his deputies, and officials from the Presidential Administration, but not Vladimir Putin himself.
Currently, it is not too far-fetched to say that the US has no single head of the executive branch of government in the person of President Joe Biden. These functions appear to be assumed by a group of individuals, referred to as the “deep state”.
It is likely that Nuland’s visit is a mission on behalf of that very specific group, as urgent negotiations are needed. The developments in Ukraine, as well as in Afghanistan or in the Middle East, are only a pretext for the meeting. The recent US-China tensions and the energy crisis are a much more significant focal point.
The United States is attempting to take advantage of the energy crisis, as China is one of its main victims. Washington is doing its best to inflict competitive damage to Beijing and to strengthen its own position. Improving on its competitive advantages over the EU comes as an added bonus.
China, for its part, is drawing closer to Russia, as it has no other choice. As a result of Nord Stream 2, and the United States proving to France, and earlier to Afghanistan, that it is a disloyal “ally”, the EU is likely to grow “fonder” of Russia. This is a worrisome development for Washington in both of these cases.
The United States needs to move quickly, due to political turmoil within, and the foundations of its global hegemony being undermined, these developments could lead to the ultimate fall of the dying empire.
It is yet to be discovered exactly what Victoria Nuland’s negotiations in Moscow will bring forth. Will it be some sort of concessions in exchange for Russia stepping back from some dealings with China and the European Union? And what does Washington have in trade? It remains questionable, as the Kremlin clearly understands the strategic advantage and necessity that the fostering of its relationships with China and Europe provide.
*
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).
Since the beginning of the lockdowns in March 2020, the impact on public transportation networks, their commuters and workers has been disastrous.
The outbreak of COVID-19 crisis has dealt a heavy blow to the already fragile United States economy.
Over 20 million people were thrown out of their jobs between March and June of last year while tax revenues generated by municipal, state and the federal governments took a drastic turn downward due the closing of many businesses and public institutions which relied on in-person customer service. With many people either laid off or mandated to work from home due to the pandemic, the ridership on all forms of public transport declined sharply.
Even though labor statistics indicate that many millions have returned to work, millions of others have witnessed their places of employment severely trim staff. At the same time, with the permanent closings of an estimated 200,000 small and medium-size business enterprises, many jobs will be lost forever.
A jobs report for the month of September stated that only 194,00 new jobs were created for the workers in the U.S. Many of the jobs that have been created since the emergence from the Great Recession of the last decade are in the low-wage category. This trend is undoubtedly continuing as the enhanced unemployment benefits have been discontinued by the states and the federal government.
Political officials at the aegis of business interests began criticizing the extended jobless benefits saying they were providing incentives for people to remain at home rather than reenter the labor market. Yet these programs were essential in preventing a complete economic collapse on the level of the Great Depression of 1929-1941.
Considering the massive cutbacks in public transportation and the lack of funding for childcare services, large numbers of workers face considerable difficulties in returning to many of the low-wage jobs which are available to them.
Moreover, millions remain ill after contracting COVID-19 themselves along with the trauma of losing close relatives, friends, neighbors and co-workers. More than 700,000 people have died of the infectious disease over the last 19 months out of a total of 44.5 million cases.
The mounting crisis of public transportation services was recognized during the first few months of the pandemic and the subsequent economic decline. An article published in vox.com during December noted:
“In the early days of the pandemic, public transit ridership dropped precipitously. Americans were urged to stay home, which prompted transit agencies to swiftly implement service cuts to match this declining demand. Transit networks needed a financial lifeline. Fare money was drying up, and existing budget gaps were further exacerbated. Through the CARES Act in March, local agencies received $25 billion in aid — bailout money that was crucial to keep networks operating through the summer despite steep declines in revenue from riders, advertisers, and taxes as people stayed home.”
Fares for buses and trains have never provided municipalities with the necessary revenue to maintain a thriving public transportation system. Subsidies from municipal, state and federal budgets are indispensable in the maintenance of public transport networks.
Those who are able to work from home, largely people employed in higher-income sectors of the labor market, will not be as adversely impacted by the cancelling of routes, the slow-down in the frequency of service and the elimination of employees. However, many people who are considered “essential workers” are in the low-income categories and rely on public transport because they may not own automobiles to take them to work, school, medical appointments, shopping and to visit friends and relatives.
Disproportionately the low-wage workers considered essential to the operations of the national economy are from the African American, Latinx, immigrant and other people of color communities. Therefore, the problems being generated by the cutbacks in public transportation have both racial and class dynamics.
Detroit Riders and Drivers Rally Downtown Demanding a Reversal of Cuts
On October 5 the Motor City Freedom Riders (MCFR) hosted a press conference and rally right outside City Hall in downtown Detroit. The MCFR has served as community advocates for the improvement and expansion of public transportation in Detroit and throughout southeastern Michigan.
Present at the event was the President of the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 26, Glenn Tolbert, who spoke to the crowd about the monumental challenges facing bus drivers during the current period. Many bus drivers have contracted COVID-19 while at work leading to several deaths.
Pay for the ATU Local 26 workers has not kept apace with the rising cost of living in the city of Detroit where the burden of over assessed property taxes and rising rents serve to drive people away from living in the municipality. Detroit bus drivers were only awarded “hazard pay” for two months during the first few weeks of the pandemic in 2020. Tolbert mentioned that the suburban Southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority (SMART) drivers make ten dollars per hour more than those working for the Detroit Department of Transportation (DDOT).
Detroit activists and union members hold rally to protest cuts in public transportation, Oct. 5, 2021 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)
In September the DDOT officials announced a series of cuts in service in the city which has perhaps one of the worst public transportation systems in the U.S. Popularly known as the Motor City, Detroit has since the mid-1950s consistently reduced investment in bus and rail services encouraging the purchase of automobiles to fuel the profits of the car industry.
Thomas Zerafa, a longtime public transportation advocate and board member of the Michigan Coalition for Human Rights (MCHR), spoke at the rally stating that he was old enough to remember the discontinuation of the streetcar rail services in 1956. A public transportation system prior to the late 1950s encompassed bus and rail routes which extended through large sections of Detroit and the region.
The Q-Line, a hybrid rail service along Woodward Avenue between West Grand Boulevard and the Riverfront, was opened in 2017. The Q-Line construction was largely opposed by most bus riders since it only covered a limited geographic area which has been targeted for gentrification over the last decade. Even this prestige project was closed down after March 2020. The rail line only began servicing customers again in September.
MCFR at the press conference and rally circulated what they described as a “City of Detroit Transit Platform”. The document has seven important demands related to public transportation issues in the city and suburbs.
These demands include raising expenditures by 300% for the bus services in order to hire more drivers and to increase the frequencies of routes. Another important call was made for greater accessibility for people living with disabilities and the construction of more enclosed bus stops with route information being available at each location.
Other issues raised were the demand to reduce fares for seniors, Medicare recipients, and students. The MCFR wants a pilot project with no far routes which would eventually lead to the elimination of cost for riders within ten years.
In regard to the labor force, the document says:
“DDOT is currently experiencing a driver shortage which means that only 70% of scheduled buses are actually leaving the terminal. Drivers should have wage parity with SMART drivers in order to prevent them from leaving for better paying jobs. They should also implement retention programs to keep drivers on staff once they complete their training.”
The two final demands propose better land use policy and coordination with the SMART and the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) in order to facilitate better services for riders and drivers throughout the city and suburbs. Finally, the question of planning democracy was raised demanding that riders and drivers be consulted in regard to route changes and other major policy changes.
Federal Responsibility and Corporate Obligations
The City of Detroit has received over $800 million in recovery funds under the American Rescue Plan (ARP) enacted by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Joe Biden. Therefore, in Detroit and other municipalities people are wondering why cuts in service and the failure to increase salaries are the dominant themes being discussed by local and state governments.
In order for any economic recovery to have sustainability there must be huge investments into public infrastructure in the transportation, educational, environmental, housing and healthcare sectors of the U.S. At present the U.S. Congress has been incapable of agreeing on a multi-trillion dollars infrastructure plan which could address some of these pressing problems.
Corporate interests including the financial institutions have systematically fostered the large-scale disinvestment in public transportation. Consequently, mass organizations in the urban and suburban areas of the country must mobilize to demand that the needs of the workers and oppressed are met in the present period.
*
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 Pan-African News Wire. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Detroit public transportation press conference and rally on Oct. 5, 2021 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)
Nobel Prize Laureate Kary B. Mullis was the inventor of the polymerase chain reaction technique. Dr. Kary B. Mullis, who passed away on August 7, 2019 at age 74, stated emphatically that no infection or illness can be accurately diagnosed with the PCR-RT.
The gas price explosion hits Europe at the critical moment of economic recovery after the disastrous effects of the 2020 lockdowns. The explanation, claiming it is due to the growth in demand and decline in supply, hides a much more complex scenario, where financial, political and strategic factors play a primary role.
The worldwide mandate for all airline pilots and air travel industry personnel to be vaccinated with a known kill shot which some analysts describe as depopulation is having major repercussions, hemorrhaging the entire transportation industry and for that matter the entire planet.
The extent of the propaganda in behalf of a “vaccine” that is known not to protect but to cause death and serious health impairments, and against known proven cures increasingly used world wide, is astounding.
Imagine humanity would one day – very soon – decide to stop wearing masks. In unison. Not in the streets, not in restaurants, not in shops, not in sports events – simply nowhere. Against all orders of a good portion of the 193 UN member governments, or at least the western governments.
The price of energy from all sources conventional is exploding globally. Far from accidental, it is a well-orchestrated plan to collapse the industrial world economy that has already been weakened dramatically by almost two years of ridiculous covid quarantine and related measures.
Corrupted governments have also used the pandemic to expand their control of its people like what you see is happening in Australia and New Zealand which is an Orwellian nightmare come true.
There have been a number of suggestions online that the withdrawal of American soldiers from overseas is being undertaken to use the troops against those individuals and domestic groups that are being targeted by the Justice Department.
Recently, African Swine Fever (ASF) was detected in Haiti. Specialists were not surprised since a couple months earlier pigs in the neighboring Dominican Republic were detected with a disease that is harmless to humans but can kill hogs.
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).
The Man Who Knew Too Much is a documentary film by Michael Oswald about Colin Wallace a former intelligence officer who blew the whistle on fake news and was framed for a murder.
Colin Wallace was involved in psychological operations in Northern Ireland. He spread fake news, created a witchcraft scare, smeared British politicians and attempted to divide and create conflict amongst communities, organisations and individuals. He fell out with members of the intelligence community and found himself accused of murder.
The documentary provides a unique insight into how intelligence services engaged with the media in the 1970s, before the advent of the internet. It shows how easy it was to smear individuals, frame events and even fabricate stories entirely. The viewer is faced with the question of how different the media might be today and what opportunities have arisen for disinformation in the information age?
Colin Wallace went from being at the centre of spreading fake news, to being a victim of it, to clearing his name.
Today, Colin Wallace believes the issues of fake news and accountability of intelligence services have not been addressed and closure in the Northern Ireland Troubles has not been achieved. Two days after the release of this documentary Colin Wallace announced in The Belfast Telegraph that he would be taking legal action against the British Ministry of Defence.
The film premiered at the Investigative Film Festival Skopje in 2020 and received a “Special Award for Investigation & Reporting” from the Harrogate Film Festival, UK.
“The lengths to which MI5, MI6 and the psyops warriors of the British military will go to suppress the truth about their dirty tricks in Ireland is astonishingly well told in this marvellous new film.” David Miller, @Spinwatch
“In a modern world driven by information, instant messaging and social media, we have much to learn from The Man Who Knew Too Much. Disinformation and psychological operations may be easier to deploy today than they were half a century ago.” Ciaran McAirt – Paper Trail Legacy Archive Research (www.papertrail.pro)
Watch the full documentary below.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
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).
It would be tempting to picture the Iraqi parliamentary elections last Sunday as a geopolitical game-changer. Well, it’s complicated – in more ways than one.
Let’s start with the abstention rate. Of the 22 million eligible voters able to choose 329 members of Parliament from 3,227 candidates and 167 parties, only 41% chose to cast their ballots, according to the Iraq High Electoral Commission (IHEC).
Then there’s the notorious fragmentation of the Iraqi political chessboard. Initial results offer a fascinating glimpse. Of the 329 seats, the Sadrists – led by Muqtada al-Sadr – captured 73, a Sunni coalition has 43, a Shi’ite coalition – led by former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – has 41 and the Kurd faction led by Barzani has 32.
In the current electoral setup, apart from Shi’ite coalitions, Sunnis have two main blocks and the Kurds have two main parties ruling autonomous Kurdistan: the Barzani gang – which do an array of shady deals with the Turks – and the Talabani clan, which is not much cleaner.
What happens next are extremely protracted negotiations, not to mention infighting. Once the results are certified, President Barham Saleh, in theory, has 15 days to choose the next Parliament speaker, and Parliament has one month to choose a President. Yet the whole process could last months.
The question is already in everyone’s minds in Baghdad: true to most forecasts, the Sadrists may eventually come up with the largest number of seats in Parliament. But will they be able to strike a solid alliance to nominate the next prime minister?
Then there’s the strong possibility they may actually prefer to remain in the background, considering the next few years will be extremely challenging for Iraq all across the spectrum: on the security and counter-terrorism front; on the ghastly economic front; on the corruption and abysmal management front; and last but not least, on what exactly the expected US troop withdrawal really means.
The takeover of nearly one-third of Iraqi territory by Daesh from 2014 to 2017 may be a distant memory by now, but the fact remains that out of 40 million Iraqis, untold numbers have to deal on a daily basis with rampant unemployment, no healthcare, meager education opportunities and even no electricity.
The American “withdrawal” in December is a euphemism: 2,500 combat troops will actually be repositioned into unspecified “non-combat” roles. The overwhelming majority of Iraqis – Sunni and Shi’ite – won’t accept it. A solid intel source – Western, not West Asian – assured me assorted Shi’ite outfits have the capability to overrun all American assets in Iraq in only six days, the Green Zone included.
Sistani rules
To paint the main players in the Iraqi political scene as merely a “Shi’ite Islamist-dominated ruling elite” is crass Orientalism. They are not “Islamist” – in a Salafi-jihadi sense.
Neither they have set up a political coalition “tied to militias backed by Iran”: that’s a crass reductionism. These “militias” are in fact the People’s Mobilization Units (PMUs), which were encouraged from the start by Grand Ayatollah Sistani to defend the nation against takfiris and Salafi-jihadis of the Daesh kind, and are legally incorporated into the Ministry of Defense.
What is definitely correct is that Muqtada al-Sadr is in a direct clash with the main Shi’ite political parties – and especially those members involved in massive corruption.
Muqtada is a very complex character. He’s essentially an Iraqi nationalist. He’s opposed to any form of foreign interference, especially any lingering American troop presence – in whatever shape or form. As a Shi’ite, he has to be an enemy of politicized, corrupt Shi’ite profiteers.
Elijah Magnier has done a sterling job focusing on the importance of a new fatwa on the elections issued by Grand Ayatollah Sistani, even more important than the “Fatwa of Reform and Changes” which addressed the occupation of northern Iraq by Daesh in 2014 and led to the creation of the PMUs.
In this new fatwa Sistani, based in the holy city of Najaf, compels voters to search for an “honest candidate” capable of “bringing about real change” and removing “old and habitually corrupt candidates.” Sistani believes “the path of reform is possible” and “hope … must be exploited to remove the incompetent” from ruling Iraq.
The conclusion is inescapable: vast swathes of the dispossessed in Iraq chose to identify this “honest candidate” as Muqtada al-Sadr.
That’s hardly surprising. Muqtada is the youngest son of the late, immensely respected Marja’, Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, who was assassinated by the Saddam Hussein apparatus. Muqtada’s immensely popular base, inherited from his father, congregates the poor and the downtrodden, as I saw for myself numerous times, especially in Sadr City in Baghdad and in Najaf and Karbala.
During the Petraeus surge in 2007, I was received with open arms in Sadr City, talked to quite a few Sadrist politicians, saw how the Mahdi army operates both in the military and social realm and observed on the spot many of the Sadrist social projects.
In the Shi’ite collective unconscious Muqtada, at the time based in Najaf, made his mark in early 2004 as the first prominent Shi’ite religious leader cum politician to confront the US occupation head-on, and tell them to leave. The CIA put a price on his head. The Pentagon wanted to whack him – in Najaf. Grand Ayatollah Sistani – and his tens of millions of followers – supported him.
Afterward, he spent a long time perfecting his theological chops in Qom – while remaining in the background, always extremely popular and learning a thing or two about becoming politically savvy. That’s reflected in his current positioning: always opposed to the US occupation forces, but willing to work with Washington to expedite their departure.
Old (imperial) habits die hard. Out of his status of sworn enemy, routinely dismissed as a “volatile cleric” by Western media, at least now Muqtada is recognized in Washington as a key player and even an interlocutor.
Yet that’s not the case of the Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq group, which was born of the Sadrist base. The Americans still don’t understand that this is not a militia but a party: they are branded by the US as a terrorist organization.
US occupation actors also conveniently forget that the way Iraq’s “dysfunctional” Parliament is configured, along confessional lines, is inextricably linked to the project of Western liberal democracy being bombed into Iraq.
Geopolitically, looking ahead, Iraq’s future in West Asia from now on will be inextricably linked to Eurasian integration. Not surprisingly, Iran and Russia were among the first actors to officially congratulate Baghdad for running a smooth election.
Muqtada and the Sadrists will be very much aware that the Axis of Resistance – Iran-Iraq-Syria-Hezbollah in Lebanon – is strengthening by the minute. And that is directly linked to the Iran-Russia-China partnership strengthening Eurasia integration. But first things first: let’s get an “honest” prime minister and Parliament in place.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
This article was originally published on Asia Times.
Pepe Escobar,born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.
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).
We need to be honest about this global pandemic which has a not-so hidden agenda to lead civilization back into the dark ages. It is easy to see what is happening around us with the constant lies about the lockdowns, facemask rules and the forced vaccination mandates and passports that is promoted and in some cases, enforced by the Biden Regime, the mainstream media, Big Pharma, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the National Institute of Health (NIH), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and others.
More than 4.5 million people worldwide have tragically died from Covid-19 at least in theory [according to the PCR-RT test which is invalid] , but I will say this, the majority had underlying health conditions such as heart disease, diabetes, many suffered from obesity, many were the elderly in their last stages of life who were the most vulnerable.
There is more than enough evidence that can attest to what I’m saying. However, there are many diseases such as cardiovascular disease (CVDs) (which is a leading cause of death globally) plus other types of diseases such as cancer that kills millions of people each year. In 2018 alone, it was estimated that 9.5 million people had died of lung cancer worldwide, yet no lockdowns, facemasks or rushed experimental injections.
The point is, it’s all an over-exaggerated lie. Covid-19 is about control of the population by any means necessary. Many governments and people fell for this narrative.
Corrupted governments have also used the pandemic to expand their control of its people like what you see is happening in Australia and New Zealand which is an Orwellian nightmare come true.
In a positive note, there were several countries such as Tanzania and Burundi including millions of people worldwide who do not believe nor follow the dictates of the global order to enforce lockdowns, experimental injections, facemask mandates or passport mandates.
Certain governments have been slowly waking up to the fact that the Covid-19 pandemic is over-exaggerated thus becoming more clear that it is all nonsense according to the President of Croatia, Zoran Milanović who was recently speaking at a press conference when a reporter said the following “Croatia is not sufficiently vaccinated, unlike the EU average. We are only at 50%.” Milanovic’s response was classic (see video here):
I don’t care. We’re vaccinated enough, and everyone knows it. We will not go more than 50%. Let them fence us in with wire. They won’t do that. We are vaccinated enough, because they are vaccinated enough. So from their perspective, we are vaccinated enough. There is simply no chance of endangering those people. And I’ll finish. if the goal is…we need to know what the goal of this frenzy is? If the goal is to completely eradicate the virus, then we have the goal. I have not heard that this is the goal. If someone tells me it’s a goal, I’ll tell him it’s out of his mind. That is impossible. Get vaccinated, then get vaccinated one more time.
We want to eradicate Covid-19! That is impossible. It is obviously impossible. I start everyday with CNN and those few channels. And I wonder if I’m normal or are they crazy? They spread panic. They do it from the beginning. They are not the only ones.But there is simply no absolute certainty. There is no life without risk, without the possibility of getting sick. People get sick from a thousand other more serious things. And while that’s happening we’ve been talking about Covid-19 for a year and a half. OK, 1 year. I understand. I justify. I was for it. Since the new year, I only listen to nonsense
Milanovic’s response to the press shows that he and his government obviously has had enough of the Covid-19 propaganda. This shows that some nations are finally waking up to the fact that Covid-19 was a scam from the start.
But sadly, many governments have fallen for the Covid-19 narrative including Cuba, which is disappointing to me. To be honest, the reason why I am singling out Cuba over other countries is because I thought they would have woken up to the fact that the Covid-19 pandemic is an over-exaggerated lie.
It is known thatFidel Castro was an avid reader of alternative media sites as well as a supporter of Global Research, but what is more interesting about Cuba today is that they have also imposed lockdowns and restrictions under its current President, Miguel Diaz Canel following the guidelines of the global medical establishment like many other countries around the world.
In 1962, there was also the idea of committing false-flag terrorist acts in New York City and elsewhere to blame it on Cuba in order to start another war called Operation Northwoods.
There was also US-sponsored terrorist attacks from Miami’s right-wing terrorists to Washington’s biological warfare that had unleashed ‘Dengue Fever’ also known as ‘Hemorrhagic fever’ on Cuba effecting more than 273,000 Cubans killing more than 158 back in 1981. Despite the hardships, Cuba has stood up to Washington.
Cuba has surely inspired revolutions across Latin America against Washington’s colonial and neoliberal policies.
I admire Cuba’s revolution, I really do, but there is one thing I need to point out and that is the fact that the Cuban leadership and its people has been deceived into believing the Covid-19 narrative sponsored by the global medical establishment.
I am not discrediting Cuban doctors and scientists in any way, the work they have done to help humanity around the world deserves recognition. A 2015 article from the Morning Star‘A Year of Achievement for Cuban Healthcare’said that Cuba has world-leading achievements which in many respects is undeniable:
In June, Cuba became the first country in the world to receive validation from the World Health Organisation (WHO) to successfully achieve the elimination of mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis. Given the global scale of the HIV/Aids epidemic, where an estimated 1.4 million women living with HIV become pregnant each year, the potential global health impact is phenomenal if the world can learn from Cuba.
The WHO said: “Eliminating transmission of a virus is one of the greatest public health achievements possible. Cuba’s success demonstrates that universal access and universal health coverage are feasible and indeed are the key to success, even against challenges as daunting as HIV.” This year also saw the largest contingent of health workers who were fighting the Ebola outbreak in west Africa return home after completing their successful missions. These world-leading achievements are from a very long list of Cuban healthcare accolades — and are a testament to the Cuban revolution and its people
But I must point out that Covid-19 has turned Cuba’s intellectual capabilities completely upside-down. I thought by this time, Cuba would be two steps ahead of the lies that come from the same Western-based medical institutions and individuals who are aligned with the political establishment and the Military-Industrial Complex that would love nothing more to have Cuba under its control.
Cuba should have led Latin America in exposing Covid-19 for what it is, an over-exaggerated disease brought to you by the global establishment to impose medical tyranny around the world.
Cuba seems to be following in their footsteps in their fight against Covid-19, for example, they have imposed harsh penalties for those who violate facemask rules including the threat of doing some prison time if you don’t follow the rules. Reuters published an article on Cuba’s actions it took to enforce its facemask mandates, ‘Cuba tightens COVID-19 measures as visitors fuel record contagion’ said that
“Since the start of the pandemic, Cuban authorities have fined citizens for wearing their face masks incorrectly in public or contravening other rules, even sentencing some to jail time.”
So why is Cuba still enforcing the use of facemasks with all of the studies that prove they are dangerous to your health? On May 2020, Dr. Russell Blaylock, a board-certified neurosurgeon, health practitioner and author wrote an article on the subject of wearing facemasks or what I like to call face diapers titled ‘Face Masks Pose Serious Risks to the Healthy’ based on recent studies said that “researchers found that about a third of the workers developed headaches with use of the mask, most had preexisting headaches that were worsened by the mask wearing, and 60% required pain medications for relief” but the most likely cause of headaches in this situation is either hypoxia which is described as a reduction in blood oxygenation and/or hypercapnia, an elevation in blood C02.
\“A more recent study involving 159 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask.Some had pre-existing headaches that were precipitated by the masks. All felt like the headaches affected their work performance.”
Dr. Blaylock also mentioned a study on how the virus can enter the brain:
It gets even more frightening. Newer evidence suggests that in some cases the virus can enter the brain. In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain
“If you look at the history of totalitarian regimes… they all do the same thing, which is they try to crush culture, and crush any evidence of self-expression…” continued “And what is the ultimate vector for self-expression? It’s your facial expressions…. [Yet] we’ve all been told to put on the burqa and be obedient.”
Does Cuba really want to take part of a medical tyrannical agenda pushed on the planet by the same political elite that has been trying to destroy Cuba since the 1959 revolution?
Cuba and its people have political issues they need to work out among themselves, but to enforce facemasks despite the evidence that they don’t work and are considered a danger to human health in order to protect the public only makes its political situation more complicated.
Are Vaccines the Only Answer? What about Ivermectin or Vitamin D?
Cuba believes that their vaccines can cure or prevent Covid-19, but did they research other alternative medicines such as Ivermectin or even vitamin-D? The Desert Review, an independent online news source published an article by Dr. Justus R. Hope ‘India’s Ivermectin Blackout. Censorship of Peer-reviewed Analysis‘ on the media’s blackout on the success of how Ivermectin defeated Covid-19 in India:
There is a blackout on any conversation about how Ivermectin beat COVID-19 in India. When I discussed the dire straits that India found itself in early this year with 414,000 cases per day, and over 4,000 deaths per day, and how that evaporated within five weeks of the addition of Ivermectin, I am often asked, “But why is there no mention of that in the news?”
Dr. Hope continues,
“Yes, exactly. Ask yourself why India’s success against the Delta variant with Ivermectin is such a closely guarded secret by the NIH and CDC.”
Then he asks the question on why the mainstream media has not reported on the positive outcomes of Ivermectin, “ask yourself why no major media outlets reported this fact, but instead, tried to confuse you with false information by saying the deaths in India are 10 times greater than official reports.”
Dr. Joseph Mercola, one of the most outspoken doctors on the Covid-19 deception has written about the effectiveness of Ivermectin and the clinical evidence associated with it in ‘COVID, Ivermectin and the Crime of the Century’ said the following :
Data clearly show ivermectin can prevent COVID-19 and when used early can keep patients from progressing to the hyper-inflammatory phase of the disease. It can even help critically ill patients recover.
Ivermectin has a long history of use as an antiparasitic, but its antiviral properties have been under investigation since 2012. Studies have shown ivermectin inhibits replication of SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal influenza viruses, inhibits inflammation through several pathways, lowers viral load, protects against organ damage, prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure, speeds recovery and lowers risk of hospitalization and death in COVID-19 patients.
Doctors have been told not to use ivermectin as large controlled trials are still lacking. However, once you can see from clinical evidence that something is working, then conducting controlled trials becomes unethical, as you know you’re condemning the control group to poor outcomes or death. In fact, this is the exact argument vaccine makers now use to justify the elimination of control groups and giving everyone the vaccine
It is time to speak out forcefully now that a new, large-scale Spanish study demonstrates not a just a correlation but a causal relationship between high-dose Vitamin D treatment of hospitalised Covid patients and significantly improved outcomes for their health.
The pre-print paper in the Lancet shows there was an 80 per cent reduction in admission to intensive care units among hospitalised patients who were treated with large doses of Vitamin D, and a 64 per cent reduction in death. The possibility of these being chance findings are infinitesimally small, note the researchers. And to boot, the study found no side-effects even when these mega-doses were given short term to the hospitalised patients
One other fact about Cuba is that it is an island-nation that has sunshine all year-round that gives you natural vitamin-D. So why did Cuban authorities close the beaches? In fact, many countries around the world who have beaches did the same thing and that just makes no logical sense at all.
Cuba is also pushing forward with a plan to vaccinate its children from the early age of 2 through 18 with 2 doses of Soberana-2 vaccine that was developed by Cuban scientists. According to Reuters
“Cuba will begin vaccinating adolescents against COVID-19 this week and younger children from mid-September as part of a drive to immunize more than 90% of the population by December, state-run media said on Wednesday” continued “all children ages 2 through 18 will receive at least two doses of the Cuban-developed Soberana-2 vaccine beginning Sept. 3, the official Cubadebate digital news outlet reported.”
Maybe the vaccine is safe according to their data and its most likely a traditional vaccine that has nothing to do with the new MRNA technology found in Pfizer and the Moderna vaccines, but for everything that can make you sick should not require a vaccine.
“Both Cuban vaccines, with a reported efficacy of more than 90%, have been approved by local regulators for emergency use, although the data has not yet been published in peer-reviewed journals.”
There are alternative drugs that can either cure you from Covid-19 or reduce the chances of you getting sick such as Ivermectin and vitamin D to name a few. Now Cuban officials say “the campaign would resemble annual vaccinations against various childhood diseases, taking place at thousands of community-based family medical practices and clinics” meaning forever Covid-19 vaccinations will be the new normal.
For a drug as essential as ivermectin, with today’s accumulating evidence of its benefit in treating COVID-19, at all its stages, the number of randomized double-blind peer-reviewed studies will never be high enough for the Vaccine believer.
No paper, no scientist, even one with five Nobel Prizes, will ever convince the Vaccine believer. On the other hand, for the God of Vaccines, any contradictory information will be fake news, disinformation, automatically demolished by the fact checkers, even before being analyzed, which it will never be anyways by the believers of the Vaccine.
The Vaccination religion feeds on the scientific aura, drapes itself in objectivity, rationality but in the case of Vaccination, it is only that, rags, appearance, fog. In reality, the belief in vaccination is nothing but subjectivity, emotionality and faith. The “science” of Vaccination, as it is spread among today’s fundamentalists, is a parasite of true Science, a tumor invading true medicine
One thing I will say about the Cuban medical system is at least they are not driven by western-based pharmaceutical cartels and the profits associated with it or have a plan to depopulate the island-nation, they are not part of that globalist agenda.
The main problem is that they believe the only way that they can combat Covid-19 effectively is through the use of vaccines. Granted they had some success at fighting other diseases such as lung cancer with their own vaccine developed by the Center for Molecular Immunology called Cimavax which has shown to help patients with terminal lung cancer live at least 3-months longer. But for the purpose of defeating covid-19, vaccines should not be the only way to fight a disease.
Can the RT-PCR Test Realistically Confirm Covid-19 Cases?
Cuba uses the RT-PCR test which has been controversial to say the least. However, according to the Pan-American Journal of Public Health who released a special report by the Cuban National Health Systemtitled ‘Equity and the Cuban National Health System’s response to COVID-19’ shows the confidence level of the Cuban government by using the Covid-19 RT-PCR test:
Use of the real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test was essential for confirming cases. Administration of these tests increased as the epidemic gained momentum, with a relatively uniform distribution across most of the regions. The main exception was the capital, which was the epicenter of the epidemic from the outset
Acknowledged both by scientific opinion and the WHO, the RT-PCR test used to “detect” the spread of the virus (as well as the variants) is not only flawed but TOTALLY INVALID”
Chossudovsky points out what was admitted by the WHO in terms of the accuracy of the RT-PCR test in what he described as a carefully formulated retraction:
WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)
WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity
What is more evident of the RT-PCR test on what it really does was discussed by its inventor, Kary Mullis, a chemist who won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry back in 1993 for his invention of the polymerase chain reaction(PCR) technique. Here is what he said about the results of the PCR test and what implications it has:
An article published on May 28, 2021 by oncubanews.com‘Cuba develops its own digital COVID vaccination passport’ reported that Cuba is falling indirectly in-line with the global medical establishment who are relentless in promoting vaccine passports, “Cuba is developing its own digital Covid vaccination passport, similar to the one promoted by other countries and regions of the world, the official media reported” which is not a good sign:
The Cuban passport is a project of the University of Computer Sciences (UCI) and is currently in the testing phase. “The different versions of the digital vaccination passports existing in the world were analyzed” for its creation, Allan Pierra Fuentes, director of the Technological Support Center of that house of advanced studies, commented to Granma daily.
The digital document developed by the UCI uses a QR code, “which will include the encrypted data of each person with an authorized signature, recognized by the WHO, which would only be provided by the Ministry of Public Health (MINSAP) and which can be read anywhere in the world, as it follows international standards,” said the publication
This is unbelievable to say the least. Pierra Fuentes, director of the Technological Support Center of that house of higher studies said that
“the idea is that any Cuban can have that digital passport printed, in the application on a mobile phone, send it by mail to the interested party or that it can be seen as an image on the cell phone,” he continued, “with that objective they have developed “three fundamental computing solutions.”
Pierra Fuentes explains the three computing solutions that will supposedly make life easy for the Cuban people:
The first of these solutions is a web page in which “users enter their vaccination data and the digital passport is generated,” while the second is “the verifier, capable of saying what information is stored by that QR code and if it was generated with a valid signature,” the source said.
Finally, the third application is the so-called “Passport Wallet,” which, according to the specialist, “will allow not only the user to have information, but also of other people in the family, and it can be displayed once it is requested”
According to Granma, Cuba’s official newspaper said that the digital passport is to impose a
“health certification at the border” that will “provide Cubans and foreigners vaccinated in Cuba with the possibility of traveling with a valid vaccination document.”
The digital passport will also “regulate access to public places of concentration with health interest.”
This is a disappointing. It falls into the hands of the global establishment who want to impose a global medical dictatorship and Cuba is just blindly going along with this insanity.
Why Cuba Should Change Its Course of Action Regarding its Covid-19 Response
So why is Cuba following the Covid-19 narrative that has paralyzed the world? Cuba has brilliant doctors and researchers that are capable of doing the necessary research to determine Covid-19 is an over-exaggerated lie, yes it does exist, but it is no more dangerous than the seasonal flu.
I understand that Cuba wants to uphold its reputation around the world as a responsible nation with an advanced medical system that has helped numerous people in-need around the world for decades, but their ideas about Covid-19 is clearly wrong on every level in terms of the lockdown and its mandates it had imposed right from the start. From mandating the use of facemasks or their vaccines as a cure-for-all to developing its digital vaccination passports, they are in fact heading in the wrong direction.
If the Cuban government researched what is behind the Covid-19 agenda to control and enslave humanity, they would expose the truth to the world. Their legacy stands as one of the main Latin American nations who resisted the US empire which did become an inspiration to many of us around the world. By exposing the Covid-19 scam, Cuba could essentially create a second revolution against a medical tyranny that has crippled many nations both rich and poor.
This is not going to end anytime soon, so it’s time for them to re-evaluate what is actually going on around us and join a new worldwide revolution against the New World Order’s medical agenda that wants to have every nation on earth including Cuba, under their 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.
Timothy Alexander Guzman writes on his blog site, Silent Crow News, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
L’esplosione dei prezzi del gas colpisce l’Europa nel momento critico della ripresa economica, dopo i disastrosi effetti dei lockdown del 2020. La spiegazione che ciò è dovuto alla crescita della domanda e al calo dell’offerta nasconde un quadro ben più complesso, in cui svolgono un ruolo primario fattori finanziari, politici e strategici. Gli Stati uniti accusano la Russia di usare il gas quale arma geopolitica, riducendo le forniture per costringere i governi europei a stipulare contratti a lungo termine con la Gazprom, come ha fatto la Germania col gasdotto North Stream. Washington preme sull’Unione europea perché si sganci dalla «dipendenza energetica» dalla Russia, che la rende «ostaggio» di Mosca.
Fondamentalmente per effetto di tale pressione sono calati nella Ue i contratti a lungo termine con la Gazprom per l’importazione di gas russo, mentre sono aumentati gli acquisti sui mercati spot (o cash), dove si acquistano partite di gas che vengono pagate in contanti nell’arco della giornata. La differenza è sostanziale: mentre col contratto a lungo termine si acquista gas a un prezzo basso, che viene mantenuto costante negli anni, nei mercati spot si acquista gas a prezzi volatili, generalmente molto più alti, determinati da speculazioni finanziarie nelle Borse merci. Enormi quantità di materie prime minerali e agricole vengono acquistate con contratti futures, che prevedono la consegna a una data stabilita e al prezzo convenuto al momento della stipula.
La strategia dei potenti gruppi finanziari che speculano su questi contratti è quella di far lievitare i prezzi delle materie prime (compresa l’acqua) per rivendere i futures a un prezzo più alto. Per avere un’idea del volume delle transazioni speculative delle Borse merci, basti pensare che solo la statunitense Chicago Mercantile Exchange, con sedi a Chicago e New York, effettua 3 miliardi di contratti l’anno per l’ammontare di un milione di miliardi di dollari (oltre dieci volte il valore del pil mondiale, ossia del valore reale prodotto in un anno nel mondo). Nel 2020, mentre l’economia mondiale era in gran parte paralizzata, il numero dei futures e contratti analoghi ha raggiunto il livello record di 46 miliardi, il 35% in più rispetto al 2019, provocando un rialzo dei prezzi delle materie prime.
Contemporaneamente, gli Usa premono sulla Ue perché sostituisca al gas russo quello statunitense. Nel 2018, con la dichiarazione congiunta tra il presidente Trump e il presidente della Commissione europea Juncker, l’Unione europea si è impegnata a «importare più gas naturale liquefatto (Lng) dagli Stati uniti per diversificare il suo approvvigionamento energetico». Il gas che arriva nella Ue è estratto negli Usa da scisti bituminosi con una tecnica di fratturazione che provoca danni ambientali gravissimi; viene quindi liquefatto raffreddandolo a -161°C e trasportato con navi gasiere a circa 30 terminali in Europa, dove viene rigassificato. Il gas statunitense, nonostante goda di benefici statali, resta molto più caro di quello russo e, per entrare nel mercato, ha bisogno che il prezzo generale del gas si mantenga ad alti livelli.
Si aggiunge a tutto questo la «guerra dei gasdotti», quella che l’Italia ha pagato a caro prezzo quando nel 2014 l’amministrazione Obama, di concerto con la Commissione europea, ha bloccato il South Stream, il gasdotto in fase avanzata di realizzazione che, in base all’accordo tra Eni e Gazprom, avrebbe portato direttamente in Italia attraverso il Mar Nero gas russo a basso prezzo. La Russia ha aggirato l’ostacolo con il TurkStream che, attraverso il Mar Nero, porta il gas russo nel lembo europeo della Turchia, proseguendo nei Balcani per rifornire Serbia e Croazia.
Il 29 settembre a Budapest, la Gazprom e la compagnia Mvm Energy hanno firmato due contratti a lungo termine per la fornitura all’Ungheria di gas russo a basso prezzo per 15 anni. Una sconfitta per Washington, appesantita dal fatto che Ungheria e Croazia fanno parte della Nato. Washington sicuramente risponderà non solo sul piano economico, ma su quello politico e strategico. Il conto lo paghiamo noi, con il rincaro delle bollette e in genere del costo della vita.
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).
The gas price explosion hits Europe at the critical moment of economic recovery after the disastrous effects of the 2020 lockdowns. The explanation, claiming it is due to the growth in demand and decline in supply, hides a much more complex scenario, where financial, political and strategic factors play a primary role.
The United States accused Russia of using gas as a geopolitical weapon, reducing supplies to force European governments to enter into long-term contracts with Gazprom, as Germany did with the North Stream pipeline. Washington pressed on the European Union to free from its “energy dependence” on Russia making itself a “hostage” to Moscow.
Basically, as a result of this pressure long-term contracts with Gazprom for Russian gas import have dropped in the EU, while purchasing on the spot (or cash) markets have increased, where gas lots are purchased and paid for in cash throughout the day. The difference is substantial: while you buy gas with a long-term contract at a low price, which is kept constant over the years, in the spot markets you buy gas at volatile prices, generally much higher, and determined by financial speculations in the Commodities Exchanges.
Huge quantities of mineral and agricultural raw materials are purchased with future contracts, which provide for delivery on a set date and at the price agreed upon at the time of signing. The strategy of powerful financial groups, that speculate on these contracts, is to raise the prices of raw materials (including water) to resell futures at a higher price.
To get an idea of the speculative transaction volume of the Commodities Exchanges, just think that only the US Chicago Mercantile Exchange, with offices in Chicago and New York, carries out 3 billion contracts a year for one million-billion-dollar amount (over ten times the value of world GDP, or the real value produced in a year in the world). In 2020, while the world economy was largely paralyzed, the number of futures and similar contracts reached a record level of 46 billion, 35% more than in 2019, causing a rise in commodity prices.
At the same time, the U.S. is pressing the EU to replace Russian gas with U.S. gas. In 2018, in a joint statement between President Trump and European Commission President Juncker, the EU pledged to “import more liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the United States to diversify its energy supply.” The gas that arrives in the EU is extracted in the U.S. from oil shale using a fracturing technique that causes serious environmental damage; it is then liquefied by cooling it to -161°C and transported by gas tankers to about 30 terminals in Europe, where it is regasified. US gas, despite enjoying state benefits, remains much more expensive than Russian gas and, in order to enter the market, needs the general price of gas to remain at high levels.
Add to all this the “gas pipeline war”, a war that Italy paid dearly when in 2014 the Obama Administration, in agreement with the European Commission, blocked South Stream, the gas pipeline at an advanced stage of construction which would have brought low-cost Russian gas directly to Italy via the Black Sea under the agreement between Italian Eni and Gazprom.
Russia has circumvented the obstacle with the TurkStream which across the Black Sea carries Russian gas to the European edge of Turkey, continuing to supply Serbia and Croatia in the Balkans. On September 29 in Budapest, Gazprom and the MVM Energy Company signed two long-term contracts for the supply of low-cost Russian gas to Hungary for 15 years. A defeat for Washington, weighed down by the fact that Hungary and Croatia are part of NATO.
Washington will certainly respond not only economically, but politically and strategically. We will pay the bill, with the increase of gas bills, and the cost of living in general.
*
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.
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).
These social reforms are meant to address some of the more glaring social contradictions produced by four decades of neoliberal policies, but with the objective to strengthen capitalism and preempt radicalism.
For more than a week the country has been caught up in the ongoing melodrama of the “Build Back Better” (BBB) legislation, the Democrat Party’s “social investment” bill now languishing in the House because of the inability of the Democrats to come to an agreement. The fight is characterized by the corporate media as an intra-party struggle between the emerging “progressive/left” pole of the Party and the “center,” represented by the recalcitrant neoliberal corporate Democrats in the persons of Senators Joe Manchin from West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema from Arizona.
But the media’s tendency to reduce this struggle to a battle of personalities distorts, in a fundamental way, the real interests at play in this fight. The intra-party struggle of Democrats is a crystallization of the complex and contradictory reality of the intra-class struggle within the dominant wing of the capitalist class on the correct strategies for dealing with the ongoing and deepening capitalist crisis.
The real terms of the struggle are between the class faction that sees the need to preempt potential radical working-class rebellion by making non-threatening reforms meant to bring some psychological relief and minor material benefits to the laboring classes as some of the provisions in the BBB legislation would bring.
Another faction of the ruling class, however, is concerned with the legislation’s cost, the threat it poses to their economic interests, and a potentially dangerous shift of influence, if not power, to the laboring classes. They see expanded social-welfare spending as inflationary and providing leverage to the working class. Being militantly committed to the logic of the neoliberal project, this faction wants to hold the line on government spending, impose austerity at every level of government and is opposed to state interventions into the economy that would reduce the precarity of workers by undermining the carefully constructed labor management policy goals that have been faithfully carried over the last forty years of discipling U.S. labor and driving down its costs in the U.S.
It is imperative that the left, particularly left forces representing Black and nationally oppressed peoples, employ a materialist, class analysis as the lens and framework to inform their critique of the BBB legislation. If we fail to engage this legislation in this way, we run the risk of inadvertently helping to obfuscate the political and ideological agenda of capital, whose objective is to dissipate and manage the class struggle
Was Build Back Better Really Intended to Be Passed in Its Entirety?
It is clear that the main focus of Joe Biden’s legislative priority was getting the infrastructure bill passed. It received bipartisan support and was able to pass in the Senate, and is being supported by a majority in the House because it represents the consensus across all elements of the capitalist class.
That consensus, however, does not exist for the BBB. Yet, there is a reason that Joe Biden, the consensus choice of the neoliberal ruling class, embraced a number of reforms during his campaign and after assuming office that cannot be understood as just the result of “pressure” from the left-pole of his party.
The fact that Biden was comfortable enough to at least pretend to be committed to a number of “liberal” policies like expanding Medicaid and investing in pre-K and child-care was precisely because an important faction of the capitalist class has arrived at the position that, if not correctly managed, the more blunt-edge elements of domestic neoliberalism were posing dangerous and potentially irreversible legitimation challenges to the entire system.
From advocating for a 70% marginal tax rate and 3% tax on every dollar over one billion in wealth to support a basic income for every “American,” and redefining the role of corporations to entities committed to serving “all of the people,” tThe Business Roundtable, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and capitalists like Warren Buffet and the CEO of BlackRock represent the tendency among the U.S.-based but transnationally-oriented capitalist class that sees redistributionist state policies and some kind of brake on the obscene economic inequality as vital to preempt serious social upheavals from workers and members of a shrinking middle-class.
The editors at the Wall Street Journal, the flagship paper of the U.S. ruling class, also argued that adjustments to what has been called neoliberalism had to be made.
But the editors of the Financial Times, the paper of choice for the international bourgeoisie, made what was a startling claim on April 4, 2020 that the era of neoliberalism was basically over:
“Radical reforms – reversing the prevailing policy direction of the last four decades – will need to be put on the table. Governments will have to accept a more active role in the economy. They must see public services as investments rather than liabilities and look for ways to make labor markets less insecure. Redistribution will again be on the agenda; the privileges of the elderly and wealthy in question. Policies until recently considered eccentric, such as basic income and wealth taxes, will have to be in the mix.”
Biden got the message and shared his thinking on how to advance a public relations approach that would offer some marginal and temporary relief without changing anything when he told his Wall Street funders:
“When you have income inequality as large as we have in the United States today, it brews and ferments political discord and basic revolution. It allows demagogues to step in and blame ‘the other’ . . . You all know in your gut what has to be done. We can disagree in the margins. But the truth of the matter is, it is all within our wheelhouse and nobody has to be punished. No one’s standard of living would change. Nothing would fundamentally change.”
Just a few months ago, what was once unthinkable, ideas that were rejected as extreme and a threat, are now subject of serious discussion, not because capitalists have suddenly experienced a scrooge-like transformation but because they are recognizing that even the absence of a militant movement putting pressure on them, they have to have stop-gap measures to address the now glaring contradiction of neoliberal capitalism that the economic crisis in 2008 and the 2020 pandemic exposed. Therefore, there is no “radical” departure here. The consummate servant of capital, Biden, is simply carrying out the new program.
However, what is also becoming clear is that the BBB was not meant to be passed in whole. It was pure political theater meant to placate the Party’s “left-pole.” The real target is/was the infrastructure bill. The Party bosses’ plan was to draw the progressives into a deal in which they would support the infrastructure bill, accept a “framework” for the BBB that would then get whittled down and backlogged with delayed spending that would then get reduced even more when the Republicans came back into office.
The clashing of interests within the ruling class, even among some of those same elements who supported some minor ameliorative reforms and the delay in passing the BBB as a result of the progressives holding firm, suggest that the above scenario is not that far fetched.
Welcome the Change, But Recognize the Ruling Class’s Fears and Build for More Independent Power
The New York Times is correct: “The Build Back Better Act is centrism taken seriously;,” it is “an effort to fix American democracy through economic support rather than structural political change.”
So, while the left could welcome this so-called stimulus bill if it is passed in whole, we must not have any illusions. The capitalist class is clear. They are supportive of this partial Keynesianism as long as the policies do not threaten their fundamental interests or require real sacrifices for their class.
For workers, and especially Black and other colonized workers and the poor, the provision for universal pre-K and support for child-care, paid parental leave, expanded Medicaid and Medicare, free community college, new funding for public housing support, elder-care, and possibilities of new job creation as a result of public investments in green-oriented industries, are important.
However, it is equally important that we do not become cheerleaders for what the rulers understand, perhaps better than some of us, that these social reforms are meant to address some of the more glaring social contradictions produced by four decades of neoliberal policies, but with the objective to strengthen capitalism and preempt radicalism.
Biden’s mission is to restore U.S. capitalism’s profitability, ability to compete with China, and to preempt domestic radicalization. By advancing reforms that blunt some of the sharpest contradictions of the system, it is believed that it will stabilize the neoliberal order while not substantially reversing the logic of labor discipline that four decades of neoliberal policies have created.
Yet, it is truly an “impossible mission.” The competing and conflicting interests among capitalist factions will continue to make it impossible for their class to support a relative “disciplining” of their fractional interests for the longer-term interests of the system. Once the “progressives” did not cave and insisted on both bills being passed together, not only did the Pelosi/Schumer/Biden plan fail, but the delay of the vote also exposed the irreconcilable interests among the ruling class.
Powerful capitalist associations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), and Business Roundtable, as well as energy company interest groups like the American Petroleum Institute (API) are vigorously challenging the climate elements in the bill. Democratic Party representatives are also getting enormous pressure from the pharmaceutical and health insurance companies.
And the corporate media is constructing a narrative that is shifting the blame for a deal not being done unto the “progressives” as opposed to the two front persons for the neoliberal agenda, which, of course, exposes the con that those two individuals were the real holdouts.
Therefore, Biden and Democrats’ “Keynesianism” is strategic. It is designed to draw the millions of workers back to the Democratic Party that voted for Obama but went over to Trump and reversed the dangerous legitimation crisis generated by the capitalist crisis that began in 2008 and deepened with COVID in 2020 and exposed the precarious nature of the economic rebound that Trump was claiming for himself up to that moment.
The expansion of welfare state spending will do little to mitigate the profound social inequalities of the U.S. Expanded social programs cannot reverse the structural contradictions caused by stagnant wages, escalating housing costs, tendencies toward continued and deepening unemployment with automation, AI, continued offshoring, unaffordable and inadequate access to healthcare, a class-based discriminatory education funding, and a crumbling public transportation system.
The people are starting to understand that radical change is necessary. The question is what kind of change. Those of us on the left who are committed to socialism know that as long as the means of production are in the hands of a few, the wealth that is generated in the production process will continue to produce obscene levels of wealth inequality in capitalist societies that translates into the power to dominate, dehumanize, and degrade the rest of us.
So, we should accept these reforms but fight for more. Workers, in particular women workers, will benefit materially if those provisions that address child poverty, childcare, the grotesque levels of maternal and infant mortality among Black and Brown working class women. And, therefore, cannot be casually dismissed as unimportant.
But we will not give unearned praise to our class enemies. We must fight even more furiously knowing that they fear us, and that victory is ours to claim.
From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
*
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 Common Dreams.
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).
The best definition of a strike is when ‘workers withhold their labor’ for better wages and working conditions. The conventional wisdom is that unions go on strike. But that is incorrect. Workers go on strike and they don’t necessarily need to be members of unions. That fact is evident today as millions of US workers are refusing to return to their jobs. They are ‘withholding their labor’ searching for better pay and a future.
We are witnessing the ‘Great Strike of 2021’ and it’s composed mostly of millions low paid non-unionized workers!
Workers returned to jobs at a rate of 889,000 a month during the 2nd quarter 2021 (April-June) as the economy reopened. That average fell to only 280,000 per month in the just completed 3rd quarter 2021 (July-Sept), according to the Economic Policy Institute.
The most recent September month figure was only 194,000 jobs were refilled, according to the US Labor Department’s monthly ‘Employment Situation Report. That missed mainstream economists’ prediction of 500,000.
According to various Tables in the US Labor Department’s monthly ‘Employment Situation Reports’ (A-1, A-13, B-1), only half of the workers who were jobless at the start of 2021 have returned to work. Officially, per the Labor Dept. more than 5 million still have not. But that 5 million is a gross under-estimation. It doesn’t count the 3 millions more who have dropped out of the labor force altogether and are no less jobless than those officially recorded as unemployed. Nor does the 5 million include a several million or so workers who were mis-classified by the Labor Dept. as employed in March 2020 when the pandemic began simply because they indicated when surveyed by the government that they expected to return to work even though they weren’t working at the time of survey. The Labor Dept. soon thereafter acknowledged it was an error to count them as employed, but to date it has still refused to correct the numbers. That number of mis-classified as employed today remains around 1 million or so.
So there are somewhere around 8 to 10 million workers in the US still without any work at all, (which doesn’t account for the millions more who are underemployed working part time or a few hours a week here and there).
Many of the 9 million or so are not returning to work out of choice—i.e. they are ‘withholding their labor’. They are in effect on strike for something better.
While most are low paid, their ranks aren’t limited to just those industries that first come to mind—like hospitality or retail work. The ranks of the low paid are common across nearly all industries in the US today, not just hospitality or retail.
Comparing the US Labor Dept.’s level of employment as of September 2021 to the pre-pandemic months of January-February 2020, number show workers withholding their labor is widespread across industries and occupations: Leisure & Hospitality shows 1.6 million fewer working today, in September 2021, compared with pre-pandemic months of January-February 2020. But the Health Care industry, with hundreds of thousands low paid workers in home health care and clinics, shows 524,000 fewer employed today compared to January 2020. Professional & Personal business services shortfall is 385,000; Education services—with its hundreds of thousands of adjuncts in higher education and millions of K-12 teachers paid low wages in small non-union school districts—is down by no fewer than 676,000. One would think manufacturing was a case to the contrary. But no. Millions of manufacturing workers are employed as ‘temps’ with low pay and no benefits—even in union contracts. Manufacturing has 353,000 fewer jobs today than it had in early January 2020. Ditto for Construction, with 201,000 fewer. And so on.
That’s more than 5 million fewer—not counting those having dropped out of the labor force altogether or those still mis-classified as working.
It’s safe to assume that at least half of the 9 million with no work whatsoever are refusing to return to work out of choice. That’s 4 to 5 million who are de facto ‘on strike’. The USA is in the midst of the ‘Great Strike of 2021’, involving millions of the low paid and super-exploited US workers across virtually all US industries!
Signs are beginning to appear that their example may now be spreading to the unionized workforce as well. Union contract renewals are being rejected—and strikes imminent or in progress—in industries from food processing (Kellog workers) to agricultural equipment (John Deere) to hospitals and healthcare on the west coast. These are large union bargaining units involving thousands, and tens of thousands of union workers.
Capitalist Ideology: Reversing Cause & Effect
Employers, business media, politicians and most mainstream economists won’t acknowledge they’re in a strike wave of both the unorganized and organized. They are united, however, in trying to blame the workers for what is a de facto walk out by millions. They are all lamenting, and scratching their heads, with no answers as to why so many workers are not returning to their jobs or willing to leave them—especially now that vaccines are available and employers are advertising job openings.
Their explanation earlier this past summer was unemployment benefits were too generous and were thus responsible for keeping millions of workers not returning to work. This theme was especially popular among politicians in the Red states. Starting last June 2021 many Red state governors and legislatures unilaterally and pre-emptively cut unemployment benefits, even though the benefits were to continue until September. The then went silent as data over the summer showed that the few ‘blue’ states that did not cut benefits early—like California, New Jersey, etc.—actually showed a greater rate of return of workers to their jobs over the summer than did Red states that cut unemployment benefits early. So much for that argument.
Now the drumbeat by employers, politicians, and Red states is that child care benefits and improvement in food stamps are keeping workers from returning. It’s the old employer strike strategy: starve them out and they’ll come back to work.
In other words, workers’ refusing to return to work has nothing to do with unlivable low wages, with lack of alternative health care for themselves and their families since returning to work means loss of government COBRA payments or Medicaid, with unavailable or unaffordable child care. It has nothing to do with employers offering many workers to return to work but at fewer hours and no guarantee of hours needed to ensure sufficient weekly earnings to cover their bills. It has nothing to do with employers insisting on unstable family-destroying work schedules, no civilized paid leave, and in general no hope for the future ever getting out of what is in effect a system of modern work indenture afflicting tens of millions of US workers today.
According to many employers, their media, and their politicians, it’s the fault of the workers themselves. They’ve been given too much during the pandemic and now they don’t want to work! That’s the Capitalist mantra and explanation for the millions refusing to return.
With that explanation, employers, media, politicians and mainstream economists turn reality on its head! As is typical of the language games played by capitalist ideology, they have reversed cause and effect. The victims—the workers—are the cause of the problem and not the result or effect. Workers are the cause of the rate of job returns falling by two-thirds the past three months compared to the previous April-June period. Left unmentioned is the decades-long practices of paying unlivable low wages, few or no benefits, and working conditions so inadequate that virtually all other advanced capitalist economy have abandoned them years ago (i.e. no paid leave, child care, national health care, etc.).
The more accurate way to look at what’s going on is that perhaps as many as half of the 9 to 10 million still without any work today are withholding their labor and looking for better wages, benefits, conditions, and new jobs that provide some hope for the future. 4 to 5 million US workers are in effect ‘On Strike’.
The Great Strike Wave of 1970-71
The last great strike wave in America was 50 years ago, in 1970-71. At that time it was union workers who walked out en masse in construction, trucking, auto, on the docks and in dozens of other big manufacturing, construction and transport companies.
This working class history has largely been ignored by academics and the capitalist media. Probably because the strikes were so successful, in nearly all instances the striking workers and their unions winning big victories! On average, that strike wave resulted in 25% immediate increases in wages and benefits in no more than three year term agreements. The workers and unions could not be stopped by employers. They were so successful the companies had to turn to the US government to halt the successful strikes and contract settlements. They turned to Nixon, president at the time, in the summer of 1971 who quickly issued emergency executive orders to freeze wages won by the strikes and then roll back the 25% wage and benefit gains to no more than 5.5%.
The wage freeze and rollbacks were central elements to Nixon’s so-called New Economic Program (NEP) issued that same August 1971 along with the wage freeze. In the NEP Nixon also attacked US Capitalist competitors in Europe and elsewhere with various trade measures and by ended the guarantee of exchanging the US dollar for 32 ounces of gold. That blew up what was called the ‘Bretton Woods’ international capitalist system that the US itself had set up in 1944.
In the former great strike wave of 1970-71 there were 10,800 strikes during the two years, with more than 6.6 million workers participating and 114 million work days lost due to the strikes. The 1970-71 strike wave was in some ways as great as the preceding big wave of 1945-46. In that period there were approximately 9,750 strikes involving 8.1 million workers resulting in an even larger 154 million work days lost due to the strikes. (Source: Analysis of Work Stoppages, US Department of Labor, Bulletin 1777, 1973)
Fast forward another half century, to the present day. There are almost as many workers ‘withholding their labor’ at around 4 to 5 million—with the number possibly rising as union workers join their ranks as their contracts expire. Number of work days lost is still to be estimated. But there is no doubt that there’s a new militancy rising, as workers take their fate into their own hands—or should one say ‘with their feet’ as they walk away from their jobs and withhold their labor!
What’s different today is today’s Great Strike of 2021 is not led by the unions. Private sector unions in the US have been decimated and almost destroyed since 1980 as a consequence of Neoliberal policies of decades of offshoring of jobs, free trade agreements, and massive government tax subsidies to corporations to replace workers with automation, machinery, and new capital equipment.
Replacing this job destruction the past four decades were tens of millions of low paid minimum wage and substandard service, temp, part-time, gig and similar indentured ‘precariate’ jobs as they are called. The recent Covid crisis exacerbated and deepened the economic contraction of 2020-21. And now the low paid, precarious, and de facto indentured work force are in revolt.
Many industries and companies are now having to raise their wages and pay recall or hiring bonuses to try to get workers to return, as they continue to withhold their labor and create a labor supply shortage. Shortages of labor supply usually mean wages must rise. But the practice is uneven across industries and still largely anecdotal.
Historical Significance of the Great Strike of 2021
The US is in the midst of an historical event. Sections of the US working class may be awakening—on their own—and not led by unions that have either been destroyed or are being led by senior union leaders who don’t want to strike out of concern it might ‘embarrass’ their Democrat Party senior friends.
The great strike of 2021 is composed, in contrast, of mostly the non-unionized workforce—lower paid service workers, independent long haul truckers, delivery drivers in the cities, hospitality workers in hotel and restaurant service, workers in retail, on local construction projects, teachers and school bus drivers, nurses ‘burned out’ by chronic overtime, warehouse and food processing workers pushed to the limit for the past 18 months, home care aide workers exploited by US middleman ‘coyotes’, and so on. The list is long.
Mainstream economists and politicians have very little understanding of the fundamental, structural changes to production processes and to product-service markets that the Covid period and deep contraction has wrought. Those changes are still be revealed. And many will prove profound. The restructuring of US labor markets now appearing is just the beginning The Great Strike of 2021 is but the symptom. Product markets and global distribution of goods and services are under similar great stress and change as well. Not least, the full effect of financial asset markets—i.e. stocks, bonds, derivatives, forex, digital currency, etc.—is yet to be felt as well. That one is yet to come and when it does may prove the most de-stabilizing of all.
*
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.
Jack Rasmus blogs at http://jackrasmus.com and hosts the weekly radio show, Alternative Visions, on the Progressive Radio Network every Friday at 2pm eastern time. Join him at twitter for daily updates at @drjackrasmus.
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).
There have been a number of suggestions online that the withdrawal of American soldiers from overseas is being undertaken to use the troops against those individuals and domestic groups that are being targeted by the Justice Department. The possibility has a certain coherency given that we have a White House that it believes it has the right to forcefully inflict medical procedures on anyone who happens to live in the US, but it falls down due to the fact that the soldiers themselves might side with the dissidents as they are being sent to reeducation camps and subsequently weeded out based on their political views, even to the extent of having their social media covertly monitored. Quis custodet custodes?, one must ask.
If there is one thing that all Americans should feel pleased with the Republican Party performance it is the fact that the then Republican dominated Senate was able to block President Barack Obama’s bid to place Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court. The downside of that is, of course, that he now is Joe Biden’s Attorney General, where he is very well placed to engage in mischief that will potentially affect all Americans. In fact, he has proven to be a more than willing accomplice in the social engineering that the Biden Administration is engaged in, to include his declaration of war against white supremacists as the single greatest terrorist threat the United States faces today.
One might well recall Taki Theodoracopulos’s recent comment that “If America survives in its current form, years from now people will wonder how society was enslaved by a minority of privileged people who would surrender and give up their mother at the first sign of an attack.” That defines Garland and those around him, but he is generally regarded by the media and those who care about such things, as a moderate, judicially speaking. As I can hardly confirm his actual views on anything, I would not dispute that assessment, but I would note that he certainly walks like a standard Democratic Party liberal duck since he has been appointed Attorney General, very tolerant of bizarre “woke” culture and taking the lead on finding and punishing domestic terrorists. The enemies list admittedly features white supremacists regarded ipso facto as extremists, but it now also includes parents who do not support “critical race theory” (CRT) in the nation’s public schools.
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky has observed how “The Department of Justice’s fight against angry parents is a real testament to the authoritarian nature of the Biden administration and indeed, the entirety of the left. It takes a lot of hubris to declare that you know how to raise someone’s child better than them and send authorities to shut you down when you protest that.” To be sure, Critical Race Theory has been fairly criticized as it pretends to be an antidote to systemic racism but is itself racist in nature as it opposes a race neutral system that equally benefits everyone. It proposes that America’s governmental bodies and infrastructures are racist and supportive of “white supremacy” and must be deconstructed. It requires everything to be examined through a value system determined by identity politics and race and it views both whites and their institutions as hopelessly corrupted, if not evil. This is what will be taught to children and this is why parents are protesting.
One has to wonder if a “moderate” jurist would support using the nation’s law enforcement resources to come down on hard on people, most of whom are committing something that might be referred to as thought crimes. The mainstream media has little to say on the issue, most probably because Garland is a protected species called “Jewish” and he is also serving a liberal Democratic Administration. One notes in particular that Garland has said nothing about intensifying FBI efforts to identify, arrest, prosecute and confine the black lives matter punks who rioted, burned and looted last summer, causing billions of dollars-worth of damage, and beating and even killing those who resisted. Could it be because they are part of the Democratic Party coalition?
Some of the press coverage on Garland that does exist is embarrassing because it is exculpatory of what might be an egregious violation of the Constitution by a government that might be described truthfully as neo-totalitarian. Indeed, Garland’s most recent pronouncement on cracking down on CRT critics triggered an approving puff piece from Newsweek, which once upon a time was considered a reliable news magazine.
The article is headlined “Merrick Garland Tackles Threats to Educators Amid Critical Race Theory Furor,” which is all you need to know about what will follow. Per News-weak and Garland, educators are being threatened by racists. Its lead paragraphs states that “Attorney General Merrick Garland is taking aim at intimidation and threats of violence directed at educators and school administrators who are working to give children ‘a proper education in a safe environment.’ Garland issued a memorandum to FBI Director Christopher Wray and federal prosecutors on Monday saying there had been a ‘disturbing spike’ in threats against school personnel and promising to take measures to deal with the issue. The move from the Department of Justice comes after fraught scenes at school board meetings across the country, with heated exchanges about COVID-19 regulations and Critical Race Theory (CRT).”
Garland’s action was reportedly in response to a letter from the politically left-leaning National School Boards Association (NSBA) to President joe Biden on September 29th, comparing threats against school personnel to “domestic terrorism.” It said “…many public school officials are…facing physical threats because of propaganda purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory within classroom instruction and curricula. As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”
Garland is mobilizing what he refers to as a “Partnership among federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement.” The FBI memorandum itself argues that “In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff who participate in the vital work of running our nation’s public schools. While spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our Constitution, that protection does not extend to threats of violence or efforts to intimidate individuals based on their views. Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values. Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety. The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate. In the coming days, the Department will announce a series of measures designed to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”
Merrick Garland, like Newsweek, makes pretty clear where he sits on the issue and it is beyond amusing to see him write about the “nation’s core values,” which he and his accomplices are attempting to subvert and destroy. The school boards are presumed to be completely innocent while the parents protesting against the “values” being forced down the throats of their children by the recently empowered “woke” fanatics who tend to make up many of the boards are the criminals. If Garland had looked a little deeper, he would have discovered that quite a lot of the harassment and intimidation is coming from the members of the school boards and their political allies in local government and the media, as has been evident in Loudoun County Virginia. Indeed, while Garland states his intention to stop those who would “intimidate individuals based on their views,” that is exactly what he and his friends in the world of education are trying to do, and succeeding in many places. A “proper education in a safe environment” is precisely what students are not receiving as standards are dropped and the focus on racism and transgenderism begin to influence and generally dominate what is in the curriculum, aided and abetted by hypocrites like Merrick Garland and his nominal boss the perpetually befuddled President Joe Biden.
No one can make a better assessment of what is happening to our country than former congressman Ron Paul. In a recent piece entitled “Parents Should Control Education” he observes: “In contrast to an authoritarian society, a free society recognizes that parents have both the responsibility and the right to provide their children with a quality education that reflects the parents’ values. Teachers who use their positions to indoctrinate children in beliefs that contradict the views of the parents are the ones overstepping their bounds. Restoring parental control of education should be a priority for all who believe in liberty. If government can override the wishes of parents in the name of ‘education’ or ‘protecting children’s health’ then what area of our lives is safe from government intrusion?”
Indeed Dr. Paul, with Merrick Garland at the helm and Captain Queeg in the White House no area of our lives is safe from the government.
*
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.
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 https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
Pigs and Canadian imperialism. Most people would have difficulty understanding the connection. But for many Haitians the relationship is a historical memory.
Recently, African Swine Fever (ASF) was detected in Haiti. Specialists were not surprised since a couple months earlier pigs in the neighboring Dominican Republic were detected with a disease that is harmless to humans but can kill hogs.
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency statement said it would support “efforts by the Dominican Republic and Haiti to manage the spread of ASF within their borders.” While seemingly innocuous, this statement could unearth deep scars among Haitians.
In the early 1980s Ottawa helped fund and oversee the eradication of the country’s “Creole” pigs. Fearing ASF from Haiti might harm the North American hog industry, the US and Canada pressured notorious dictator Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier to eradicate all the indigenous “Creole” pigs on the island and replace them with northern animals. A number of Agriculture Canada veterinarians and officials participated in the $17.3 million ($50 million today) campaign to eradicate the disease.
Despite receiving minimal compensation, Haitian pig owners largely complied with the order. Afterall, the experts from a wealthy and educated country like Canada must know best. Plus, paid informers reported on hidden pigs and Duvalier’s henchman threatened those failing to comply.
The campaign was highly effective. ASF was eliminated in Haiti but so were an entire breed of animals that “could make do with whatever food it found under foot, including human excrement.”
Rather than replace the pigs with similar animals from elsewhere in the Caribbean, hogs from Canada and the US were brought in. But, these ”improved breeds” required a pen, feed and other niceties far beyond the reach of most Haitian peasants. In effect, the foreign pigs could not survive Haiti’s harsh conditions.
An Agriculture Canada veterinarian who participated in the eradication later expressed regret about the slaughter. ”They should have kept a nucleus of creole pigs,” Roland Brunet told the Globe and Mail in 1987. “After all, it’s pretty terrible to have got rid of a breed that corresponded to the needs of the people.”
The pig eradication devastated the countryside. Hogs were the primary means for the peasantry to store wealth in case of emergency (to pay for school, seeds, baptisms or a funeral). A nearly 50% reduction in school enrollment was linked to the pig eradication. According to an estimate by a French veterinarian specializing in tropical medicine, 610,000 families owned at least one pig before the extermination, but by 1987 the number had fallen to 40,000 families. The eradication program wiped out much of the peasantry’s savings.
Jean-Jacques Delate labeled the eradication “a monumental blunder and a phenomenal swindle.” The French government funded veterinarian told the Globe and Mail, “the extermination profited only two countries, the United States and Canada. Canada was as dishonest as the United States.”
Haitians have not forgotten about the devastation wrought by this policy. A few months ago, Moïse Jean-Charles, one of the country’s most popular politicians, decried the pig eradication in a speech to hundreds of supporters.
Canada, and some Haitians, thought North Americans knew best 40 years ago. The result was an economic disaster for already poor farmers and some profits for Canadian and American agricultural interests. Does the Canadian Food Inspection Agency remember? Does it care? Or will it once again be used as an imperialist tool to extract wealth from people who have been exploited far too much?
*
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).
Argentina has extensive medical experience with ivermectin. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, it was used to treat dengue fever, which is endemic in Argentina
Early in the pandemic, Dr. Hector Carvallo, a retired medical professor in Argentina, devised two ivermectin trials to assess the drug’s usefulness against SARS-CoV-2. His treatment protocols are used in five Argentinian provinces. In one province, the death rate was reduced to one-third in less than a month, in the middle of the outbreak
When used preventatively, ivermectin is administered in conjunction with carrageenan, which also has antiviral properties
When treating mild cases, ivermectin is administered with aspirin; in moderate cases with aspirin and corticosteroids, and in severe cases, ivermectin is given with enoxaparin, an anticoagulant drug
These drug combinations were selected based on what was known about other viruses that cause similar health effects as SARS-CoV-2, such as the rhabdovirus’ effect on neurology, the paramyxovirus, which causes hyperinflammation in the lungs, and the dengue virus, which overamplifies the immune system
In this interview, we continue the COVID-19 discussion with a medical expert from Argentina, Dr. Hector Carvallo, whose focus since early 2020 has been the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.
Carvallo graduated from medical school in 1981 — the same year AIDS emerged as a global pandemic. In the first two years, AIDS killed 2 million people. Since 1981, it has claimed the lives of 35 million. While officially retired for a couple of years, the 2020 COVID pandemic brought him out of retirement.
“My first fire baptism was with AIDS,” he says. “I have dedicated my professional time to teaching and assisting. I graduated as a professor in 1996, and worked as a professor for the School of Medicine in Buenos Aires, which is public. Later, I was an associate professor of internal medicine for two private schools of medicine until I retired a couple of years ago.”
Ivermectin Is a Potent Antiviral
Interestingly, Carvallo had experience with ivermectin as an antiviral before the COVID outbreak. Argentinian doctors were using it against dengue fever, which is endemic in Argentina. So, when SARS-CoV-2 emerged, they decided to take another look at the drug to see if it might be useful.
“We came across some studies that were being conducted in Australia at the Monash University by people like Dr. Kylie Wagstaff,” Carvallo says. “We supposed that it would be very useful because the virology in effect already proved that, and we decided — even before they published their first findings — to replicate what they were doing, but in vivo. That is, not in the laboratory but in human beings.”
In early April 2020, Carvallo and his team developed two trials submitted to the National Library of Medicine in the United States. One was for preexposure1 (prevention) and the other for treatment. In both cases, ivermectin was used as an adjunct to other compounds, as they didn’t believe it was a silver bullet by itself.
For preventive purposes, they used ivermectin together with carrageenan, a food emulsifier and thickener that has a long history of use in both food and medicine. According to Carvallo, carrageenan has antiviral effects too, so the ivermectin was used in combination with topical carrageenan, administered through the nose and mucus membranes of the mouth.
In the treatment trial, ivermectin was combined with aspirin for mild cases, aspirin and corticosteroids for moderately severe cases, and enoxaparin (an anticoagulant drug) for severe cases.
These drug combinations were selected based on what was known about other viruses that cause similar health effects as SARS-CoV-2, such as the rhabdovirus’ effect on neurology, the paramyxovirus, which causes hyperinflammation in the lungs, and the dengue virus, which overamplifies the immune system.
Early Treatment Is Crucial
Like so many other doctors, Carvallo knew right from the start that early treatment would be crucial and that telling patients to just wait it out at home until they couldn’t breathe would be a death sentence.
“We knew from the very first day we entered the school of medicine that the sooner you treat any illness, the more chances you will have to be successful in the treatment,” he says. “You have to treat quickly, and strongly. This is natural thinking. Nobody has to be a genius to know that. In this case, inexplicably, many doctors have been told to do nothing.
To keep the patients in their homes on their own with just a few pills of Tylenol — which we know it’s good for nothing — until they cannot breathe properly. Then they have to be referred to the hospital. That is patient abandonment under any law in any country …
If you walk around a corner and you see your neighbor’s house on fire, you may call 911. You may play hero and enter the house and try to save them. You may cry out for help. The only thing you must not do is nothing.
I believe in any attempt to keep a mild patient, mild. What I cannot accept as a medical doctor — because it is against our oath — is to remain with arms folded until that person gets worse. That’s criminal … There’s only one reason for all this. The reason is summarized in one word, greed.”
Aspirin was chosen for its anticoagulant effects. Another option recommended by American doctors is NAC, an over-the-counter supplement that both prevents blood clots and breaks up existing ones. NAC also has other benefits that makes it useful against COVID-19. Argentina does not allow the sale of supplements without prescription, so no dietary supplements were used in these particular trials.
“That doesn’t mean we say they are not good,” Carvallo says. “We simply adjusted ourselves to what was there. We believe in the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine. We believe in the effectiveness of azithromycin. Vitamin D, zinc, doxycycline. We believe in those compounds too. But we have not tried them.”
Situational Update in Argentina
So far, only five of the 24 provinces in Argentina have authorized these ivermectin-based protocols for prevention and early treatment, but at least that’s better than the U.S., where ivermectin is rejected outright. In many U.S. hospitals, doctors who dare prescribe it face being fired.
As you’d expect with something that actually works, those five provinces are indeed faring better in terms of infection rates, hospitalizations and deaths. In one province, the death rate was reduced to one-third in less than a month, in the middle of the outbreak, when no vaccines were available.
Argentina didn’t start rolling out their COVID shots until March 2021, and the vaccination campaign has been slow. Carvallo estimates no more than 40% of the population has received two doses so far.
He believes the slow vaccine uptake is partly due to logistical challenges, and partly due to safety concerns. “Many people have preferred to use alternative methods instead of vaccines,” he says. Argentina may still move to make the injections mandatory, though.
“You know what? Making an experiment mandatory and using the media to convince everybody to use it is not new,” Carvallo says. “It was done during the second World War. Josef Mengele and Joseph Goebbels did that.
One made any experiment he wanted on people that were hopeless and at the camps. The other one was a minister of propaganda who convinced everybody that everything was OK … That’s what we are seeing. Let’s forget about science — common sense has been disregarded.”
Carvallo himself ended up taking the Chinese COVID shot, as proof of vaccination was required for him to travel to Europe. In an effort to counter any potential side effects, he continues to take aspirin to prevent blood clots, and ivermectin. “I keep on using Ivermectin,” he says, “I’ve been using it for over a year.”
Recommended Dosing Schedule
In the U.S., ivermectin has been mocked and misrepresented as a veterinary drug. In reality, it’s been approved for human use for decades, and won the Nobel Prize for medicine in 1995, at which time it was considered a miracle drug.
“Even people from the CDC have said, ‘You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Why should you use Ivermectin?’” Carvallo says. “I would answer them, if they consider ivermectin is only for veterinary use, they are neither horses nor cows, they are asses. The fact is, we use ivermectin on a weekly basis for preexposure, that’s for prevention. The dose is 0.2 mg per kilo [of bodyweight. To calculate pounds into kilos, divide your weight in pounds by 2.2].
We adjust the dose to the patient’s weight. One of the worst comorbidities for somebody contracting the virus is obesity. You cannot give the same dose to a skinny person and to an obese or morbid obese person. So, we adjust for that.
We use it once a week. Now that Delta is appearing in South America, we are considering reducing it to three or four days between doses. Do you know why we use it on a weekly basis? Because ivermectin will work for 3.5 days. For the other three days, you will be exposed.
You may contract the virus, but even before the virus can replicate enough to pass from the incubation period to the invasion period, you will take ivermectin again. So, you won’t know it exists. You won’t even realize you have contracted the disease. Your immune system will have [encountered] the virus and will start creating immunity …
We keep on using that four months. We’ll stop for a couple of months because ivermectin will accumulate in the fat tissue. After two months of not using it, we start again.”
Carvallo also points out that natural immunity is far stronger than artificial immunity created by the COVID shots. This is no surprise, because that’s how it’s always been with all other viruses. The key is to prevent the infection from getting a strong foothold. With early treatment, you’ll get through the infection just fine, and have robust and likely lifelong immunity.
Addressing Toxicity Concerns
As for the safety of ivermectin, studies in Africa have used doses that were 10 times higher than the 0.2 mg/kg recommended for COVID, without toxic effects. Hydroxychloroquine, on the other hand, has a far narrower safety margin. This is well-known, and was clearly used to discredit the drug. As explained by Carvallo:
“What they did with hydroxychloroquine in order to discredit it was easy. Hydroxychloroquine is also very useful against COVID. But the safety margin is narrow. What they did was to use three times the dose in order to cause toxicity. There were 200 studies in favor of hydroxychloroquine.
There was one study talking about the toxicity, and all the scientific community in the world latched on to that one. That’s crazy. In the case of ivermectin, it was so wide a gap between safety and toxicity that they couldn’t do that. So, they just disregarded it.”
Now, there are veterinary formulations of ivermectin. Do not use these, as they typically contain polyethylene glycol (PEG), which is toxic to humans. Ironically, the COVID shots actually contain PEG. Many are allergic to this substance, which is why anaphylaxis is such a common acute side effect of the jabs.
Why Are COVID Jabs Still Recommended?
As of September 24, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) had received 15,937 reports of deaths following the COVID shot, 71,036 hospitalizations and more than 752,800 adverse events in total.2
Calculations by Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, based on VAERS data suggests the actual death toll may be around 212,000.3 He estimates side effects and deaths are under-reported by a factor of 41 or more, so the total number of injuries is likely between 2 million and 5 million.
Even if we were to accept the official VAERS numbers, the death toll is astronomical. Under normal circumstances, a pandemic vaccine would be pulled after about 50 deaths. No explanation has ever been given for why the COVID shots are still being universally recommended after nearly 16,000 reported deaths.
What we’re living is really a classic imitation of George Orwell’s book “1984.” Almost everything government and health officials say is the exact opposite of the truth. Right is left. Up is down. Black is white. For those who know the facts, it’s a surreal experience. Double standards have also become the norm. As noted by Carvallo:
“The vaccine is almost sacred. It’s like a Bible. Whatever we say in favor of other treatments is a sin. Nobel Prize [winners] of medicine, like Luc Montagnier and Satoshi Omura, have been censored on the media. It’s crazy.”
What’s more, we already have evidence showing the shots don’t work as advertised. They lose effectiveness very rapidly. The answer we’re given is booster shots. Israel is already talking about a fourth dose, and the injections have not even been out for a full year yet.
“If you give a medicine and don’t get a positive result in a few days, you reconsider either your diagnosis or your treatment,” Carvallo says. “You don’t insist on the same thing because it’s insane to insist on the same thing trying to get different results.”
The reason we keep getting more variants is because the vaccine is “leaky.” It doesn’t prevent you from getting infected, so the virus starts to mutate to evade the vaccine-induced antibody. Carvallo agrees, adding that it’s equally insane that the shots are designed to produce antibodies against just one portion of the virus, the spike protein, rather than act against the pathogenesis of the virus.
When you recover from a natural infection, you have both humoral and cellular immunity, and even though humoral immunity (antibodies) will decrease within a few months, you still have latent cellular immunity that will spring into action when needed.
The COVID shots do not provide any cellular immunity, which is why they cannot achieve herd immunity, even if 100% of a population is injected. Carvallo also points out that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is now the weakest it’s ever been. The real enemy at this point is the propaganda that keeps fear alive.
Now’s the Time to Take Control of Your Health
Carvallo is one of those rare individuals who has been able to perform research others cannot at this time. He’s retired, so he has no funding or career to lose. He hopes that, eventually, more doctors will go back to thinking for themselves and return to their oath to do no harm, and to focus on what’s best for their patients rather than the bureaucracy currently dictating what they can and cannot do.
According to projections, we could potentially see billions of people die or be permanently disabled from these experimental injections. How are we going to take care of them all? Who’s going to pay for their care? Already, U.S. entitlement programs — Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — are nearing bankruptcy.
According to David Martin, Ph.D.,4 pension programs and entitlement programs will all run out by 2028, and as they run out of money, the drug industry will collapse as well, as they are the primary beneficiaries of these programs. Medicare and Medicaid pay for the bulk of the drug dependency in America.
So, in just a few years’ time, we’ll be facing a convergence of collapses on multiple fronts, and at the same time, large portions of the population may be severely ill and wholly dependent on these systems for their survival.
Society also requires all sorts of infrastructure, and if large portions of society are crippled or dead, society will collapse from lack of qualified workers alone. So, the COVID shot mandates are clearly making an already precarious situation far worse, as the financial system would be collapsing anyway.
The best thing anyone can do right now to prepare for this convergence of collapses is to focus on your health. Make sure you’re as healthy as you can be. Be sure to optimize your vitamin D level, for example, and avoid toxins of all kinds. Getting used to growing some of your own food would also be a good idea, as would looking into ways to protect your retirement assets.
*
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).
The White House is seriously considering a “no shot, no fly” rule within the U.S.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Biden administration’s top medical adviser, is in favor of the idea and stated that “nothing has been taken off the table” when it comes to domestic air travel vaccine mandates
COVID-19 shots do not prevent transmission and people who have been injected can still spread COVID-19 to others, making vaccine mandates more about compliance than science
The “science” behind social distancing is also nonexistent, and the 6 feet requirement an arbitrary number created by politics, not science
The vaccine mandate rhetoric is also ignoring the basic and long-established phenomenon of natural immunity; those who’ve recovered from COVID-19 are naturally immune and don’t need a shot
The only way to compensate for the assault on freedom happening all around is for people to hear about it and stand up against it
*
COVID-19 injection mandates are gaining speed in the U.S. and it may not be long before you’re required to get a COVID-19 shot if you plan to travel by air. While injection mandates already exist for cruises and international travel, you could still fly domestically whether you’ve been injected or not. This may soon change.
In former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul’s September 20, 2021, Liberty Report, it’s noted that the White House is seriously considering a “no shot, no fly” rule within the U.S.,1 and Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Biden administration’s top medical adviser, is in favor of the idea.
Fauci Supports Injection Mandate for Domestic Air Travel
When asked whether he would support vaccine mandates for airline travel, Fauci told theSkimm,2“I would support that if you want to get on a plane and travel with other people that you should be vaccinated.” He also stated, in an interview with “Meet the Press,” that “nothing has been taken off the table” when it comes to domestic air travel vaccine mandates.3
Despite Fauci’s many inconsistencies and outright lies during the pandemic — such as denying that the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) funded coronavirus research at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology4 — he still hasn’t been arrested and he still has a job, Paul noted. “You’d think that his flip-flopping would call attention to his ineptness,” Paul said, adding that Fauci is partners with Bill Gates and the deep state is clearly on his side:5
“Fauci changes his mind every once in a while, only in words, never in actions. His actions have been very consistent. More government, more intimidation, more of elimination of personal liberties and personal decisions. So that’s going to continue. I don’t see how it could be improved unless they have somebody replace him. Some day that will happen.”
September 20, 2021, White House COVID-19 response coordinator Jeff Zients announced that international travelers flying into the U.S. would need to present proof of injection. This increased speculation that a domestic injection requirement for air travel could follow, putting personal and medical freedom further at risk. When asked about it, Zients echoed Fauci in saying, “We’re not taking any measures off the table.”6
More About Compliance Than Science
People who have received two COVID-19 shots can still spread COVID-19 to others. According to the CDC, “If you are fully vaccinated and become infected with the Delta variant, you can spread the virus to others.”7
So people on a plane who are infected with COVID-19 can transmit the virus, period. It doesn’t matter if they’ve been injected or not, since the shot does not prevent transmission. The CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) posted online July 30, 2021, detailed an outbreak of COVID-19 that occurred in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, in which 74% of the cases occurred in fully vaccinated people.8
This finding was pivotal in yet another CDC turnaround, in which they loosened mask requirements for vaccinated people and then abruptly tightened them again, suggesting that everyone needs to wear a mask indoors whether they’d gotten injected or not,9 because even the vaccinated are spreading the virus and can infect others.
The New York Times published another example, quoting data from Israel showing that an increasing number of vaccinated people were ending up hospitalized for COVID-19:10,11
“Dr. Sharon Alroy-Preis, Israel’s head of public health services said the summer’s rise in the number of hospitalized patients who had been fully vaccinated with Pfizer’s vaccine was ‘scary.’ She said 60 percent of severely or critically ill patients and 45 percent of those who died during what she called the fourth surge had received two injections of Pfizer’s vaccine.”
Vaccine mandates are, quite simply, more about compliance than science. According to Paul, it’s a matter of punishing people for noncompliance:12
“It’s getting the people conditioned that they will obey. And if they don’t, they’re either going to be punished or they’ve been intimidated to think that they’re going to die from a disease and the problems are much, much greater than they really are.
They’re made to be very frightened and they work on fear. This is what social distancing was all about. This is what masks were all about. They never proved any of that.”
Six Feet Social Distancing Rule ‘Arbitrary’
The “science” behind social distancing is also nonexistent, and the 6 feet requirement an arbitrary number created by politics, not science, since SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by aerosols.13 Scott Gottlieb, former FDA commissioner who later joined Pfizer’s board of directors, admitted on “Face the Nation”:14,15
“The six feet was arbitrary in and of itself. But if the administration had focused in on that, they might have been able to effect a policy that would have actually achieved their outcome. But that policy making process didn’t exist, and the six feet is a perfect example of the lack of rigor around how CDC made recommendations.
Nobody knows where it came from. Most people assume that the six feet of distance, the recommendation for keeping six feet apart, comes out of some old studies related to flu, where droplets don’t travel more than six feet. We now know COVID spreads through aerosols.
The initial recommendation that the CDC brought to the White House … was 10 feet, and a political appointee in the White House said we can’t recommend 10 feet. Nobody can measure 10 feet. It’s inoperable. Society will shut down. So the compromise was around six feet.”
So the idea that health officials are following science is a ridiculous one, Paul said. In essence, “they’ve cancelled science.”16
Why Isn’t Anyone Talking About Natural Immunity?
The vaccine mandate rhetoric is also ignoring the basic and long-established phenomenon of natural immunity. There are an estimated 33 million people in the U.S. who have recovered from COVID-19.17 This is likely an underestimate, as it doesn’t include people who were asymptomatic or had mild cases and didn’t even know they were infected. These 33 million-plus people are now naturally immune to COVID-19.
“For as smart a guy as he [Fauci] is, he doesn’t understand or believe, or just is in denial of, natural immunity,” Paul said.18 It defies common sense and logic to mandate a shot for someone who is already immune to the disease. This is likely to prompt more than a few lawsuits, especially since it’s been shown that natural immunity may protect you significantly better than an injection.
Data presented July 17, 2021, to the Israeli Health Ministry revealed that, of the more than 7,700 COVID-19 cases reported since May 2021, only 72 occurred in people who had previously had COVID-19 — a rate of less than 1%. In contrast, more than 3,000 cases — or approximately 40% — occurred in people who had received a COVID-19 vaccine.19 As reported by Israeli National News:
“With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.
By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.”
In other words, those who were vaccinated were nearly 700% more likely to develop COVID-19 than those who had natural immunity from a prior infection — and this is largely in response to the Delta variant.20 While it’s not surprising that U.S. health officials haven’t made this distinction, penalizing or removing privileges from a person for not receiving an injection they don’t need is an ethical nightmare.
What Other Privileges Will Be Taken Away?
Vaccine passports are a slippery slope that erode your freedom and personal liberty. Already, the shots are being required by employers, schools, nursing homes, restaurants and hospitals across the U.S., and the government intends to make this the “new normal.” In the White House’s “Path Out of the Pandemic,” it’s stated:21
“The President’s plan will reduce the number of unvaccinated Americans by using regulatory powers and other actions to substantially increase the number of Americans covered by vaccination requirements — these requirements will become dominant in the workplace.”
In addition to requiring all federal workers and millions of contractors that do business with the federal government to get injected, the White House is also calling on large entertainment venues such as sports arenas and concert halls to require injections or proof of a negative COVID-19 test for entry.22
Paul pointed out the irony, that you can lose your job if you talk about natural immunity, as though it’s a crime to do your best to tell the truth, but it’s being encouraged that, if you haven’t received the shot, you lose liberties. Many people are fed up with the loss of freedom and increasing authoritarianism, prompting massive protests worldwide.
Protests have taken place in the Netherlands, Australia and in the U.S. against mandatory vaccination. Demonstrations are good, Paul said, as “we want people standing up for liberty … We’re trying to motivate people to stand up for their rights and do their best to resist the demands and control that government is imposing on them.”23
Public trust in the U.S. government is hovering at near historic lows, with only 2% of Americans stating that they can trust the government to do what is right “just about always,” while only 22% said they can be trusted “most of the time.”24
The only way to compensate for the assault on freedom happening all around is for people to hear about it and stand up against it, because now it’s a COVID-19 shot that’s being required and the unvaccinated who are being excluded, but tomorrow it will be another requirement and another pool of people — smokers, the obese — being targeted. The silver lining is that, as things worsen, Paul said, “My guess is that people are going to wake up.”25
*
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.
