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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It is frightening how oligarchically-minded figures of a Great Resetting nature wish to use the structures of social credit to modify group behaviour under a post-Truth, depopulated/de-carbonized world order.

Ever since COVID-19 made a crazy world even crazier, many good people have become absorbed into anti-Chinese hysterics all across the Five Eyes-managed parts of the rules-based liberal west.

Every day, new accusations that China is running spy rings, honey pots, Trump’s overthrow, and even the Great Reset itself as part of a larger plot to undermine western democracy are repeated across the conservative press landscape. The two biggest “proofs” of China’s evil heart are:

1) China’s use of social credit that deprives people of freedom (and broader state regulation of the internet and video games), followed by

2) China’s regulation of religious organizations within their borders which somehow translates into “atheist commie state illegalizing religion”.

Frankly, these fears are impotent, unfounded and devoid of any understanding of either basic history or the actual power structures managing the world we all live in.

As I’ve written in countless locations (such as here, here, here, here and here), those same imperial forces that have driven the worst downshifts of human history via wars, assassinations, coups and economic terrorism, are very much alive today and are in fact attempting to steer humanity into a feudal slave model of society (with some technocratic 21^st century modifications).

This power structure is not Chinese, nor is it Russian. It isn’t even American, although it demands that all three nations be wiped out, their historic cultures reset and turned into fragmented, depopulated regions of a post-nation state global order.

Thankfully, genuinely nationalist leaders have arisen in this moment of global crisis and have created an alternative pathway into a very different future from the one which misanthropic globalists like George Soros or Klaus Schwab demand exist. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres complained of this alternative block in a recent speech saying:

 “I fear our world is creeping towards two different sets of economic, trade, financial, and technology rules, two divergent approaches in the development of artificial intelligence—and ultimately two different military and geo-political strategies. This is a recipe for trouble. It would be far less predictable and far more dangerous than the Cold War.”

In the course of the following series, I am going to nip some of the virulent anti-China mythologies in the bud by first focusing on synthetic cult creation past and present, the problem of Jesuits, the nature of China’s deep state, color revolutions, and the Chinese debt trap myth.

Social Credit: Not my Cup of Tea but Still a Necessity

Let me just state that on a personal level, speaking as someone who is shaped by democratic western values, all forms of surveillance, and social credit offend me.

I believe that people should cherish freedom and live in a cooperative world of love, trust and democracy.

That said, that world which I hope future generations get to experience bears little resemblance to the world of supranational oligarchism which has taken control of nations dumb enough to step into the globalist cage over the past decades and tie their fate to the Wall Street- City of London run bubble world order.

As I laid out in my recent article ‘Guterres and the Great Reset: How our Economy Became a Time Bomb’, those figures preparing to pull the plug on the bubble known as the western financial system tend to orbit one particular organization called the World Economic Forum, with names such as Klaus Schwab, Henry Kissinger and George Soros.

And while consumers of anti-Chinese propaganda might here exclaim that these individuals have all spoken well of China at different times, the only thing which Schwab, Soros or Kissinger admire is China’s centralized power structures and social credit systems. Everything that China is actually doing as far as building the New Silk Road, unleashing long term credit for development, empowering sovereign nation states to stand on their two feet and ending global poverty are despised.

Power hungry imperialists very much enjoy centralized national controls for the simple reason that these controls would give them the power to make their grandiose visions for a dystopic techno-feudal dictatorship happen fast without pesky democratic mechanisms getting in the way. The difference between China’s leadership when contrasted with the Schwabs of the Great Reset crowd is a matter of intention and governing ideology.

Where one is devoted to closed system depopulation and unipolarism, the other is devoted to open system long term growth and multipolarism.

A Lack of Humility

As hard as it is for some to admit, we who live here among the western trans-Atlantic states have a much more virulent form of social credit and surveillance state now in place under the Five Eyes and the multiheaded hydra which former CIA analyst Ray McGovern has called MICIMATT (Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank complex). This is easy to see from a top-down perspective, but for those whose minds are conditioned to make sense of the world “from the bottom up”, it is difficult to see beyond the thick veneer of propaganda (i.e.: just being at a rally on January 6, 2021 has countless people on do not fly lists, un-hirable or in jail).

Bankruptcy (either COVID-lockdown induced or other) results in poisoned credit penalties for many years which is nearly impossible to break out of for most people. In China, on the other hand, you can indeed find your wallet take a hit or job options limited by bad social credit, but inversely you can also recover your standing relatively easily.

Admittedly it frightens me to think how oligarchically-minded figures of a Great Resetting nature wish to use the structures of social credit tied to some form of Universal Basic Income in order to modify group behaviour under a post-Truth, depopulated/de-carbonized world order. But the thing to hold in mind is that mechanisms, like most tools, are generally morally neutral. It is how we use them that imbues them with evil or goodness.

Additionally, China is NOT forcing vaccines on their people while we here in the free west are making life unlivable if you don’t get the jab.

Recently, Canadians have lost the right to fly, sit on a train or cross a border to the USA without (at least) two mRNA jabs. Millions are threatened with a loss of livelihood if they don’t subject themselves as guinea pigs in a vast gene therapy experiment which is still in clinical stages and carrying a remarkably high rate of adverse events including death.

Chinese and Russian federal governments on the other hand have intervened on municipal/provincial administrators who have tried making the jab mandatory at different times and both nations have resisted pressure to use mRNA gene therapy relying instead on conventional viral vector technology.

Contrast this with the western nations, where our federal governments have demonstrated themselves to be little more than active appendages of the Great Reseting sociopaths with the only serious efforts at resistance coming from various state or provincial representatives.

In case this exercise in humility is still meeting resistance, it is worth being reminded that here in the freedom-loving liberal democracies of Canada, the USA and UK, jailed whistleblowers deprived of trial, or even basic civil liberties has become a normalized fact of life. When former CIA analyst John Kiriakou spoke out against his government’s use of illegal torture, he was put in prison. When Chelsea Manning exposed murderous drone assassinations of civilians committed by the US military, she found herself quickly jailed. When US Air force analyst Daniel Hale leaked information about the murder of innocent civilians, he paid the price with a 4 year prison sentence. Meanwhile Julian Assange rots in jail and Snowden would be in jail if he hadn’t found sanctuary in Russia.

In the next installments, we will tackle the important issue of asymmetrical warfare which has been deployed to divide and conquer China from within over the past 200 years. This will include an exposition of deep state operations within China, the use of religious organizations as fronts for color revolutionary tactics, and Soros-affiliated NGOs promoting regime change across Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang.

*

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.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation . Consider helping this process by making a donation to the RTF or becoming a Patreon supporter to the Canadian Patriot Review

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Pressenza

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Yemen’s Ansar Allah is on the warpath and it seems that the Saudi-led coalition is incapable of stopping its advance.

As of October 18^th, the Houthis (Ansar Allah) have taken control of large swathes of Ma’rib province, and are priming to, once again, try to take the strategic city.

Ansar Allah announced that their fighters had captured an area of 3,200 square kilometers in the central Yemeni provinces of Shabwah and Ma’rib, during an operation dubbed “Spring of Victory”.

The operation resulted in the killing, wounding and capture of hundreds of mercenaries involved in the aggression. The Houthi spokesman, Brigadier General Yahya Sari claimed that among those were al-Qaeda and ISIS members.

Detailed information on the operation was promised in the upcoming days, with numbers of casualties and destroyed equipment. The Houthis usually boast greatly with all of their successes.

On the same day, the Saudi-led coalition boasted of its defensive capabilities. It claimed that it had intercepted and shot down two suicide drones which were launched from Yemen.

The two drones were most likely shot down within Yemeni airspace by fighter jets of the Royal Saudi Air Force with air-to-air missiles.

Additionally, the Saudi-led coalition said that its warplanes carried out 41 airstrikes on Houthi forces in the district of al-Abdiyah in the central Yemeni province of Ma’rib.

The coalition claimed that 165 Houthi fighters were killed and ten military vehicles were destroyed in the airstrikes. These numbers were not verified by any independent side.

Just days earlier, on October 12^th, the Houthis announced another successful operation dubbed “Dawn of Victory”.

According to the accompanying statement, throughout the operation, 1,300 Saudi-backed fighters were killed, 4,320 were wounded and 30 were captured by Houthi fighters.

During the operation, the Houthis’ air-defenses opened fire at Saudi-led coalition and US drones and warplanes 518 times and managed to shoot down a total of 17 drones.

The Yemeni group’s missile force carried out 49 attacks on targets inside Yemen and on 19 targets outside the country’s border. From its side, the drone force carried out 170 attacks on targets outside Yemen and 75 attacks on targets within the country.

The Saudi-led coalition carried out nearly 1,000 airstrikes in an attempt to impede the operation, but it failed. It is likely that numbers of the most recent operations are comparable, and it stands to show that Riyadh’s forces are incapable of mounting any form of adequate offense and defense.

The Houthis have been advancing towards Ma’rib city for more than seven months now. These two most recent operations are some of the most significant successes, as it isn’t a short-term gain that could potentially be quickly be lost if the Saudi-led coalition pushes back.

It appears that these two operations are the result of steady advances and tactical battlefield successes that could potentially be lasting and allow for Ansar Allah to push for Ma’rib city in the coming weeks.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

In a highly applauded, common sense legal opinion on October 15, 2021, the Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson stated that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe off-label medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID.

After citing numerous statutes and court decisions regarding the off-label use of prescription drugs, the AG opinion states:

“We conclude that governing law allows physicians to use FDA-approved medicines that are unproven for a particular off-label use so long as (1) reasonable medical evidence supports that use and (2) a patient’s written informed consent is obtained. In the context of this ever-changing global pandemic, we note that it is appropriate to consider medical evidence outside of Nebraska and to give physicians who obtained informed consent an added measure of deference on their assessment of the available medical evidence.”

The Nebraska AG continues on to provide much evidence for the history of the safety and effectiveness of ivermectin, and to chastise the FDA for its clear attempt to undermine its use, writing:

“The FDA’s most controversial statement on ivermectin came on August 21, 2021, when it posted a link on Twitter to its ‘Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin” webpage with this message: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.’ This message is troubling not only because it makes light of a serious matter but also because it inaccurately implies that ivermectin is only for horses or cows.”

Informed Choice Washington strongly agrees with the Nebraska AG and disagrees with the Washington Medical Commission for harassing Dr. Miller, a physician’s assistant in Clark County, WA, for prescribing something that is his legal right to prescribe and that many doctors around the world are using to save lives during the pandemic. Community members stand with Dr. Miller.

The inventors of ivermectin won a 2015 Nobel Prize for saving human lives, not animals.

And the body of science on the safety and effectiveness for ivermectin’s use with COVID-19 is indisputable. There have been 63 trials; 625 scientists; 47,437 patients; 30 randomized controlled trials showing positive results for ivermectin preventing infection and/or preventing severe disease, hospitalization, and death.

Countries that have adopted ivermectin in their response to COVID (or portions of their country have adopted, or practitioners are independently prescribing with success for their patients)  include Argentina, Bangladesh, Belize, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Columbia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Japan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Slovakia, South Africa, Thailand, and even the USA.

The U.S. National Institute of Health addresses ivermectin usage for COVD saying it is “generally well tolerated” and they are tracking some of the many studies underway. Tragically, they appear to be ignoring the existing completed studies and the massive success experienced by populations around the world. Still. There it is. Ivermectin acknowledged as a treatment protocol under consideration and usage.

So why did the Washington State Medical Commission suspend the license of Physician Assistant Scott Miller, and include in the charges that Miller had been promoting ivermectin and prescribing it for his patients?

While ICWA is not privy to all the details of the WMC’s charges, we are familiar with the unethical war on ivermectin being waged. We are highly concerned that the WMC is being fed misinformation by certain public health entities and are being used to put fear in doctors prescribing and promoting ivermectin. This fear-based suppression of the inexpensive lifesaving drug is being perpetrated to protect the profits of the drug industry that has anti-viral drugs in the pipeline that they hope to profit highly from.

Charge 1.12 against Dr. Miller quotes a false statement from Merck: “…ivermectin has no scientific basis for the potential therapeutic effect against COVID-19, no meaningful evidence of clinical activity or clinical efficacy in patients with with COVID-19, and a lack of safety data in the clinical studies that have been conducted with patients with COVID-19.” Ample studies, cited above, have proven otherwise. Ivermectin has been shown to be antiviral, antibacterial, and anti-inflammatory. It’s also “anti-big profit” since it is off-patent. Merck is just one of the makers of the generic, 40-year old medicine. Merck has no interest in supporting ivermectin since it makes them virtually nothing; they are pushing the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization on their new oral, anti-viral drug against COVID, Molnupiravir, with only interim data from a highly questionable clinical trial.

Some in the scientific community are very concerned that Molnupiravir’s mechanism of action—mutagenesis—“threatens to accelerate the evolution of the coronavirus” and the results could be catastrophic. The drug has also been shown to be “mutagenic in mammalian cells.” 

So while billions of doses of ivermectin have been taken safely over decades, Merck is seeking EUA for what they hope to be a highly profitable mutagenic drug with the potential to cause much harm. 

People are dying every day from COVID-19, both the vaccinated and the non-vaccinated, in hospitals and at home. Ivermectin, along with other drug and nutrient protocols, has proven globally to save lives. It is criminal — a crime against humanity — to punish doctors who weigh the evidence and prescribe ivermectin to their patients.

ICWA respectfully asks the WMC to take the time to fully explore the full body of science as well as the politics of ivermectin and to reconsider not only their charges against Scott Miller who is obviously passionate and frustrated trying to save patients, but also to reconsider their stance on ivermectin for all physicians in Washington State. One of the leading sources of ivermectin science and politics is the Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance. This is a group of highly respected and credentialed pulmonary care specialists working in critical care units with COVID patients.

It is no exaggeration to say that the future of the practice of medicine is at stake. After all, if doctors are to be nothing more than marketers for the pharmaceutical industry, unable to truly practice medicine based on the full body of evidence and their own experienced judgement, then why bother with licensing doctors at 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.

Featured image is from ICWA

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

More sanctions seem to be coming Belarus’ way, if European Foreign Ministers agree to them.

The most significant limitation is prohibiting EU companies from leasing jets to the Belarusian airline Belavia. This means that Minsk’s national airline would have no airplanes to fly passengers, it is a significant step.

The EU has accused the government of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko of facilitating migration into the bloc in retaliation for EU sanctions.

According to the accusations, thousands of migrants have been lured to Belarus on tourist visas and encouraged to cross into Poland, Lithuania and to a lesser extent Latvia — all three of which are EU nations that border Belarus.

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko denied all of this and instead blamed the West for what he says is a looming humanitarian catastrophe this winter after migrants were left stranded on the Belarusian-Polish border.

In Poland, thousands took to the streets in Warsaw, protesting against migrant pushbacks.

Demonstrators marched through the Polish capital holding signs with messages such as, “Stop torture at the border,” “Nobody is illegal,” and “How many bodies lie in the forest?”

At least seven people have died at the EU’s eastern border since the uptick in migrant arrivals that began in summer, according to Polish, Lithuanian and Belarusian officials.

The United Nations refugee agency and the International Organization for Migration said they were “shocked and dismayed” by migrant deaths at the border, adding that groups of people have become stranded for weeks, unable to access any form of assistance or asylum.

Meanwhile, officials in Minsk, Warsaw, Vilnius and Riga have continued exchanging accusations while the deaths slowly pile up.

In response to the most recent sanctions, France’s ambassador was ordered out of Belarus.

France’s foreign minister said that Ambassador Nicolas de Lacoste’s departure was due to the “unilateral decision” of Belarusian authorities.

The Belarusian Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the departure was connected to de Lacoste’s unwillingness to present his credentials to Lukashenko. Additionally, Minsk said it was recalling Belarus’ ambassador to France, Igor Fisenko, for consultations over the developments.

The French foreign ministry explained that the ambassador did not present his credentials to the 67-year-old leader because it was “in line with the common European position of not recognising the legitimacy of the outcome of the August 2020 presidential election.”

This diplomatic standoff between Belarus and the EU will continue, especially in view of the deepening integration between Minsk and Moscow, which Brussels also attempts to “prohibit”.

It is unlikely that these attempts to stop the integration will prove fruitful and result in anything significant. The migrant crisis, however, is a “ticking time bomb” that needs to be dealt with sooner, rather than later, as people dying along the borders is a worrisome development.

This is all taking place against the concerning backdrop of Russia closing its permanent mission to NATO. The Alliance’s representative office in Moscow was also shuttered. This means that all official communication mechanisms have been stopped, and the only way NATO can communicate with Moscow is through its Ambassador in Brussels.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

U.S. billionaires have seen their wealth surge $1.8 trillion during the pandemic, their collective fortune skyrocketing by nearly two-thirds (62 percent) from just short of $3 trillion at the start of the COVID crisis on March 18, 2020, to $4.8 trillion on August 17, 2021, according to a report from Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) and the Institute for Policy Studies Program on Inequality (IPS). A table of the top 15 billionaires is below and the full data set is here.

Elon Musk has seen his wealth increase by an eye-popping $150 billion during the pandemic, a gain of over 600 percent.

America’s billionaire bonanza demonstrates the flaws in our current economic and tax systems President Biden and Democrats in Congress are trying to remedy by advancing a $3.5 trillion budget package, which has already passed the U.S. Senate and is being considered in the U.S. House today. If it becomes law through the budget reconciliation process this fall, it will aid communities and working families by making healthcare, eldercare, childcare, housing and education more affordable, investing in clean energy, expanding the Child Tax Credit and providing 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave. It will be paid for by making the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share of taxes, and it will not raise taxes on anyone making under $400,000 a year.

Not only did the wealth of billionaires grow, but so did their numbers: in March of last year, there were 614 Americans with 10-figure bank accounts; this August, there are 708. Their $1.8 trillion of increased wealth alone over 17 months, which will not be taxed unless they sell their assets, would pay for more than half of Biden’s 10-year $3.5 trillion investment package.

Sources: March 18, 2020 data: Forbes, “Forbes Publishes 34th Annual List Of Global Billionaires,” accessed March 18, 2020. August 17, 2021 data: Forbes, “The World’s Real-Time Billionaires, Today’s Winners and Losers,” accessed August 17, 2021.

The great good fortune of these billionaires over the past 17 months is all the more appalling when contrasted with the devastating impact of coronavirus on working people. Over 86 million Americans have lost jobs, almost 38 million have been sickened by the virus, and over 625,000 have died from it.

President Biden’s investment proposals contained in the Senate-passed budget resolution would significantly improve Americans health by making private insurance in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges more affordable; closing the Medicaid coverage gap in 12 states that refuse to expand coverage under the ACA; expanding Medicare to cover dental, vision and hearing benefits; increasing long-term care benefits to help people afford home and community-based services; and lowering the cost of prescription drugs by giving Medicare the authority to negotiate lower drug prices with drug corporations.

Biden’s proposed investments would reduce health insurance premiums for 9 million people, according to the White House, saving an average 60-year-old making $55,000 a year hundreds of dollars a month on their ACA insurance policy premium, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. The cost of extending these subsidies is $163 billion over 10 years, per the Treasury Department. That means the $1.8 trillion increase in American billionaire wealth over the last 17 months could pay the entire 10-year cost of making healthcare more affordable for 9 million people more than 10 times over.

While these investments in healthcare would benefit millions of Americans and save money in the long run, the ballooning wealth of billionaires benefits no one but the super-rich. That’s because the current tax code is riddled with loopholes and special breaks that allow the super wealthy to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Due to one of the code’s biggest loopholes, increased wealth enjoyed by billionaires and other members of the richest 1 percent—for whom such wealth growth is the primary source of income—can go untaxed forever. The virtual tax-free status of billionaire wealth growth was highlighted recently by a report from ProPublica. It estimated that 25 top billionaires paid on average just 3.4 percent of their wealth-growth in federal income taxes and that several, including Jeff Bezos (worth $188 billion on August 17, 2021) and Elon Musk (worth $175 billion on August 17, 2021), went multiple recent years paying zero federal income tax.

Even when taxed, the top tax rate on wealth-growth income is only about half that of wage income—20 percent vs. 37 percent. President Biden would end those special breaks on the wealth-growth income of millionaires and billionaires as part of his tax-reform package. Following are Biden’s tax reforms that are expected to be a part of budget reconciliation legislation to be voted on in the fall, many of which will ensure billionaires start paying closer to their fair share of taxes:

• Tax wealth like work. People with more than $1 million a year in income will have to pay a top tax rate on the sale of stock and other assets that is the same as the top rate workers pay on wages. Biden also will close a loophole that often allows the wealthy to avoid paying taxes on investment gains for their entire lives. These reforms will raise $325 billion.
• Restore the top individual tax rate to 39.6 percent and stop avoidance of taxes by wealthy business owners that are used to fund healthcare. These two reforms will together raise $370 billion.
• Crack down on tax evasion by the wealthy, which will raise $700 billion. 
• Raise the corporate tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent, leaving it still far below the 35 percent rate in 2017. Corporate taxes are largely paid by the owners of corporations, which means the stockholders. Billionaires are among the wealthiest 1 percent that own over half of all corporate stock. This reform will raise nearly $900 billion.
• Curb offshore corporate tax dodging by eliminating incentives to outsource jobs and shift profits to tax havens. This reform will raise more than $1 trillion.

A more direct way to tax billionaire wealth is to tax the wealth itself instead of just its growth. If the wealth tax proposed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren had been in effect in 2020, the nation’s billionaires alone would have paid $114 billion for that year—and would pay an estimated combined total of $1.4 trillion over 10 years.

Poll after poll shows that Americans of all political persuasions and by large majorities believe that the wealthy and big corporations need to start paying their fair share of taxes. A June poll by ALG Research and Hart Research shows 62 percent of voters support Biden’s proposed $4 trillion (at the time) investments in healthcare, childcare, education, clean energy and more—paid for by higher taxes on the rich and corporations.

March 18, 2020 is used as the unofficial beginning of the coronavirus crisis because by then most federal and state economic restrictions responding to the virus were in place. March 18 was also the date that Forbes picked to measure billionaire wealth for the 2020 edition of its annual billionaires’ report, which provided a baseline that ATF and HCAN compare periodically with real-time data from the Forbes website. PolitiFact has favorably reviewed this methodology. 

*

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

Featured image is from Twitter

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

On October 7th, the death toll after vaccination in Taiwan reached 852, while the death toll after the COVID-19 was diagnosed [largely based on the flawed PCR test] was 844. The number of deaths after vaccination exceeded the number of confirmed deaths for the first time.

According to a “Notice of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination” issued by Taiwan’s health department, on March 22 this year, Taiwan began vaccination. From that day to October 6, the death toll after vaccination in Taiwan has reached 849.

Among them, the death toll after vaccination with AZ was the largest, reaching 643; the death toll after vaccination with Moderna was 183, and the death toll after vaccination with Taiwan’s self-produced “Medigen” vaccine was 22.

Another news from Taiwan Chinatimes: 

Chinatimes reported that Taiwan’s “DCD” updated the “Notice of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination” on the 8th. According to data, as of 16:00 on the 7th, the “Suspected Serious Adverse Events after Vaccination” The number of deaths was 850, and as of the 8th, the number of deaths from COVID-19 pneumonia was 845.

Notification of adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination (Source: “Taiwan Chinatimes”)

As of the 6th, since the epidemic, the number of deaths due to the confirmed COVID-19 in Taiwan was 844. This is the first time that the number of deaths after vaccination has exceeded the number of confirmed deaths.

According to data released by the Taiwan Epidemic Command Center, on the 7th, there were 4 new confirmed cases of COVID-19 pneumonia in Taiwan, all of which were imported from abroad, and there were no new deaths among the confirmed cases. However, there were 3 new deaths after vaccination. The number of deaths after vaccination still exceeds the number of deaths after diagnosis.

On October 6, the Kuomintang “legislator” Yeh,Yu-Lan bluntly stated in a Facebook post that the vaccine given to save lives has also nearly doubled the number of deaths due to the COVID-19, which is indeed very ironic and confusing.

She mentioned that recently, some hospitals in Taiwan have reported that 25 people were vaccinated with undiluted vaccine stock solution, or the vaccination dose was insufficient. It should have been given 0.5cc, but only 0.1cc was given.

Netizens mentioned that the original appointment to go to the National Taiwan University Hospital for the second dose of Moderna was changed to a “high-end” vaccine. This series of vaccine problems can be clearly felt. The number of vaccination deaths has caught up with the COVID-19 diagnosis. The death toll is not accidental, nor is it accidental.

She said that many people would actively vaccinate to survive, and relevant departments should not turn life-saving vaccines into life-threatening vaccines because of negligence in control. People who are vaccinated in accordance with the island’s policies have become inexplicable victims under the epidemic.

In fact, as early as two weeks ago, the Kuomintang “legislator” Wu I-ding had questioned that the mortality rate after vaccination in Taiwan was higher than that in other regions. At that time, Chen Shih-chung said that “the judgment has not been completed” and death may not be related to vaccination.

Wu I-ding had no choice but to say that she could not get any information from Chen Shih-chung, so she went to the health department and the legal department. Unexpectedly, all parties have been “playing the ball” all the time.

The statement “not necessarily related” is a consistent statement that Chen Shih-chung has always used in the face of all doubts about vaccines, such as adverse reactions and deaths after vaccination.

As mentioned earlier, in the “Notice of Adverse Events after COVID-19 Vaccination” issued by the Taiwan authorities yesterday, the authorities have also been emphasizing that “(this document) itself cannot explain or be used to derive the existence or seriousness of vaccine-related problems. Conclusion of degree, frequency or incidence.”

*

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.

Sources

https://www.ettoday.net/news/20211009/2097484.htm

https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2021-10-08/doc-iktzqtyu0213782.shtml

https://www.guancha.cn/politics/2021_10_08_609960.shtml

Featured image is from Medical Trend

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The United States regretted its inability to take part in the talks on Afghanistan in Moscow this week. The Russian side was pinning hopes on a meeting of the exclusive Troika Plus (US, China, Russia and Pakistan) followed by a gathering in an expanded format known as the ‘Moscow format’ on Wednesday. 

The US State Department spokesman Ned Price said during a briefing on Monday,

“We will not participate in the Moscow talks. The Troika Plus has been an effective, a constructive forum. We look forward to engaging in that forum going forward, but we’re not in a position to take part this week.” 

Conceivably, he alluded to the dramatic developments at the state department over the weekend  — the Oct. 15 memo to Secretary of State Blinken by the the acting inspector general at State Diana Shaw that she is launching a series of investigations into the Biden administration’s last diplomatic moves in Afghanistan and the resignation three days later by the special representative on Afghan reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad. read more 

Nonetheless, the meeting under the ‘Moscow format’ is going ahead on Wednesday attended by 10 regional countries and a high ranking Taliban delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Salam Hanafi. A Russian Foreign Ministry statement in Moscow today said the meeting will focus on the developing political and military situation in Afghanistan and highlighted that the establishment of an inclusive government and efforts for a global response to prevent a humanitarian crisis will also be on the agenda. 

The MFA disclosed that a joint statement by the participants will be issued after the meeting, which is symbolic insofar as it will also include will also include Afghanistan’s de facto ruler, Taliban. Incidentally, Taliban was not invited to last week’s G20 talks on Afghanistan. This is the first time that a structured meeting of regional states will be including the Taliban officials since their seizure of power in August, although no government has so far recognised the group as the country’s legitimate rulers. It is a significant step. 

A CGTN commentary titled What may China and other countries do at the Moscow meeting on Afghanistan? has underscored that Chinese officials will harp on “a zero-tolerance approach toward terrorism” on the part of the. Taliban who “will be subject to its neighbours’ demands of stating its commitment to not allowing Afghanistan to be a base for terrorist groups and also working actively to prevent it from happening.” 

The commentary took note cautiously,

“However, despite the assurances to their neighbours, the Taliban will have to prioritise their concerns. Although they control Afghanistan, the rule is not yet fully consolidated. There are still many who oppose the rule and have protested against it. Some, like the Islamic State which is based in the country, have even targeted the Taliban for it.

“Because of this, the Taliban may well focus on those they deem a direct threat. That may mean that the Taliban invest less time and effort on behalf of their neighbours.” 

Nonetheless, the Moscow meeting can be expected to make a call for humanitarian assistance and urge the US and other rich countries to free up the money that has been frozen to ease help alleviate the current crisis. The Chinese commentary hinted that notwithstanding the challenging situation in Afghanistan, the Moscow meeting’s participants “might also explore more practical measures to help boost resources and revenues for the Afghan government. That could mean looking at ways to make trade easier between Afghanistan and its neighbours, whether it is reducing paperwork on imports and exports or providing alternative financial mechanisms and channels to enable investment.” 

In the backdrop of the Moscow meeting, reports have appeared that Delhi has sounded Islamabad about the logistics and feasibility of transporting 50,000 metric tonnes of wheat and medical aid to Afghanistan. Clearly, on the sidelines of the Moscow meeting on Wednesday, opportunities may arise for Indian and Pakistani officials to exchange views informally.

Delhi has extended an invitation to the Pakistani National Security Advisor Moeed Yusuf to participate in a conference on Afghanistan next month, which will be chaired by India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval. 

Indeed, if the looming crisis in Afghanistan gives impetus to Delhi and Islamabad to reach some degree of pragmatic understanding to reset their tense relationship, that will be a hugely consequential outcome of the Moscow meeting. Perhaps, it is too much to hope for. The odds may appear to be heavily stacked against it as the mutual antipathies run deep. There is no dearth of interest groups (on both sides) who strive to keep tensions alive. 

In geopolitical terms too, there are contradictions. Pakistan prioritises its close, fraternal relations with China while the Indian policy has steadily gravitated toward aligning with the US’ ‘strategic competition’ with China (and Russia). Pakistan has worked hard in the recent years to diversify its external relationships whereas India is seemingly acquiring a ‘bloc mentality’.

The point is, while the United States maintains that it has a ‘de-hyphenated’ regional policy toward India and Pakistan, in effect Washington is far from a passive onlooker. The US has high stakes in thwarting any regional processes vis-a-vis the Taliban government in Kabul. The Russian officials are not far off the mark when they question the US’ intentions in Afghanistan.

A senior columnist at the Kremlin-funded RT Finian Cunningham noted today that the geopolitical significance of the spate of terrorist attacks by the ISIS-Khorasan lately “seems clear.” Cunningham went to assess:

“The surge in violence in Afghanistan is aimed at preventing the country from creating a stable government and to stifle a postwar reconstruction from cooperation with regional partners, in particular China.

“In contrast to the overtures from Beijing, Moscow, Iran, Pakistan and others, the United States has sought to throw obstacles in the way of Afghanistan’s new Taliban government.” read more

Yesterday, the state department spokesman Ned Price had vaguely cited logistical reasons why the US has to stay away from the Moscow conference. Let us give him the benefit of the doubt for now. To be sure, Khalilzad is leaving as an embittered man. According to New York Times, in his resignation letter to Blinken, Khalilzad wrote that the “reasons for this (resignation) are too complex and I will share my thoughts in the coming days and weeks, after leaving government service.” 

Meanwhile, ‘Troika Plus’ went ahead and held their scheduled meeting alright in Moscow — minus the US, of course.

*

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

Featured image: A batch of emergency humanitarian aid donated by China arrived at Kabul International Airport, Afghanistan, September 29, 202 (Source: Indian Punchline)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

In country after country around the world, people are rising up to challenge entrenched, failing neoliberal political and economic systems, with mixed but sometimes promising results.

Progressive leaders in the U.S. Congress are refusing to back down on the Democrats’ promises to American voters to reduce poverty, expand rights to healthcare, education and clean energy, and repair a shredded social safety net. After decades of tax cuts for the rich, they are also committed to raising taxes on wealthy Americans and corporations to pay for this popular agenda.

Germany has elected a ruling coalition of Social Democrats, Greens and Free Democrats that excludes the conservative Christian Democrats for the first time since 2000. The new government promises a $14 minimum wage, solar panels on all suitable roof space, 2% of land for wind farms and the closure of Germany’s last coal-fired power plants by 2030.

Iraqis voted in an election that was called in response to a popular protest movement launched in October 2019 to challenge the endemic corruption of the post-2003 political class and its subservience to U.S. and Iranian interests. The protest movement was split between taking part in the election and boycotting it, but its candidates still won about 35 seats and will have a voice in parliament. The party of long-time Iraqi nationalist leader Muqtada al-Sadr won 73 seats, the largest of any single party, while Iranian-backed parties whose armed militias killed hundreds of protesters in 2019 lost popular support and many of their seats.

Chile’s billionaire president, Sebastian Piñera, is being impeached after the Pandora Papers revealed details of bribery and tax evasion in his sale of a mining company, and he could face up to 5 years in prison. Mass street protests in 2019 forced Piñera to agree to a new constitution to replace the one written under the Pinochet military dictatorship, and a convention that includes representatives of indigenous and other marginalized communities has been elected to draft the constitution. Progressive parties and candidates are expected to do well in the general election in November.

Maybe the greatest success of people power has come in Bolivia. In 2020, only a year after a U.S.-backed right-wing military coup, a mass mobilization of mostly indigenous working people forced a new election, and the socialist MAS Party of Evo Morales was returned to power. Since then it has already introduced a new wealth tax and welfare payments to four million people to help eliminate hunger in Bolivia.

The Ideological Context

Since the 1970s, Western political and corporate leaders have peddled a quasi-religious belief in the power of “free” markets and unbridled capitalism to solve all the world’s problems. This new “neoliberal” orthodoxy is a thinly disguised reversion to the systematic injustice of 19th century laissez-faire capitalism, which led to gross inequality and poverty even in wealthy countries, famines that killed tens of millions of people in India and China, and horrific exploitation of the poor and vulnerable worldwide.

For most of the 20th century, Western countries gradually responded to the excesses and injustices of capitalism by using the power of government to redistribute wealth through progressive taxation and a growing public sector, and ensure broad access to public goods like education and healthcare. This led to a gradual expansion of broadly shared prosperity in the United States and Western Europe through a strong public sector that balanced the power of private corporations and their owners.

The steadily growing shared prosperity of the post-WWII years in the West was derailed by a  combination of factors, including the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, Nixon’s freeze on prices and wages, runaway inflation caused by dropping the gold standard, and then a second oil crisis after the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Right-wing politicians led by Ronald Reagan in the United States and Margaret Thatcher in the U.K. blamed the power of organized labor and the public sector for the economic crisis. They launched a “neoliberal” counter-revolution to bust unions, shrink and privatize the public sector, cut taxes, deregulate industries and supposedly unleash “the magic of the market.” Then they took credit for a return to economic growth that really owed more to the end of the oil crises.

The United States and United Kingdom used their economic, military and media power to spread their neoliberal gospel across the world. Chile’s experiment in neoliberalism under Pinochet’s military dictatorship became a model for U.S. efforts to roll back the “pink tide” in Latin America. When the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe opened to the West at the end of the Cold War, it was the extreme, neoliberal brand of capitalism that Western economists imposed as “shock therapy” to privatize state-owned enterprises and open countries to Western corporations.

In the United States, the mass media shy away from the word “neoliberalism” to describe the changes in society since the 1980s. They describe its effects in less systemic terms, as globalization, privatization, deregulation, consumerism and so on, without calling attention to their common ideological roots. This allows them to treat its impacts as separate, unconnected problems: poverty and inequality, mass incarceration, environmental degradation, ballooning debt, money in politics, disinvestment in public services, declines in public health, permanent war, and record military spending.

After a generation of systematic neoliberal control, it is now obvious to people all over the world that neoliberalism has utterly failed to solve the world’s problems. As many predicted all along, it has just enabled the rich to get much, much richer, while structural and even existential problems remain unsolved.

Even once people have grasped the self-serving, predatory nature of this system that has overtaken their political and economic life, many still fall victim to the demoralization and powerlessness that are among its most insidious products, as they are brainwashed to see themselves only as individuals and consumers, instead of as active and collectively powerful citizens.

In effect, confronting neoliberalism—whether as individuals, groups, communities or countries—requires a two-step process. First, we must understand the nature of the beast that has us and the world in its grip, whatever we choose to call it. Second, we must overcome our own demoralization and powerlessness, and rekindle our collective power as political and economic actors to build the better world we know is possible.

We will see that collective power in the streets and the suites at COP26 in Glasgow, when the world’s leaders will gather to confront the reality that neoliberalism has allowed corporate profits to trump a rational response to the devastating impact of fossil fuels on the Earth’s climate. Extinction Rebellion and other groups will be in the streets in Glasgow, demanding the long-delayed action that is required to solve the problem, including an end to net carbon emissions by 2025.

While scientists warned us for decades what the result would be, political and business leaders have peddled their neoliberal snake oil to keep filling their coffers at the expense of the future of life on Earth. If we fail to stop them now, living conditions will keep deteriorating for people everywhere, as the natural world our lives depend on is washed out from under our feet, goes up in smoke and, species by species, dies and disappears forever.

The Covid pandemic is another real world case study on the impact of neoliberalism. As the official death toll reaches 5 million and many more deaths go unreported, rich countries are still hoarding vaccines, drug companies are reaping a bonanza of profits from vaccines and new drugs, and the lethal, devastating injustice of the entire neoliberal “market” system is laid bare for the whole world to see. Calls for a “people’s vaccine” and “vaccine justice” have been challenging what has now been termed “vaccine apartheid.”

Conclusion

In the 1980s, U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher often told the world, “There is no alternative” to the neoliberal order she and President Reagan were unleashing. After only one or two generations, the self-serving insanity they prescribed and the crises it has caused have made it a question of survival for humanity to find alternatives.

Around the world, ordinary people are rising up to demand real change. The people of Iraq, Chile and Bolivia have overcome the incredible traumas inflicted on them to take to the streets in the thousands and demand better government. Americans should likewise demand that our government stop wasting trillions of dollars to militarize the world and destroy countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, and start solving our real problems, here and abroad.

People around the world understand the nature of the problems we face better than we did a generation or even a decade ago. Now we must overcome demoralization and powerlessness in order to act. It helps to understand that the demoralization and powerlessness we may feel are themselves products of this neoliberal system, and that simply overcoming them is a victory in itself.

As we reject the inevitability of neoliberalism and Thatcher’s lie that there is no alternative, we must also reject the lie that we are just passive, powerless consumers. As human beings, we have the same collective power that human beings have always had to build a better world for ourselves and our children – and now is the time to harness that power.

*

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

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

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

Both authors are frequent contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is by Tom Pennington

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

American billionaires’ wallets have had a good year, with their fortunes growing by 70%.

That’s according to a new report from the left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and Americans for Tax Fairness, which tracks gains from March 18, 2020 to October 15, 2021. The groups analyzed real time data from Forbes on gains by the ten-figure club to find that billionaires in the US added a cumulative $2.1 trillion to their net worths during the pandemic.

It’s the latest data point showing that the world’s richest grew both in ranks and in fortune. In April, IPS released a report that found the world’s billionaires added $4 trillion to their wealth from March 18, 2020 to March 18, 2021. Research firm Wealth-X found that the number of billionaires in the world rose to over 3,000 in 2020 – a new record. The US alone rose from 614 billionaires in March 2020 to 745 this month.

Here’s how much America’s wealthiest added to their collective fortunes, and how their net worths stack up.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk saw the biggest gains by far. He again surpassed former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos as the richest person in the world in March, a fact he hasn’t been shy about touting. Just this month he tweeted a silver medal at Bezos in response to a tweet from Bezos heralding Amazon’s success.

The gains come as America reckons with pandemic-exacerbated inequality. Across the country, thousands of workers are striking for better conditions and higher pay; millions of Americans are also quitting their roles en masse, driving up wages as the workforce contends with record months of quits.

Meanwhile, the top 1% of Americans just surpassed the entire middle class in how much wealth they hold. That unevenness – alongside continued revelations into how the world’s ultrawealthy weasel out of paying taxes through intricate loopholes and financial structures – have prompted calls for higher taxes on the highest-earners, alongside increased enforcement.

President Joe Biden has proposed tax measures targeted at America’s wealthiest to offset the costs of his party-line infrastructure package. His original plan included an increase in the top individual tax rate, along with a nearly doubled rate for capital gains – the profits from assets like bonds and stacks – although that rate eventually shrunk in Democrats’ proposal. The package would also pour money into the IRS to increase enforcement

A recent study from IRS researchers and academics found that the top 1% of Americans fail to report about a quarter of their income to the IRS. Income underreporting is nearly twice as high for the top 0.1%, which could account for billions in unreported taxes.

The gap between taxes owed and taxes paid could only grow if left without intervention, according to the Department of Treasury. Treasury estimates that Biden’s proposed $80 billion investment in the IRS could bring in an additional $700 billion over 10 years. That’s still with hundreds of billions in taxes going uncollected each year, as Insider’s Ayelet Sheffey reports.

Biden has also backed a proposal from Senate Finance Chair Ron Wyden that would tax unrealized gains from billionaires. Essentially, it would tax the profits that billionaires rake in from those capital gains, even if they’re not selling them off. A report from White House economists – which figured in those gains as income – found that America’s 400 wealthiest families pay just 8.2% in income taxes annually.

However, the fate of tax hikes is currently imperiled. Key moderate senator Kyrsten Sinema opposes raising taxes for both individuals and large corporations, Insider’s Joseph Zeballos-Roig reported. Her support is pivotal in getting a party-line package passed.

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

With the exception of Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11, 2001, Americans have not been attacked by an enemy on our own soil. Unlike countries in Europe during World War II, America has never been occupied by a military force or locked down under martial law.

We have never seen soldiers in armored vehicles patrolling the streets, warning us to stay in our homes or face arrest – or worse.

Beginning in 1776, when our freedom seeking founders wrote the Declaration of Independence¹ and stood their ground from Lexington and Concord to Saratoga and Valley Forge,² and then came together to create a constitutional Republic dedicated to protecting individual and minority rights, ³ the United States of America has defined and served as a beacon for liberty for people around the world. ⁴

This summer, we watched soldiers patrolling the streets of Sydney, Australia with helicopters overhead blaring warnings to a stunned, locked down people to stay in their homes in the name of the public health.^{5 6 7}

We have watched hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, gather together again and again in the streets of Paris, London, Rome, Athens, and Berlin.^{8 9 1011 12} They are marching against authoritarianism, the kind of Orwellian authoritarianism embodied in government issued vaccine passports that punish citizens for simply defending the right to make a voluntary medical decision for themselves and their minor children,¹³ a decision about whether to be injected with a biological pharmaceutical product that can cause serious reactions,^{14 15 16 17}  injure,^{18 19 20 21} kill^{22 23 24} or fail to work.^{25 26 27 28}

The signs they carry say:

“No forced testing, no forced vaccines”

“Stop the dictatorship”

“Hands off our children:

“My body is mine”

“Big Pharma shackles freedom”

“No to the Pass of shame”

“Better to die free than live as a slave”

In what has become a prophetic primal scream for liberty, governments are ordering the police to break up the largely peaceful demonstrators^{29 30} flooding the big cities and small villages of western Europe, the first populations to organize massive public protests against old fashioned tyranny dressed up in 21^st century clothes.

The people of Europe were the first to stand up for freedom during this government declared public health emergency because they know how tyranny begins. They know what it looks like and they remember what it feels like. They remember and are declaring, “Never again.”

In America, We Have Taken Our Freedom for Granted

Most Americans living today do not remember World War II or, if they do, it is through what their parents or grandparents told them about it. World War II was not fought on American soil. Americans went to war in Europe to stop the slaughter of millions at the hands of an authoritarian fascist government commanding the Army of the Third Reich that killed in the name of the public health and safety,^{31 32} even an authoritarian communist government slaughtered many more millions during a “Reign of Terror” in the Soviet Union. ³³ Most American children today are not taught what happened in China after World War II, when the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) implemented the Great Leap Forward and the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. Those militant ideological cleansing campaigns imprisoned and killed tens of millions of citizens because they criticized or opposed authoritarian government policies.^{34 35}

In America, we have taken our freedom for granted because, while we have been willing to fight to defend the freedom of others, we have never been called upon to defend it in our own backyard. Most Americans have never imagined we would experience a serious threat to autonomy and freedom of thought, ^{36 37} speech,^{38 39}conscience^{40 41}  and assembly.⁴² So deep has been our trust in the laws and cultural values which have, for the most part, ensured fundamental freedoms in our country, that we never believed it could happen here.⁴³⁴⁴

But the last 20 months have changed everything. Many Americans have begun to understand that tyranny can be disguised to look like safety, even as many others still cannot bring themselves to believe it.

America’s Move Toward Authoritarianism

Striking fear into the hearts and minds of the people, the move toward authoritarianism in America began with government officials suddenly telling us – even children as young as two years old – that we could not breathe fresh air or enter public spaces without a mask covering our face.^{45 46 47 48 49}  Millions of American workers judged to be “non-essential” lost the ability to earn a living so they could eat and pay rent during “flatten the curve” lockdowns we were told would only last a few weeks but, instead, went on for months.^{50 51 52} Anyone who criticized government narratives about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 virus^{53 54} or questioned social distancing restrictions was immediately publicly shamed and censored.^{55 56 57} Any doctor, who tried to provide early treatment to COVID-19 patients by repurposing safe and effective licensed drugs and nutritional supplements to help their patients survive the infection, ⁵⁸ were also publicly shamed and censored.^{59 60}

After the FDA granted Pfizer and Moderna an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) ⁶¹ in December 2020 to distribute their liability free experimental mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S.,^{62 63 64 65}  public health officials enlisted big corporations to launch a hard-sell national vaccine advertising campaign targeting all Americans over the age of 12. ^{66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73} Anyone who asked questions or challenged the hard sell was immediately censored on social media.^{74  75 76  77}  State governments and employers were encouraged to threaten workers,⁷⁸ especially health care workers and emergency responders, with loss of their jobs for refusing the vaccine.^{79 8081 82} Private businesses were encouraged to deny unvaccinated citizens entry to restaurants, stores and other public venues.⁸³

By the end of July 2021, the Department of Veteran Affairs directed all VA health care workers to be fully vaccinated or lose their jobs. ⁸⁴ In early August, the Department of Defense announced that all military service members must be fully vaccinated when the FDA officially licenses a COVID-19 vaccine or lose their jobs. ⁸⁵ Suddenly, on Aug. 23, the Pfizer mRNA vaccine was licensed without a public meeting of the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRPBAC) and full disclosure of the scientific data supporting licensure.⁸⁶

By the end of August, about 176 million Americans had been “fully” vaccinated, representing 53.6 percent of our population of 333 million people,⁸⁷ which is the third largest in the world. And studies had confirmed that the SARS-CoV-2 infection mortality ratio (IFR) in the U.S. remains at less than one percent.⁸⁸

Federal Government Declares War on Unvaccinated Americans

But the Executive Branch of the US government was not happy. Federal health officials had publicly set the goal of persuading 90 percent of Americans to get the COVID vaccine,⁸⁹ although it is clear now that the real goal all along was a 100 percent vaccination rate: no exceptions and no questions asked.

At the beginning of September, the politics of persuasion gave way to an iron fisted approach using the heel of the boot of the State to try to club 100 million unvaccinated Americans into submission.

On Sept. 9, 2021, the President of the United States followed the advice of top public health officials and, in effect, declared war on unvaccinated Americans.^{90 91} He scapegoated and placed all the blame for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on the unvaccinated, even though federal health officials admit that fully vaccinated people can still get infected and transmit the virus to others;^{92 93 94 95} and even though breakthrough COVID infections, hospitalizations and deaths in fully vaccinated people are on the rise; ^{96 97} and even though evidence shows individuals who have recovered from the infection have stronger natural immunity than those who have been vaccinated; ⁹⁸ and even though officials at the World Health Organization now say that the SARS-COV-2 virus is mutating like influenza and is likely to become prevalent in every county – no matter how high the vaccination rate.^{99 100}

The President told 100 million unvaccinated Americans that “our patience is running thin” and issued an Executive Order that every person working for the Executive Branch of the federal government – more than two million people – must get fully vaccinated or lose their jobs.¹⁰¹  That order also applied to about 17 million health care professionals working in medical facilities that accept Medicare and Medicaid.¹⁰²

There is no option for Executive Branch employees to get tested – the rule is get vaccinated or be fired. It is interesting that the order does not apply to workers in the Judicial Branch or Legislative Branch, which includes members and staffers in Congress.

The President also ordered the Department of Labor to issue a rule that carries penalties of $14,000 per violation to force private companies with more than 100 employees to get their workers fully vaccinated or be tested weekly. He also called for all teachers and school staff in all schools to be fully vaccinated.^{103 104}

The next day, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci, criticized the President for not going far enough.¹⁰⁵ Fauci said the government should give Americans no option but to get injected with the biological product that some describe as a vaccine, others characterize as a genetic therapy or cell disrupter biological, and others allege is a bioweapon made in a lab in China with U.S. funding.^{106 107 108} Then Fauci said all children must be vaccinated or denied a school education¹⁰⁹ and all unvaccinated people must be banned from getting on an airplane.¹¹⁰ At the same time, a Virginia congressman introduced the Safety Travel Act that would require travelers getting on a plane or Amtrak train in the U.S. to show proof of COVID vaccination or a negative COVID test within 72 hours of boarding.¹¹¹

Destroying the Lives of Those Who Dissent

Today, people in some cities are being denied entrance to restaurants and stores if they can’t prove they have been “fully” vaccinated.¹¹² Doctors are refusing to provide medical care to the unvaccinated.¹¹³ Hollywood entertainers are celebrating the deaths of unvaccinated people, saying they deserved to die, and are calling for the unvaccinated who get COVID to be denied admission to hospitals for treatment. ^{114 115} Judges are separating children from mothers who have not gotten a COVID shot. ¹¹⁶ Influential scientists are insisting lawmakers make it a hate crime for anyone to publicly criticize scientists and government health officials. ¹¹⁷

Dissenters are told they are “selfish”¹¹⁸ and characterized as an enemy of the state¹¹⁹ for simply defending the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking.¹²⁰ The normalizing of the ritualistic persecution of Americans who are refusing to give up the right to autonomy – which is the first and most fundamental human right – is underway. The Orwellian message is: the life of any person who dissents from government policy must be systematically destroyed.

Demanding obedience, government health officials characterize public health policies that segregate, discriminate and turn people against each other as “the good.” Yet, a lot of Americans instinctively know segregation and discrimination is not good. They know that persuading a majority of citizens to scapegoat a minority of citizens to cover up the failures of government is allowing evil to triumph.

Dissenting Americans, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, fill the ranks of every socio-economic class, every political party and every faith-based community. They understand the meaning of the warning that, “The only thing necessary for triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,” and they are not going to stand by and do nothing.

When government threatens to take away an individual’s right to employment, education, health care and the ability to enter a store to buy food, enter a hospital or travel on public transportation, there is no other word for it but tyranny.

Weaponizing a Virus and A Vaccine Against the People

This virus, which has a 99 percent survival rate, and this leaky vaccine, which fails to reliably prevent infection and transmission in the fully vaccinated, has racked up a record breaking more than half a million vaccine adverse event reports in the U.S. alone.¹²¹ It will not be the last virus and vaccine to be weaponized against the people in the name of the greater good.

That is because forced vaccination is the tip of the spear in a culture war that has been going on for much longer than the 40 years that I have been a vaccine safety and human rights activist publicly warning that this day would come.^{122 123 124} It is a war that will cause more suffering until enough of us refuse to be siloed and, instead, join together to change dangerous laws that abuse the trust and good will of the people.

Every single American, whether you have been vaccinated or not, should stop to reflect upon what is happening in our country. Think about what liberty means.

Imagine What Life Will Be Like in the Future

Imagine what life will be like in the future if you cannot leave your home without being harnessed to a government issued digital ID, which contains personal information about your body and your life, and is hooked up to an electronic surveillance system that records and controls every move you make.

Imagine if you are a health care worker and your medical license is taken from you for refusing to get a government mandated vaccine, which is a public health policy being implemented in Washington, DC,¹²⁵ a city where doctors can now vaccinate children as young as 11 years old without the knowledge or consent of their parents.¹²⁶

Imagine if you cannot hold any type of job or enter a grocery store to buy food to feed your family, or enter a drug store, cafe, gym, school,¹²⁷ cinema, museum, park or beach without showing proof you’ve been vaccinated.

Imagine if you are denied entrance to a doctor’s office or lose your Medicare and social security benefits because you don’t have the vaccine passport, a suggestion made recently on national television.¹²⁸

Imagine if you cannot get on a plane or bus to visit your children or elderly parents because federal government officials have exercised authority over inter-state commerce and banned the unvaccinated from crossing state borders, an action that some proponents of forced vaccination are urging the current administration to invoke.^{129 130}

Imagine if you cannot get a driver’s license, file your taxes, open or access your bank account or use a credit card to make a purchase if you fail to produce the required vaccine paperwork stamped by the government.

Imagine if you or your child have already suffered a previous serious vaccine reaction or have an underlying inflammatory immune disorder that increases your risk for being harmed by vaccination,^{131 132 133} but doctors refuse to see you because you are unvaccinated – which is already happening in America – and you are denied admission to a hospital for a life saving operation.

Forced Vaccination Was Always the End Game Before and During this Pandemic

If you think that that the vaccine passport is only about this virus and this vaccine, think again. Forced vaccination was always the end game both before and during this pandemic and the proof of that lies in the decades of federal legislation and federal agency rule making paving the way for what we are experiencing today.^{134 135 136 137 138} Right now, forced vaccination is the quickest means to what the World Economic Forum transparently describes on its website as “The Great Reset.”¹³⁹ You, your children and grandchildren are the commodity, and in the name of the greater good, you are expected to obediently allow others to “reset” your lives in all kinds of ways without making a sound.

The government issued passport allowing you to function in society, is just the first step on the slippery slope to what will be many more requirements and restrictions on your freedom in the days, months and years to come. The question is, will you allow yourself to be used and abused by those currently holding the power to do what they want to do to you, or will you defend your God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

This pandemic of deception and incompetence has stolen from our daily lives the peace and joy we deserve to have, leaving too many of us confused and paralyzed by fear, divided from our family and friends, crippled with anxiety and despair, allowing hopelessness to rule our days.

We Can Refuse to Live in Fear and Push Back Against Authoritarianism

It doesn’t have to be like this. We can refuse to be psychologically manipulated so we are unable to engage in rational thinking and are crippled by fear.  We can push back against the authoritarians taking away our freedom and trying to divide us. We can do it the way that all successful social reform movements before us have done it: through actively participating in local, state and federal government and by engaging in non-violent civil disobedience,¹⁴⁰ if that becomes necessary.

Instead of allowing ourselves to be separated from one another, we can stay connected and meet together in small groups in our homes and neighborhoods.  We can develop personal relationships with our elected officials at every level of government – from our local sheriff and elected members of local school boards and city and county councils, to our elected state and federal legislators. If we don’t like the way the people we have elected are governing, we can vote them out, or run for office ourselves and help change the laws.

We can talk to the young men and women serving in our community police departments and the U.S. military to remind them of how important it is to value and protect human rights and civil liberties, so that if they are ever called upon to implement authoritarian rule, they will make the right choice.

Above all, we can be self-disciplined and make rational decisions that do not lead to violent confrontations, because that kind of behavior only plays into the hands of those, whose ultimate goal is to take away autonomy and more individual freedoms in the United States. During the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s, the most profound statements were made by those who sat down in the front of the bus, or in a chair at a segregated restaurant or other public place, and simply refused to move.¹⁴¹

Standing Our Ground During This Time of Oppression and Suffering

There are restaurant owners in New York City, who are refusing to follow orders directing them to discriminate against and deny service to the unvaccinated. ^{142 143}

There are veteran health care workers on the frontlines caring for patients during the pandemic, who are being fired for supporting informed consent rights, ^{144 145} and giving up their careers to stand on principle. Many of them suspect that the next cruel order they will be told to obey is to deny life saving medical treatment to unvaccinated patients.

There are corporate CEO’s and union leaders, who are refusing to bow to political pressure to require rank and file workers to get the vaccine or risk losing their jobs.^{146 147}

There are courageous doctors and scientists, who have never spoken out publicly before, who are risking their careers by demanding that mass vaccination policies be backed up by good science;^{148 149} who are challenging the government’s narrative that natural immunity is not as good as vaccine acquired immunity; ¹⁵⁰who are criticizing the long term safety of mRNA vaccines,¹⁵¹ and providing convincing evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus did not spontaneously jump out of a bat but was genetically engineered by scientists in biohazard labs. ¹⁵²

There are state lawmakers, who are listening to the people and refusing to vote for the passage of forced vaccination laws that perpetuate the illusion that vaccine passports are the only solution to ending the pandemic.^{153 154}

These Americans are rejecting authoritarianism. They are heroes, and they are on the right side of history.

They and many other brave Americans are helping us make our way through this time of fear, oppression and suffering when the cultural values and beliefs that have guaranteed freedom in this great country of ours are being tested.

Restoring the Spirit of Freedom to the Center of Our Culture

I believe we will come together and pass this test. We will act responsibly to protect our liberty. We will restore the spirit of freedom to its rightful place at the center of our culture.

We will do it because we know that if the state can tag, track down and force individuals against their will to be injected with biologicals of known and unknown toxicity today, then there will be no limit on which individual freedoms the state can take away in the name of the greater good tomorrow.

You can choose to be a hero wherever you live. You can choose to reject the ugly call to shame and punish your friends, family members, neighbors, colleagues and fellow citizens for defending the human right to autonomy and protection of bodily integrity, which is the essence of the informed consent ethic. You can choose freedom over fear.

Be the one who never has to say you did not do today what you could have done to change tomorrow. Do it for yourself, your children and grandchildren, and for all the generations to come.

It’s your health, your family, your choice. And our mission continues:

No forced vaccination. Not in America.

*

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

Notes

1 America’s Founding Documents: Declaration of Independence, U. S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. U.S. Archives.

2 John Jay College of Criminal Justice. American History: The Revolutionary War: Major Battles and Campaigns. Lloyd Sealy Library July 15, 2021.

3 Jefferson T. First Inaugural Address of President Thomas Jefferson, Mar. 4, 1801. National Archives. “All too will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression.”

4 Ortega I. America, the Great Beacon of Liberty. The Heritage Foundation July 5, 2011.

5 Pyman T. Australia uses helicopters and the ARMY to enforce its “Zero Covid” lockdown as thousands of police flood Sydney to enforce the rules and hand out $500 no-mask fines – with just 17% of adults vaccinated. Daily Mail July 31, 2021.

6 News Australia. Lockdown protestors clash with police in Sydney and Melbourne. Aug. 21, 2021. (VIDEO)

7 Alam HA. Hundreds of anti-lockdown protesters clash with police in Australia. CNN Sept. 18, 2021.

8 Fisher BL. Protests Against COVID Lockdowns Flare Up in 2021 Around the World. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 29, 2021.

9 Fisher BL. Hundreds of thousands march in London Protesting Pandemic Restrictions, Vaccine Passports. The Vaccine Reaction May 31, 2021.

10 Fisher BL. Mass Protests in Greece and France Opposing COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates and Health Passports. The Vaccine Reaction July 18, 2021.

11 Fisher BL. COVID Vaccine Mandates Strongly Opposed in Europe, US as Vaccine Failures Increase; Australia: The Lockdown is killing us, not COVID.” The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 2, 2020.

12 Lewis L, Conner N. Non! Hundreds of thousands of protestors take to the streets of Paris in opposition to controversial vaccine passport after it was launched amid backlash. Daily Mail Aug. 14, 2021.

13 Ellyatt H. ‘Breaking society apart’: Unvaccinated people are angry as they face more Covid restrictions. CNBC Aug. 13, 2021.

14 Higgins-Dunn N. FDA staff recommends watching for Bell’s palsy in Moderna and Pfizer vaccine recipients. CNBC Dec. 15, 2020.

15 CDC. Allergic Reactions Inducing Anaphylaxis After Receipt of the First Dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine – United States, December 14-23, 2020. MMWR Jan. 15, 2021; 70(2): 46-51.

16 Rutkowski K, Mirakian R et al. Adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines: a practical approach. Clin Exp Allergy 2021; 51(6): 770-777.

17 Kania K, Ambrosius W, Kupczyk ET, Kozubski W. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis in a patient vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology Sept. 4, 2021.

18 CDC. Myocarditis and Pericarditis After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination. Sept. 8, 2021.

19 The Rio Times. NCAA Golfer has severe adverse heart condition due to Covid vaccine, speaks out against vaccine mandates. Sept. 17, 2021.

20 Bussel JB, Connors JM, Cines DB et al. Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (also termed Vaccine-induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia). American Society of Hematology Aug. 12, 2021.

21 Classen JB. US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint,
“All Cause Severe Morbidity.” Trend Int Med 2021; 1(1): 1-6.

22 Fisher BL. Healthy Mom, 39, in Utah Dies of Organ Failure Four Days After Moderna COVID Vaccination. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 15, 2021.

23 Fisher BL. More Deaths Reported to VAERS Following COVID-19 Vaccinations Than for Any Other Vaccine. The Vaccine Reaction July 11, 2021.

24 Menon P. New Zealand reports first death linked to Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Reuters Aug. 30, 2021.

25 Hains T. CDC Director: Vaccines No Longer Prevent You From Spreading COVID. RealClearPolitics Aug. 6, 2021.

26 Yahi N, Chahinian H, Fantini J. Infection-enhancing antiSARSCoV2 antibodies recognize both the original Wuhan-D614G strain and Delta variants – A potential risk for mass vaccination? J Infect Aug. 9, 2021.

27 Van Beusekom M. Studies: COVID vaccine protection waning against infection but not hospitalization. CIDRAP Aug. 18, 2021.

28 Chemaitely H, Tang P, Hasan MR et al. Waning of BNT162b2 vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in Qatar.MedRxiv Aug. 27, 2021.

29 McLaughlin K, Ardrey T. Video Shows French police using tear gas to break up anti-vaccine protests. Business Insider July 14, 2021.

30 Mang C. Thousands march in Berlin in second day of anti-vaccination protests. Reuters Aug. 29, 2021.

31 Biddiss M. Disease and dictatorship: the case of Hitler’s Reich. J R Soc Med 1997; 90: 342-346.

32 Bachrach S. In the Name of Public Health – Nazi Racial Hygiene. N Eng J Med 2004; 351(5): 417-420.

33 Starks TA. Propagandizing the Healthy, Bolshevik Life in the Early USSR. AJPH 2017; 107(11): 1718-1724.

34 Effer DB. Medicine in Red China. Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 1974; 67(2): 167-174.

35 Strauss V, Southeri D. How Many Died? New Evidence Suggests Far Higher Numbers for the Victims of Mao Zedong’s Era. Washington Post July 17, 1994.

36 Alwine J, Goodrum F. Personal freedoms should not trump public health. The Hill Dec. 5, 2020.

37 Sgaier S, Saldanha N. Biden’s Covid-19 Task Force Needs Behavioral Scientists. Harvard Business Review Dec. 8, 2020.

38 Thompson A, Otterbeing H, Ollstein AM. Anti-vaxx politicians under fire as coronavirus spreads. Politico Mar. 21, 2020.

39 Magness PW, Yang E. Who Fact Checks the Fact Checkers? A Report on Media Censorship. American Enterprise Economic Institute Aug. 11, 2021.

40 Chermerinsky E. Op-Ed: Don’t exempt religious objectors from vaccine mandates. Los Angeles Times July 23, 2021.

41 Low D. Remove religious exemption from childhood vaccines. Seattle Times Sept. 7, 2021.

42 Napolitano AP. Coronavirus fear lets government assault our freedom in violation of Constitution. Fox News  Mar. 19, 2020.

43 Kramer J. COVID-19 vaccines could become mandatory. Here’s how it might work. National Geographic Aug. 19, 2020.

44 CDC. Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings. July 26, 2020.

45 Shepardson D. CDC orders sweeping U.S. transportation mask mandate as COVID-19 rages. Reuters Jan. 29, 2021.

46 Alexander PE. Masking Children: Tragic, Unscientific and Damaging. American Institute for Economic Research Mar. 10, 2021.

47 Zweig D. Experts: CDC’s Summer-Camp Rules Are ‘Cruel’ and ‘Irrational.’ New York Magazine May 4, 2021.

48 Walach H, Weikl R, Prentice J et al. Experimental Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Content in Inhaled Air With or Without Face Masks in Healthy Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatr June 30, 2021.

49 Markowitz A. State-by-State Guide to Face Mask Requirements. AARP July 28, 2021.

50 NPR. Public Health Experts Encourage Social Distancing to “Flatten the Curve” of Infection. Mar. 11, 2020.

51 Fisher BL. Unprecedented Response to COVID-19 by Governments Prohibits Physical Contact and Cripples World Economy. NVIC Newsletter Mar. 29, 2020.

53 Young a. Could an accident have caused COVID-19? Why the Wuhan lab-leak theory shouldn’t be dismissed. USA Today Mar. 22, 2021.

54 Henderson DR, Hooper CL. The Origin of SARS-CoV-2. American Institute for Economic Research June 18, 2021.

55 International Press Institute. Emergency COVID-19 measures must. not be used to roll back media freedom. Mar. 17, 2020.

56 Griffith K. Critics blast YouTube for ‘censorship’ for removing video of doctors urging an end to coronavirus shutdowns because they disputed ‘local health authorities.’ Daily Mail Apr. 29, 2020.

57 Richard L. ‘Single most qualified’ mRNA expert speaks about vaccine risks after he says YouTube banned his video. Yahoo June 24, 2021.

58 One America News Network. Veronica Wolski: A Medical Freedom Horror Story. Sept. 15, 2021.

59 Klecker M. State Sen. Scott Jensen says he’s being investigated by the state medical board for COVID-19 comments. Star-Tribune July 8, 2020.

60 Henderson DR, Hooper CL. Why Is the FDA Attacking a Safe and Effective Drug? Wall Street Journal July 28, 2021.

61 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Dec. 18, 2020.

62 FDA. FDA Takes Key Action in Fight Against COVID-19 By Issuing An Emergency Use Authorization for First COVID-19 Vaccine. FDA Press Release Dec. 11, 2020.

63 FDA. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 11, 2020.

64 FDA. FDA Takes Additional Action in Fight Against COVID-19 by Issuing an Emergency Use Authorization for Second COVID-19 Vaccine. FDA Press Release Dec. 17, 2020.

65 FDA. Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 18, 2020.

66 Welsh B. LAFD Officials Offering Vaccine Incentives. Los Angeles Times Jan. 6, 2021.

67 Sharma A. Roughly Half of Caregivers At Long Term Care Facilities Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine. KPBS Jan. 15, 2021.

68 Parpia R. Amazon, Google, Walmart and Starbucks Partnering with Local Governments to Distribute COVID-19 Vaccines. The Vaccine Reaction Jan. 31, 2021.

69 Megan Garnett Coyle. Ad Tech Leaders Unite to Measure the Ad Council & COVID Collaborative’s COVID-19 Vaccine Education Initiative – the Largest PSA Campaign in US History. Businesswire Mar. 30. 2021.

70 Fisher BL. Seeing through the COVID-19 Spin. NVIC Newsletter Apr. 26, 2021.

71 Raines K. State and Local Governments and Companies Offer Incentives to Get Vaccinated for COVID-19. The Vaccine Reaction July 4, 2021.

72 Solomon L. Vaccine Skepticism is Soaring Amid Heightened Government Hype and Steps to Hide Unwelcome Data. The Epoch Times May 12, 2021.

73 Durkee A. Biden’s ‘Door to Door’ Vaccine Plan Could Fizzle with Unvaccinated Republicans, Poll Suggests. Forbes July 14, 2021.

74 Fisher BL. Vaccination and Censorship: The Truth Will Set Us Free. NVIC Newsletter Jan. 26, 2021.

75 Attkisson S. CENSORED: National Vaccine Information Center. Mar. 8, 2021.

76 Attkisson S. Vaccine Info Site: CENSORED. May 4, 2021.

77 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Suspended from Twitter. May 24, 2021.

78 Emanuel EJ, Guido M, Diana A. Private companies must require vaccines for workers It’s the only way to get past COVID.USA Today July 26, 2021.

79  Fisher BL. Texas Bill Still Pending After Historic Hearing to Prohibit Vaccine Mandates and COVID Vaccine Passports. NVIC Newsletter May 21, 2021.

80 Stengle J. Houston hospital workers fired, resign over COVID-19 vaccine. Associated Press June 22, 2021.

81 Silvarole G. NY approves COVID mandate for health care workers, removes religious exemption. Democrat & Chronicle Aug. 26, 2021.

82 Wynter K, Kang G. LA city firefighters suing over COVID vaccine mandate. KTLA Sept. 16, 2021.

83 Ortiz JL, Aspegren E, Vargas S. New York Gov. Cuomo urges businesses to adopt ‘vaccine-only admission.’ USA Today Aug. 2, 2021.

84 Federal News Network. VA Mandates COVID-19 Vaccine for Health Care Workers. July 26, 2021.

85 Baldor CC. COVID vaccines to be required for military under new US plan. Associated Press Aug. 9, 2021.

86 Hendler C, Wrangham T, Caceres M. FDA Approves BioNTech’s Comirnaty. Pfizer COVID Shot Remains Experimental. The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 4, 2021.

87 World O Meter. US Population.

88 Irons NJ, Raftery AE. Estimating SARS-CoV-2 infections from deaths, confirmed cases, tests, and random surveys. Proc Natl Acad Sci Aug. 3, 2021.

89 Weixel N. Fauci Herd immunity could require 90 percent of the country to be vaccinated. The Hill Dec. 24, 2020.

90 Miller Z. Sweeping new vaccine mandates for 100 million Americans. Associated Press Sept. 9, 2021.

91 Stolberg SK, Rogers K. Biden’s New Vaccine Requirements Draw Praise, Condemnation and Caution. New York Times Sept. 9, 2021.

92 Bleier BS, Ramanthan M, Lane AP. COVID-19 Vaccines May Not Prevent Nasal SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Asymptomatic Transmission. Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery Dec. 15, 2020.

93 Plan Healthcare. New CDC Mask Guidelines Rest on Data Showing the Vaccinated May Transmit Virus – The New York Times. July 30, 2021.

94 Becker K. CDC Director Admits to CNN That COVID Vaccines Don’t Prevent Transmission of Virus. Becker News Aug. 6, 2021.

95 Ledger J. You’ve Had a COVID ‘Breakthrough Infection’ – Can You Really Spread It to Others? Yale Medicine Aug. 11, 2021.

96 Caceres M. More Breakthrough Cases of COVID Ending in Hospitalization or Death. The Vaccine Reaction Sept. 5, 2021.

97 Shastri J, Parikh S, Aggarwahl V et al. Severe SARS-CoV-2 Breakthrough Infection by Alpha Variant in a Fully Vaccinated Health Care Worker. Frontiers in Medicine Aug. 20, 2021.

98 Wadman M. Having SARS-CoV-2 once confers much greater immunity than a vaccine – but vaccination remains vital. ScienceAug. 26, 2021.

99 Mendez R. WHO says Covid will mutate like the flu and is likely here to stay. CNBC Sept. 7, 2021.

100 Phillips N. The coronavirus is here to stay – here’s what that means. Nature Feb. 16, 2021.

101 The White House. Path out of the Pandemic: President Biden’s COVID-19 Plan. Sept. 9, 2019.

102 Rosenthal J, Gee E, Calsyn M. Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations for Health Care Workers As a Condition for Medicare and Medicaid Participation. American Progress Institute Aug. 6, 2021.

103 O’Kane C. All New York City public school teachers and staff must be vaccinated, Mayor Bill de Blasio announces. CBS News Aug. 23, 2021.

104 Zilber A, Associated Press. Furious teachers protesting mandatory vaccinations march across Brooklyn Bridge chanting ‘F*** Joe Biden’: Businesses reel against new NYC indoor vaccine rule crackdown amid Delta infections flattening. Mail Online Sept. 14, 2021.

105 Alexander H. Fauci tells Biden to go FURTHER: CDC chief says president’s sweeping COVID-19 vaccine mandate is a ‘MODERATE’ plan and he would not give Americans the option of testing instead. Daily Mail Sept. 10, 2021.

106 Gertz B. Coronavirus link to China biowarfare program possible, analyst says. The Washington Times Jan. 26, 2020.

107 Shepherd I. mRNA Vaccines: The Silent Weapon. Lew Rockwell Aug. 28, 2021.

108 Browne E. Fauci Was “Untruthful” to Congress About Wuhan Lab Research, New Documents Appear To Show. NewsweekSept. 9, 2021.

109 So L. Fauci backs COVID-19 vaccine mandate for US children. Reuters Aug. 29, 2021.

110 Blanco A. ‘If you travel on a plane you should be vaccinated’: Fauci demands vaccine mandate for air travel and public schools in bid to reach herd immunity. Daily Mail Sept. 13, 2021. 

111  Beyer D. Beyer Introduces Legislation Requiring Vaccination or Testing for Airport, Amtrak Travelers and Workers. Press Release Sept. 9, 2021.

112 Milligan S. No Shot, No Shoes, No Service. US News & World Reports July 30, 2021.

113 Parpia R. US Doctors Refuse to Provide Care for Unvaccinated COVID Patients. The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 30, 2021.

114 Garvey M. Howard Stern to anti-vaxxers: ‘You had the cure and you wouldn’t take it.’ CNN Sept. 10, 2021.

115 Cohen K, Torres L. Jimmy Kimmel says unvaccinated. people shouldn’t get ICU beds in hospitals. Yahoo News Sept. 8, 2021.

116 Fox32. “Exceeds his jurisdiction:’ Chicago judge strips child custody from unvaccinated mother. Aug. 27, 2021.

117 Hotez PJ. Mounting antiscience aggression in the United States. PLOS Biology July 28, 2021.

118 Beam C. Why refusing the COVID-19 vaccine isn’t just immoral – it’s un-American.’ The Conversation Aug. 9, 2021.

119 Wilson J. US was warned of threat from anti-vaxxers in event of pandemic. The Guardian Apr. 27, 2020.

120 Fisher BL. Why Is Informed Consent to Vaccination A Human Right? NVIC Newsletter June 28, 2017.

121 MedAlerts. Search the VAERS Database: COVID-19 Vaccine.

122 Fisher BL. The Moral Right to Conscientious, Philosophical and Personal Belief Exemption to Vaccination. National Vaccine Advisory Committee May 2, 1997.

123 Fisher BL. The Vaccine Culture War in America: Are You Ready? NVIC Newsletter Mar. 8, 2015.

124 Fisher BL. Taking No Prisoners in the Vaccine Culture War. NVIC Newsletter Mar. 13, 2019.

125 Segraves M. DC Health Care Workers Could Lose Licenses if Unvaccinated. NBC Sept. 7, 2021.

126 Fisher BL. Doctors Given Power to Vaccinate Young Children Without Knowledge of Parents. NVIC Newsletter June 28, 2021.

127 Zwicker H. Is GMU Coercing students and staff to get experimental COVID-19 vaccine? Fairfax Times July 2, 2021.

128 Miller M. Vaccine should be mandatory for those receiving government healthcare, ABD News’s Margaret Hoover says. Yahoo July 26, 2021.

129 Gersen JS. Should the Government Impose a National Vaccination Mandate? The New Yorker Aug. 26, 2021.

130 Bomboy S. Current constitutional issues related to vaccine mandates. Constitution Daily Aug. 6, 2021.

131 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Evaluating Biological Mechanisms of Adverse Events: Increased Susceptibility. Chapter 3 (p. 82). Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality; Washington, DC: The National Academies Press 2012.

132 Fisher BL.  Do You Know How to Identify a Vaccine Reaction? NVIC Newsletter  Aug. 27, 2018.

133  Fisher BL. Witnessing the Vaccine Injury Epidemic. Nov. 14, 2019; National Mall, Washington, DC.

134 Fisher BL. The National Electronic Vaccine Tracking Registry: History of Forced Vaccination: How The Plan To Force Vaccination Gave Birth To The National ID, A Government Health Records Database, and the End of Medical Privacy. National Vaccine Information Center July 1999.

135 NVIC. National Vaccine Information Center Cites “Betrayal” of Consumers by U.S. Supreme Court Giving Total Liability Shield to Big Pharma. Businesswire Feb. 23, 2011.

136 Fisher BL. CDC Wants to Expand Power to Eliminate Measles: What You Need to Know. NVIC Newsletter Sept. 12, 2016.

137 NVIC. National Vaccine Information Center Calls 21^st Century Cures Act “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” and Urges Presidential Veto to Protect Public Health. Businesswire Dec. 8, 2016.

138 Fisher BL. The National Plan to Vaccinate Every American. NVIC Newsletter Mar. 21, 2020.

139 World Economic Forum. The Great Reset.

140 The King Center. Glossary of Nonviolence.

141 Encyclopedia Britannica. Sit-In Social Protest.

142 Fitzsimmons EG. Restaurant owners sue New York City, hoping to block its ‘ridiculous’ vaccine mandate. New York TimesAug. 18, 2021.

143 Trigoso E. Thousands Gather at ‘Freedom Rally’ in New York City to Oppose Vaccine Passport. The Epoch Times Sept. 18, 2021.

144 Mentzer R, Peek J. Health Workers Protest Hospital Systems’ COVID-19 Vaccine Requirements. Wisconsin Public RadioAug. 11, 2021.

145 Koons E, Court E. Nurses Who Won’t Vax Threaten Staffing Shortages. Bloomberg News Aug. 26, 2021.

146 Pavlich K. The Country’s Largest Healthcare Union is Protesting Against Vaccine Mandates. Townhall July 26, 2021.

147 Trujillo D. Labor Unions Push Back Against COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates. NBC Universal Aug. 3, 2021.

148 Bell R, Butler-Jones D, Clinton J et al. A Balanced Response: Open Letter to Government of Canada. July 6, 2020.

149 Kulldorff M, Gupta S, Bhattacharya J. The Great Barrington Declaration. Oct. 20, 2020.

150 Makary M. Natural immunity to covid is powerful. Policymakers seem afraid to say so. The Washington Post Sept. 15, 2021.

151 Richard L. ‘Single most qualified’ mRNA expert speaks about vaccine risks after he says YouTube banned his video. Yahoo June 24, 2021.

152 Murray S. How NIH-funded research in China could have led to the COVID-19 pandemic. US Right to Know Sept. 17, 2021.

153 Howard J. Some states move to block Covid-19 vaccine requirements in public schools. CNN July 13, 2021.

154 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Advocacy Portal.

All images in this article are from NVIC

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

On October 16, Colombian businessman and Venezuelan Special Envoy Alex Saab was in practical terms kidnapped for the second time, first by Cabo Verde under pressure from Washington, and now by the U.S., in flagrant violation of international law.

For nearly a year and a half, Saab had been imprisoned on the island nation of Cabo Verde, 400 miles off the northwestern coast of Africa in the Atlantic. As a Bloomberg article explains, “Saab was detained June 12 [2020] when the private plane he was traveling on from Venezuela to Iran made a fuel stop on the Cape Verdean island of Sal.”¹ What Bloomberg does not mention is that Saab’s plane was forced to land in Cabo Verde because two other nearby nations in mainland Africa, apparently under pressure from the U.S., refused to let him land.²

There is no extradition treaty and there was no Interpol order

The capture of Saab was made without any proper legal basis. While Washington prevailed upon Cabo Verde to seize Saab based upon the pretext that the U.S. wanted to extradite him for alleged crimes, the United States has no extradition treaty with Cabo Verde.³ Moreover, while Cabo Verde authorities claimed that Saab was detained pursuant to a valid Interpol notice, a regional court in Nigeria found that the detention took place before the Interpol notice was issued, raising huge concerns about the legal validity of Saab’s detention and imprisonment.⁴

The U.N. also demanded the extradition to be suspended

Indeed, this regional court, The Economic Community of West African States Court of Justice (ECOWAS), explicitly “ruled that Saab should be freed because he was detained before the Red Notice was issued.”⁵ As Reuters explains, “decisions by that court are final and binding under a 1991 protocol.”

And then, on June 8, 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Committee issued a decision for preliminary measures demanding that the extradition of Saab be suspended and that Saab, who is suffering from cancer, be given the necessary medical attention which he has been denied in Cabo Verde.⁶

On September 28, 2021, the African Bar Association issued a statement demanding “the immediate and unconditional release of Ambassador Alex Saab, respect for the ECOWAS Court and the Rule of Law in Africa by Cape Verde and all Governments and Institutions in Africa as the African Bar Association will continue to demand for the respect of treaty obligations and the independence of Judiciary in Africa.”⁷

In spite of the foregoing and the overwhelming opposition to Saab’s extradition amongst the citizenry of Cabo Verde, the Constitutional Court of Cabo Verde approved the extradition of Saab to the U.S. in September of this year.⁸ To put it simply, Saab was kidnapped in Cabo Verde nearly a year and a half ago, and there he was detained, until his “extradition” to the U.S. on October 16th, despite the lack of any valid extradition treaty and any valid arrest warrant at the time of capture.

While the allegations against him are hotly disputed, what is not in doubt is that Washington is behind his persecution. And it is also clear that the U.S. is interested in Saab, not because of any alleged crimes but because he may hold the key to Venezuela’s ability to circumnavigate Washington’s deadly illegal unilateral sanctions. First and foremost, the allegations against Saab involve alleged embezzlement from food and housing programs in Venezuela. Given that the U.S. is sanctioning Venezuela in an attempt, inter alia, to undermine the ability of Venezuela to maintain such programs, it is patently obvious that Washington has no real, bona fide concerns about someone allegedly taking kickbacks from such programs. And moreover, under established U.S. judicial doctrines of comity and forum non conveniens, it is Venezuela which, in the first instance, has the right to try to prosecute such crimes committed within its own domestic jurisdiction.

Sanctions against Iran: U.S. real reasons to harass Ambassador Saab

Bloomberg explains that Alex Saab was on his way to Iran to negotiate the exchange of Venezuelan gold for much needed gasoline supplies.⁹ Due to U.S. sanctions, the oil-rich nation of Venezuela is unable to obtain the necessary chemicals and supplies to refine its oil into gasoline which is needed to generate electricity and to transport goods throughout the country. In addition to gasoline, Saab was also attempting to negotiate the purchase of food, medicines and other critical supplies which have also been made scarce in Venezuela due to U.S. sanctions.¹⁰

As explained by Alena Douma, U.N. Special Rapporteur on the unilateral use of coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights:

The hardening of sanctions faced by the country since 2015 undermines… the state’s capacity to maintain infrastructure and implement social projects. Today, Venezuela faces a lack of necessary machinery, spare parts, electricity, water, fuel, gas, food and medicine. Venezuelan assets frozen in United States, United Kingdom and Portuguese banks amount to U.S. $6 bln. The purchase of goods and payments by public companies are reportedly blocked or frozen. . .

It has been reported that electricity lines are able to work at less than 20 per cent of their capacity today. . . .

An estimated 90% of households are connected to the national water distribution system. Numerous households, however, report frequent cuts because of electricity outages affecting water pumps and the maintenance of infrastructure, and because of the shortage of qualified maintenance staff.¹¹

It appears that Alex Saab’s very adeptness in helping Venezuela to get around these sanctions–sanctions which Alena Douma notes are illegal under international law–is the real reason for Washington’s interest in having him detained and extradited.¹²

As the New York Times explains, while the U.S. has brought vague “money-laundering” charges against Saab, “hard-liners at the Justice and State Departments, including Elliot Abrams, the State Department’s special envoy for Iran and Venezuela,” want to ensure Saab’s continued detention in Cabo Verde lest they “lose an opportunity to punish Mr. [Nicolás] Maduro.” As the Times continues, the “months long detention of Mr. Saab has stripped Mr. Maduro of an important ally and a major financial fixer at a time when fewer countries are willing or able to come to Venezuela’s aid. If Mr. Saab cooperates with American officials, he could help untangle Mr. Maduro’s economic web of support and assist the authorities in bringing charges against other allies of the Venezuelan government.”¹³

And how did the U.S. ensure Cabo Verde’s compliance in all this? It has used a carrot and a stick approach. The carrot is significant: U.S. economic development assistance to the island nation. In September of 2020, the U.S. embassy in Cabo Verde announced “the U.S. government would invest $1.5 million in Cabo Verde to support the country’s efforts to mitigate the economic crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.”¹⁴ And in June, 2021, the embassy announced a plan to build a new U.S. embassy adjacent to the government palace:

This year, July 4 will mark a new chapter in Cabo Verde-U.S. history as representatives of both countries dedicate 4.5-hectares of land adjacent to the Government Palace in Praia as the site for a new U.S. embassy. This exciting, long-anticipated project represents a more than $400 million investment by the U.S. government in the bilateral relationship, with fully $100 million of that total going directly into Cabo Verde’s economy, benefitting local businesses and contractors and creating scores of construction jobs.¹⁵

The stick is the deployment of old-fashioned “gun-boat diplomacy”–a term coined by President Teddy Roosevelt. Thus, as the New York Times explains, the U.S. has anchored the Navy Cruiser San Jacinto off the coast of Cabo Verde to make sure that Saab did not escape somehow. While U.S. officials claimed that they were doing this in response to “threats” by Venezuela to take all measures to protect Saab’s human rights, the presence of the gun ship appeared calculated as much to ensure no second thoughts by the government of  Cabo Verde as it was to prevent some rescue attempt by Venezuela or its ally Iran.¹⁶

Saab’s extradition case is currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11^th Circuit which is to decide whether the U.S. has proper cause to extradite Mr. Saab under U.S. and international law. Quite tellingly, the U.S. prosecution has twice postponed the initial hearing in which it was to present evidence and arguments in favor of extradition. And, it has asked for a third postponement.¹⁷

The U.S. extracted Saab from Cabo Verde without court sanction

And, so, U.S. authorities, on October 16th, instead of waiting for the 11^th Circuit to decide the merits of the case–a case which they will surely lose–have kidnapped Saab a second time, flying him out of Cabo Verde to the U.S. without court sanction. It is no coincidence that this kidnapping took place, moreover, the day before Presidential elections in Cabo Verde which brought to power a new leader opposed to Washington’s mistreatment of Saab.

Alex Saab is now sitting in a federal prison in Miami. This is a flagrant violation of both international and U.S. domestic law. In addition, this has already had huge international repercussions, with the government of Venezuela suspending scheduled talks with the opposition in response.

The actions of the U.S. and Cabo Verde against Alex Saab have dealt a serious blow to international law and the security of diplomats worldwide. It sets the dangerous precedent that an individual, and especially a foreign diplomat, can be captured and detained without warrant and then “extradited” to the U.S. without a valid extradition treaty and without an U.S. court authorization. This type of action undermines the rule of law, and indeed establishes “the rule of the jungle” wherein powerful countries like the U.S. can simply ignore rights of individuals to due process and to freedom from arbitrary detention to bully developing countries such as Venezuela.

*

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.

Dan Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and he is one of COHA’s Senior Research Fellows.

Notes

1. “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. www.bnnbloomberg.ca Accessed October 17, 2021.file:///C:\Users\Owner\Documents\3953-2021-c-adocx.pdf
2. “Deal Maker for Venezuela’s Maduro Can Be Extradited to U.S., Court Rules.” Wall Street Journal. Jan 25, 2021. www.wsj.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
3. “U.S.-Indicted Dealmaker For Venezuela’s Maduro Detained On Way To Iran.” June 14, 2020. www.rferl.org Accessed October 17, 2021.
4. “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. www.bnnbloomberg.ca Accessed October 17, 2021.
5. Ibid.
6. “UN Committee Rules on Detention of Venezuelan Diplomat Saab.” June 8, 2021.
   www.telesurenglish.net Accessed October 17, 2021
7. “African Bar Association Statement on Venezuelan Diplomat Alex Saab.” Oct 22, 2021.
   orinocotribune.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
8. “Cape Verde Poll Shows Alex Saab Extradition Case will Harm Government in October Elections.” AllAfrica Info Wire. Sep. 20, 2021. allafrica.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
9. “Maduro Financier Faces Extradition to U.S. After New Ruling.” Bloomberg. Mar 17, 2021. bnnbloomberg.ca Accessed October 17, 2021.
10. Griffith, B. “Extradition of Alex Saab: U.S. takes effort to starve Venezuelans to new lows.” People’s Dispatch. July 7, 2021. peoplesdispatch.org Accessed October 17, 2021.
11. Preliminary findings of the visit to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela by the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. Feb. 12, 2021. www.ohchr.org Accessed October 17, 2021.
12. Ibid.
13. Schmitt, E., and Turkewitz, J. New York Times. “Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela.” Dec 22, 2020. www.nytimes.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
14. “The United States Provides Over $1.5 million to Help Cabo Verde Respond to COVID-19.” Press Release–September 3, 2020. U.S. Embassy, Cabo Verde. cv.usembassy.govAccessed October 17, 2021.
15. “Article by U.S. Ambassador to Cabo Verde, Jeff Daigle–Land Dedication.” June 30, 2021. U.S. Embassy, Cabo Verde. cv.usembassy.gov Accessed October 17, 2021.
16. Schmitt, E. and Turkewitz, J. “Navy Warship’s Secret Mission Off West Africa Aims to Help Punish Venezuela.” New York Times. www.nytimes.com Accessed October 17, 2021.
17. “Defense of Alex Saab Rejects Request for New Extension by U.S.” Oct 6, 2021.
    www.telesurenglish.net Accessed October 17, 2021.

Featured image is from COHA/MR Online

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

Named after the famous German underground movement The White Rose (Die Weisse Rose) which distributed leaflets calling on people to resist the Nazi regime, The White Rose UK urges people everywhere to resist the medical/political tyranny being carried out under the guise of a fake pandemic.

Several members of the German White Rose were caught by the Nazis and sentenced to death or imprisonment.  Today, the Biden-Harris regime is attempting to inject harmful, ineffective, and often lethal genetic-modification agents (“vaccines”) into every man, woman, and child in America.  These so-called vaccines have already killed, disabled, and severely injured millions of people in the US and around the world, according to the governments’ official statistics.  Unvaccinated, sensible people who refuse this grotesque experimental treatment are demonized, vilified, and falsely accused of spreading illness.

Backed by the presstitute news media, Big Tech censorship, and wholly corrupt government health agencies which are fronts for Big Pharma, the US government’s ultimate goal is to remove the unvaxxed from society—get them fired from their jobs, make them unable to go shopping or travel, and isolate them in FEMA-style concentration camps which have already been built. 

Distributing truth-telling leaflets, as do members of The White Rose UK, is one way to fight this insanity.  Another method is a freely distributed print newspaper. 

Druthers is a free newspaper widely distributed across Canada—350,000 copies of the November issue reportedly on the way, also available as a free pdf download (Druthers.net).  Druthers has announced that it has launched into the United States this month (DruthersUSA.com).  The newspaper has featured hard-hitting articles that tell the truth about the injurious COVID-19 “vaccines”, the fraudulent PCR test, the mountains of junk data, the mountains of corpses from those who got the jab, and grassroots resistance to the suicidal course that Canada, USA, and most other nations are pursuing.

Challenging the Narrative

The following statement, from The White Rose UK website, needs to reverberate far and wide across America, from sea to shining sea, or the USA will not survive physically as a nation:

The disproportionate and dehumanising covid restrictions are a disgrace to humanity.

Masks, social distancing and the so-called covid vaccines are causing great harm. People protesting against lockdowns have been arrested and treated like criminals for gathering and exercising their right of free speech. At the same time, YouTube, Facebook and Twitter have been censoring videos and posts that do not match the current trend of the mainstream media. Schools have now turned into social engineering sites. Forcing children to wear masks and keeping children constantly at a distance in class and on school grounds is deeply dehumanising, and will have a damaging effect on children’s mental development. Parents should stand up against these guinea-pig methods. It’s not the way we grew up, and we should make sure our children grow up with the same freedoms we enjoyed!

Many experts have warned that the so-called covid vaccines will do a lot of harm and now with over a million adverse reactions – many of them severe – and over a thousand six hundred deaths reported in the UK alone, there is proof that the covid jab is causing great harm. But those reported adverse reactions and deaths only make up 1-10% of all covid injection injuries. In fact, it has become clear that the covid jab is causing far more injuries and deaths than the alleged covid virus.

Bit by bit, we have given up our freedom and our rights out of fear of a virus. After the first lockdown it was evident that more people died from the lockdown than from the virus. Our economy will suffer severely and poverty will increase. How many people have lost their job and how many businesses are ruined due to the lockdowns?

The so-called ‘new normal’ is not normal, it’s entirely abnormal, and we should never get used to it! It’s time to take over responsibility and to make decisions for ourselves, or else, the next generation of grown-ups will not experience the same freedom we’ve had before this manufactured covid crisis.

Like the White Rose in Germany, that resisted the Nazi regime, we encourage people to resist the covid tyranny. We do not want anymore lockdowns and demand an end to all restrictions. Visit your friends and family, the lonely, the vulnerable and the dying. We are humans and not controllable robots. We need to socially interact, without anti-social distancing and without face masks.

Journalists, teachers, doctors, lawyers, politicians should stand up for the truth and speak out publicly. If the majority of people rid themselves of fear and panic and make use of common sense, those who want to control us will eventually have to give up, and we will be able to guarantee a future of peace and freedom for our children and grandchildren.

***

Here is The White Rose UK manifesto which sends a powerful message that needs to be absorbed and understood by every global citizen:

End the Covid Fraud and Global Genocide Now!

People are experiencing serious adverse reactions after receiving the covid jab, or are dying.

Many more will die in the coming months and years. The covid fraud is causing a global genocide. This needs to end now. Crimes being committed or supported by governments, government advisory groups, members of the World Economic Forum, the mainstream media, social media platforms and other agencies in positions of authority:

• Extreme fear mongering via press releases, media announcements and nation-wide advertisement, using taxpayers’ money
• Inducing unnecessary fear and terror of a virus less lethal than a strong seasonal flu
• Cynical use of new variants to promote fear and justify continued restrictions
• Falsifying death records by stating covid as the primary cause of death when not applicable
• Mask mandates on public transport, in shops, schools, work places and other public places – in many cases for hours a day – exposing the wearer to potential and actual damage to their mental and physical well-being
• Forcing children and adults to take covid tests, often regularly, that are not fit for purpose, produce mainly false positives, and can cause damage to health
• Using covid “cases”, which are based on false test results, for prolonging covid restrictions and lockdowns
• Coercing people into taking an experimental “vaccine”, which is in fact a gene-modifying injection, can induce infertility, and is causing more adverse reactions and deaths than all other vaccines together
• Promoting the use of an unlicensed therapy as though it were fully approved and safe
• Suppressing or underplaying the data regarding adverse reactions and deaths of the covid jabs
• Ignoring the Nuremberg Code by not enabling people to give informed consent before vaccination or testing
• Disruption of education
• Suppression of religious freedom, prevention of worship
• Restricting freedom of movement across borders, and during lockdowns, within the country
• Causing job losses, business failures and loss of opportunities
• Delaying diagnosis and treatment of conditions far more serious than covid resulting in unnecessary loss of life
• Forced quarantine of healthy people at their own expense
• Suppression of the right to protest, freedom of association and freedom of speech
• Suppression of scientific debate, giving voice only to “approved” agencies

Find out more: thewhiterose.uk

*

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 State of the Nation.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

According to a report from Israel’s Channel 12, the Israeli government approved a $1.5 billion budget to prepare for a potential attack on Iran.

The extra funds would be used to purchase additional aircraft, surveillance drones, and the munitions needed to strike Iran’s underground nuclear facilities. The report said about $620 million would come from the 2022 military budget, and the rest of the funds would come from this year’s budget.

For years, Israel has been seeking bunker-busting bombs that could penetrate Iran’s underground facilities. If they did acquire the munitions, Israel would also need bombers capable of carrying them, something it currently doesn’t have. The US tested a new 5,000-pound bunker buster earlier this month, which Israeli media interpreted as a possible message to Iran.

In July, it was reported that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) requested additional funds for next year’s budget to prepare for operations against Iran. Throughout the year, IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kohavi has repeatedly said the IDF is “accelerating” plans to strike Iran, and Israeli politicians have constantly been threatening the Islamic Republic.

Israel frequently carries out covert attacks against Iran’s civilian nuclear program, but the IDF planning suggests an overt operation could happen in the future. The US has joined Israel in issuing threats against Iran. Last week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken hinted at military action against Iran alongside Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid. Blinken said if diplomacy with Iran fails, the US will turn to “other options.”

Lapid made clear that one of Blinken’s “options” was military action. “I would like to start by repeating what the Secretary of State just said.  Yes, other options are going to be on the table if diplomacy fails.  And by saying other options, I think everybody understands here … what is it that we mean,” Lapid said.

*

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

Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

“It’s not necessary to censor the news, it’s sufficient to delay the news until it no longer matters,” Napoleon Bonaparte reportedly said. The same standard helps explain why Washington politicians and federal agencies usually get away with covering up their lies and abuses.

Many people assume that unless the government actively censors, people will learn what the government has done. But most government cover-ups succeed. Daniel Ellsberg, who risked life in prison to leak the Pentagon Papers, related in his 2002 memoirs:

“It is a commonplace that ‘you can’t keep secrets in Washington’ or ‘in a democracy’…. These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public.”

Cover-ups succeed because people defer to promises by government officials to investigate themselves. This was how the Nixon-era Pentagon buried scores of Vietnam atrocities even after confirming the carnage. After the My Lai controversy exploded, many U.S. soldiers reported other atrocities to the Pentagon. Nine thousand pages of documents were compiled confirming more than 300 war crimes, including seven other massacres of civilians by U.S. troops. David Hackworth, a retired colonel and the most decorated officer in the Army, later commented, ‘’Vietnam was an atrocity from the get-go…. There were hundreds of My Lais. You got your card punched by the numbers of bodies you counted.’’ American soldiers faced more legal perils for reporting than for committing atrocities.

Nixon a mastermind of cover-ups

Nixon gave the order: “Get the Army off the front page.” Col. Jared Schopper, in charge of the war crimes files at the Pentagon in the early 1970s, later explained: “The only way to get them [articles on atrocities] off the front page is to say they are founded and appropriate action was taken, or that they are unfounded and propaganda tools.” But the “appropriate action” usually meant simply burying the case regardless of how much evidence existed of war crimes. As long as the government claimed to be investigating an alleged atrocity, the media downplayed the story.

While the media deferred, the Nixon administration aggressively slandered critics. In early 1971, former Navy officer John Kerry electrified the media with testimony that American soldiers in Vietnam had committed a wide array of grisly atrocities. Even though the Pentagon quickly provided confidential information to the White House confirming Kerry’s charges, “the Nixon administration went ahead with an aggressive backroom campaign to discredit as fabricators and traitors Kerry and other veterans who spoke out about war crimes,” as Deborah Nelson, the author of The War Behind Me, noted in 2008.

The Nixon cover-up of Vietnam atrocities played a role in the 2004 presidential election. After the Democrats nominated Sen. Kerry, a group known as “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” sprang up to, in its own words, “counter the false ‘war crimes’ charges John Kerry repeatedly made against Vietnam veterans.” The group savagely attacked Kerry in a series of ads. Kerry suffered far more political damage than he would have if the Pentagon had not succeeded in burying the evidence of the vast majority of Vietnam war crimes.

Bush’s cover-ups

The George W. Bush administration used similar charades to stifle the scandal over its worldwide torture regime. The only thing necessary for a successful cover-up was for the president first to continually proclaim that everything will be investigated, and then, months later, to proclaim that everything has already been investigated. A year after the first photos from Abu Ghraib leaked out, Bush declared: “There have been over, I think, nine investigations, eight or nine investigations by independent investigators that have made the reports very public.”

In reality, none of the investigations had been independent, and none of the reports were available in full to the public. Most of the investigations were based on the prior reports, which themselves did little or no honest digging. Yet, the Bush administration created the impression that anyone who refused to accept the good faith of the government’s self-investigations was acting in bad faith.

George Orwell made the official fabrication and rewriting of history the occupation of the main character in 1984. But nowadays, there is no need for a bureaucracy to rewrite history. Newspaper stories are “the first draft of history,” and the U.S. government routinely dictates the copy. If worse comes to worse, the military can simply delete photographs revealing too many victims.

The media as handmaiden to the state

The media elite happily plays lap dogs to the war machine. CNN chief Walter Isaacson explained: “Especially right after 9/11…. There was a real sense that you don’t get that critical of a government that’s leading us in war time.” Elisabeth Bumiller, the New York Times correspondent for the White House, explained why reporters did not ask tough questions at a Bush press conference just before he attacked Iraq: “It’s frightening to stand up there. Nobody wanted to get into an argument with the president at this very serious time.” The Washington Post blocked or buried pre-war articles exposing the holes in the Bush team’s assertions on Iraq. PostPentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks explained: “There was an attitude among editors: ‘Look, we’re going to war, why do we even worry about all this contrary stuff?’” Jim Lehrer, the host of government-subsidized PBS’s Newshour, explained his timidity in 2004: “It would have been difficult to have had debates [about invading Iraq] … you’d have had to have gone against the grain.” The illusion that the media is independent makes its groveling more subversive to citizens’ understanding.

After he launched an invasion of Iraq in 2003, Bush perennially proclaimed that the United States had given freedom to 25 million Iraqis. Thus, any Iraqi civilians killed by U.S. forces were both statistically and morally inconsequential. And the vast majority of the news coverage left out the asterisks.

A 2005 American University survey of hundreds of journalists who covered Iraq concluded: “Many media outlets have self-censored their reporting on the conflict in Iraq because of concern about public reaction to graphic images and details about the war.” Individual journalists commented:

• “In general, coverage downplayed civilian casualties and promoted a pro-US viewpoint. No U.S. media show abuses by US military carried out on regular basis.”
• “Friendly fire incidents were to show only injured Americans, and no reference made to possible mistakes involving civilians.”
• “The real damage of the war on the civilian population was uniformly omitted.”

A 2008 New York Times article noted that “After five years and more than 4,000 U.S. combat deaths, searches and interviews turned up fewer than a half-dozen graphic photographs of dead U.S. soldiers.” Veteran photographers who posted shots of wounded or dead U.S. soldiers were quickly booted out of Iraq. The Times noted that Iraqi “detainees were widely photographed in the early years of the war, but the U.S. Defense Department, citing prisoners’ rights, has recently stopped that practice as well.” Privacy was the only “right” the Pentagon pretended to respect — since the vast majority of detainees received little or no due process.

Cover-ups succeed because it is easier to recite official denials than to unearth official crimes. The Washington media takes its reality from the government. The Washington media’s idea of “factual reporting” is telling people what the government told them. Quoting a government official carries its own absolution. For the media, the official exonerates the falsehood almost every time. Controversial news that lacks a government seal of approval is often treated as scurrilous — or at least unfit for family newspapers. Pulitzer Prize–winning Associated Press correspondent Charles Hanley wrote about the U.S. use of torture in Iraq six months before the Abu Ghraib story broke. Hanley later explained why his expose was almost completely ignored: “It was not an officially sanctioned story that begins with a handout from an official source.”

How craven was the media during the Iraq war? In 2008, the New York Times revealed how the Pentagon created a cadre of 75 retired officers who, in return for confidential briefings and flattery from top officials, would appear on TV and repeat Pentagon talking points — without admitting the source. The result was “a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines between government and journalism have been obliterated.” Former Green Beret officer Robert Bevelacqua described the process: “It was [the Bush administration] saying, ‘We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you.”’ Another retired officer described the whole process as “psy-ops on steroids.”

The Times noted: “Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.” Some of the commentators received lavish government contracts after gushing praise over the Pentagon’s policies. Even though the networks made no effort to screen their “experts” for brazen conflicts of interest, they denied they had done anything wrong.

Truth awards no licenses or regulatory exemptions. As former CBS news anchor Dan Rather explained in 2007: “Fear is in every newsroom in the country … fear … if you don’t go along to get along, you’re going to get the reputation of being a troublemaker. There’s also the fear that, particularly in [television] networks, they’ve become huge, international conglomerates. They have big needs, legislative needs, repertory needs in Washington. Nobody has to send you a memo to tell you that’s the case.” The networks became wealthy because of government preferences — they received scores of billions of dollars’ worth of scarce broadcast spectrum gratis. The fact that the airwaves were a gift leaves the recipient dependent on government. Rather’s CBS colleague Eric Sevareid made the same point years earlier: “The bigger the information media, the less courage and information they allow. Bigness means weakness.”

A government cover-up succeeds if it dissipates the outrage. Politicians routinely use controlled leaks of damaging information to blunt the impact of a government abuse or debacle. They choose a friendly media source who will frame the issue to their liking. A few embarrassing details leaking out is no substitute for the smoking gun. Coverups often aim to focus wrath on specific tidbits or people — and avoid or stifle fundamental questions about government powers. After the Hurricane Katrina debacle, the firing of the head of FEMA chief Michael Brown (“Brownie, you’re doing a heckuva job!” President George W. Bush publicly declared) ensured that the heat would be greatly decreased on FEMA itself.

As long as the media uses a government-provided template, politicians have little to fear from the press. Information on government abuses is not self-propelled. If it were, political history would be radically different. The same people who wield power usually also determine what information is released. Politicians and pundits talk as if there is some divine law of democracy assuring that “truth will out.” In reality, the issue of whether truth will out is no different than any other political conflict.

Government lying is not simply a result of character defects in politicians, political appointees, and bureaucrats. Instead, it is often the result of a systemic bias against admitting systemic failures. The larger government becomes, the more the deck is stacked against honesty in public affairs. People in government and in power have far more tools and stronger incentives to deceive than the average citizen’s incentive and ability to discover the truth. This is not a problem that can be solved by finger-wagging or moralistic lectures calling for politicians to repent. As philosopher Hannah Arendt noted, “the lie did not creep into politics by some accident of human sinfulness; moral outrage, for this reason alone, is not likely to make it disappear.”

But things will be different now that Joe Biden is president, right? Unfortunately, the media continues celebrating his election victory by ignoring almost all his falsehoods and failures. The mere fact that Biden is not Donald Trump will likely continue to give him a free pass from the media for at least another six months. Or maybe cold, hard reality will never catch up with the most media-beloved president since Barack Obama.

*

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

James Bovard is a policy adviser to The Future of Freedom Foundation. He is a USA Todaycolumnist and has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, New Republic, Reader’s Digest, Playboy, American Spectator, Investors Business Daily, and many other publications. He is the author of Freedom Frauds: Hard Lessons in American Liberty (2017, published by FFF); Public Policy Hooligan (2012); Attention Deficit Democracy (2006); The Bush Betrayal (2004); Terrorism and Tyranny (2003); Feeling Your Pain (2000); Freedom in Chains(1999); Shakedown (1995); Lost Rights (1994); The Fair Trade Fraud (1991); and The Farm Fiasco(1989). He was the 1995 co-recipient of the Thomas Szasz Award for Civil Liberties work, awarded by the Center for Independent Thought, and the recipient of the 1996 Freedom Fund Award from the Firearms Civil Rights Defense Fund of the National Rifle Association. His book Lost Rights received the Mencken Award as Book of the Year from the Free Press Association. His Terrorism and Tyranny won Laissez Faire Book’s Lysander Spooner award for the Best Book on Liberty in 2003. Read his blog. Send him email.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

As a follow up to the July 11-12 protests, the same opposition figures and groups that participated in them, requested permission for marches to be simultaneously held in several cities across Cuba on November 15. In response, the local municipal authorities, for example Old Havana, responded by pointing out that “Article 56 of the [Cuban] Constitution, which is mentioned as a legal basis [for the march permit], provides among its requirements for the exercise of the right to demonstrate legally and “in respect for public order and in compliance with the rules established by law.” (Note: This unofficial English version of the decision was translated by Water Lippmann and edited by the author.)

In other words, while the signatories invoke Article 56, they only recognize the portion concerning the “right to demonstrate peacefully” in the abstract as the request published in the FaceBook page Archipiélago reveals, the main platform spear heading the second phase of “colour revolution.” They are ignoring that section of the same article that stipulates limits: “Respect for public order and compliance with the rules established by law.” Which Cuban law are the signatories avoiding? The municipal decision goes on to explain: “Article 4 of the Constitution defines that the socialist system endorsed by this Constitution is irrevocable, therefore any action exercised against it is illicit.”

Contrasting US and Cuban Constitutional Rights

The mainstream media in the US and those in Cuba who have been denied permission then invoke self-righteous statements protesting that the safeguard of socialism should not be a precondition to demonstrate. They are outraged that any limitation may be imposed on these rights? What is their reasoning? Is it possible that they are so imbued with the US-centric notions of “freedom of expression” and “right to assemble” in the abstract, as found in the US Constitution? Let us explore. The First Amendment of the US Constitution stipulates:

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

Unlike the Cuban constitution, there is no explicit reference in the US Constitution to protection of the capitalist system. One might respond by arguing that there is indeed some kind of reference, as in for example, the notorious Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility…” Does the latter mean that nothing can upset or challenge the capitalist status quo? We can only surmise that this is the case, as the entire history of the United States is based on the suppression of uprisings by the Indigenous Nations, African-Americans, the working class and youth against capitalism and imperialism. Whether one can extrapolate from “domestic tranquility” to mean the right of capitalism to operate in peace or not, it nevertheless remains a foregone conclusion: in practice, for the white supremist US elite, freedom of speech and right to assembly is tolerated unless it challenges the capitalist-imperialist status quo.

In contrast, the Cuban constitution and political system is frank and honest: Do not cross the red line we have established to defend our socialist system. Where does this limitation on freedom of expression and assembly come from?

The local authorities elaborate on their decision: “The Constitution of the Republic was widely debated and approved in a referendum by 86.85 percent of the voters, an overwhelming majority that sovereignly and freely chose the socialist system, its irrevocability and the right to fight by all means against anyone who tries to overthrow the established political, social and economic order.”

Communism: They Missed the Train

The process involved at arriving at this constitutional conclusion has been lengthy and complex, but also characterized by considerable public engagement and contribution. The first draft was made available to the entire Cuban population in 2018. Over many months, Cubans read the document and made a total of 780 suggestions and 9,600 proposals. Many of these were incorporated in the final draft, which was presented to the public.

One of the main sponsors of this month’s march request (and also involved in the July 11-12 protests), La Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU), called for a “massive and resounding ‘No’” on the February 24, 2019 Constitutional referendum vote.

However, how did it play out?

“Voter turnout: 84.4% of eligible voters.

Yes: 86.85%.

No: 9.0%.

Blank or spoiled: 4.5%.”

Not only did this mean a clear rejection of the No vote, but the voter turn-out increased in comparison to the previous vote in the last general elections in 2018, which registered an 82.9% voter turn-out. Furthermore, this thirst to fully participate in the referendum translated into an expressed desire to further enshrine socialism in the new Constitution and even expand on that goal. In the initial draft sent to the citizens for discussion, the ultimate goal of communism was not present. However, revolutionary blogs and journalists challenged this omission. The author was in Havana at the time and witness to the lively debate in the neighbourhoods and on television on the issue to exclude or include communism. We recall that La Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU) and the rallying call of other opposition groups on July 11-12 was then and is now in October 2021, “Down with Communism.” However, in the course of the debates at the grass roots level, this was the opportunity for the La Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU) to sway the electorate against communism being enshrined in the Constitution. It must be pointed out as clearly as possible that they did, indeed, miss the train.

In its futile appeal for a No vote, and perhaps reading the writing on the wall, UPAC asserted that the referendum and elections are “rigged.”

However, the author participated in all stages of the Cuban electoral system in 1997-98 and there is no evidence at all of fraud. In 2010, another study in Cuba confirmed this.

The Proof of the Pudding is in the Eating

In its decision, the local municipal assembly in Havana writes that:

“The promoters and their public projections, as well as the links of some with subversive organizations or agencies financed by the US government, have the manifest intention of promoting a change of political system in Cuba. This reaffirms that the announced march, whose organizational scheme is conceived simultaneously for other territories of the country, constitutes a provocation as part of the strategy of ‘regime change’ for Cuba, rehearsed in other countries…Furthermore, as soon as it was announced, the march received public support from US legislators, political operators and media that encourage actions against the Cuban people, attempting to destabilize the country and urging military intervention.”

Is this at all far-fetched? Hardly, the CNN reporter in Havana for example, in his enthusiasm to put a peaceful face on the efforts of protest organizers, had no difficulty violating his journalistic integrity by challenging the veracity of the Cuban government’s decision based on facts. He asserted that “Cuban government officials are making it clear that a request to hold a peaceful protest next month will not be authorized.” Inadvertently, he proves the point, namely that foreign “media encourage actions against the Cuban people.”

Nor is he alone in exhibiting the old adage about the “proof of the pudding.”

The municipal authority wrote: “As soon as it was announced, the march received public support from US legislators, political operators.” Indeed, after showing support for the march, once the decision came down on October 12, here are the words of US State Department spokesperson Ned Price, at a press conference later that day:

“QUESTION: Yeah. I wanted to ask you about the Cuba’s Government decision to ban a protest that was planned for November 15th, claiming that the organizers are backed by the US to overthrow the regime. Do you have any comment on that, any response?

MR PRICE: Well, let me make one thing very clear at the outset. What happened in July, what transpired in the days and the weeks after that, was not about the United States. It was about the conduct of the Cuban regime, the unmet aspirations of the Cuban people for freedom, for dignity, for prosperity, the elements that they have been denied by this regime for far too long, since 1959.”

Then with poker-faced elaboration, after denying US involvement, Ned Price volunteered the State Department as the megaphone for the subversive elements. “We call for the government in Havana to respect the fundamental freedoms and the fundamental rights of the Cuban people.”

On October 12, the Miami Herald reports on a Telegram messaging system press conference from Cuba leading up to the request for a march permit and featuring the Havana individual who filed the request. It is very revealing.

Firstly, the Miami Herald fondly recalls that “on July 11, hundreds of Cubans took to the streets to ask for regime change,” which is the main reason that the Municipal officials refused the permit.

Secondly, the Miami-based outlet quotes the signatory for the permit, “they always complain about the ‘blockade,’ he said, referring to the US embargo. ‘There is no worse blockade than the internal blockade on every Cuban citizen in this country.’” This is a dead give away about the intentions of these individuals, who do not seem to have a country.

Thirdly, we have to admire the political acumen of the signatories. They seem to be very aware that they have opened a beachhead among sections of the “left” in the US and Canada and want to go further. The Miami Herald quotes him:

“I am calling on the left worldwide, which is usually complicit and unfortunately usually behaves in a hypocritical way, to tell them that there are no left or right dictatorships, good or bad, there are dictatorships, and we must oppose them all, whatever their political sign.”

In contrast, for example, an independent watchdog journalism organization MintPress News in the US and the anti-imperialist socialist The Canada Files in Canada countered those sections of the sold out “left” in their respective countries, who were cheerleading the attempted July 11 “colour revolution” in Cuba.

Will they learn their lesson as we head into another one?

*

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

This article was originally published on The Canada Files.

Arnold August is a Montreal-based author and journalist whose articles are published in web sites across North America, Latin America, Europe and the Middle East in English, Spanish and French. He is a Fellow at the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute.

Featured image: Cubans take part in a mass rally in defence of the Cuban Revolution and calling for an end to US sanctions, July 2021. Photo: Helen Yaffe

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

History is strewn with the broken branches of twisted irony.  An individual who found himself entangled in it was the late Colin Powell, who, as a military man, gave a doctrine his name only to forgo it as a diplomat.

The Powell Doctrine was one of certitude and caution: do not engage in conflict except in conditions whereby you could bring overwhelming and decisive force to bear.  Political goals had to be clear; hostilities would be brief.  There would be no more quagmires, no more Vietnam Wars for the US imperium.  The model for this was his first engagement with Saddam Hussein’s forces in 1991.  The other manifestation of this approach was opposing military intervention in Bosnia.

Such ruminations were reached after service in Vietnam, where he made his mark as a major who questioned the account of the My Lai massacre.  Tasked with providing the first response to the Pentagon’s queries spurred on by Ron Ridenhour, he showed an all-establishment view to the butchering of over four hundred villagers, questioning the complaint against Charlie Company as vicious rumour mongering.

This approach served him well, enabling him to get a White House Fellowship, receive patronage from Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger, assume the role of President Ronald Reagan’s Deputy National Security Advisor, then National Security Advisor.  The Chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs was only logical in the scheme of this alignment, granting him an almost panoptical view of military-intelligence operations.  He directly supervised the teachers of torture from the School of the Americas and learned the importance of keeping the death-squads in the service of US power at arm’s length.  Ridenhour conveys this point with gruesome precision.  “Just keep those big, burly, white American advisers far enough away from the actual mayhem so that they will never be seen splattered with blood on the evening news.”

His briefings during the 1991 Gulf War were famed for being direct and free of jargon.  It stood to reason.  The Vietnam War, for the likes of Powell, had been lost not only because of unclear goals but because of a failure to control army-media relations.

Through the 1990s, he had a certain pop allure that drew him towards a possible tilt at the White House.  He had mastered military greatness and could now be readied as an Ike-redux.  Under heavy spousal pressure, he gave up his bid for office.  Alma Powell had threatened to leave him in the event of him running, fearing potential assassination from a racist’s bullet.  At the time, Christopher Hitchens recalled those “dinner-parties that turned into unspeakable cafard; the TV and radio chat-shows that went null at the mention of his name.”

Slotting into the role of US Secretary of State in the first administration of George W. Bush, he was billed the voice of sane moderation in a cabinet of hawks, the wounds of September 11, 2001 still bleeding.  The military man could still make his mark, despite pretending to prefer ploughshare to sword.

Prior to him taking the reins at the State Department, he had been mocked by his predecessor, Madeline Albright, who always had a touch of the war monger about her.  “What’s the point of having this superb military you’re always talking about,” she chided him with a bloody craving, “if we can’t use it?”  Albright had been a critic of the qualifications suggested by the Powell doctrine, calling it archaic before it even came into practice.  “You know, Gen. Powell wrote a book and one of the problems with writing a book is that it takes a while to get it published.”  She found it “probably ironic that just at the time that this [book] came out, in fact, the limited application of limited force in Bosnia was working.”

Powell would have done his critics proud in abandoning his own doctrine, demonstrating that ideas are there to be vanquished and burned, even by their own creators.  The moment he did so remains dark folklore, a poison of statecraft.  With the Bush administration enthralled by the prospect of war in the Middle East, having marshalled themselves against evidence more counterfeit and conspiratorial than Donald Trump ever could be, Powell played along with gusto. This heralded a conversion from remarks made in February 2001 that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein “has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of destruction.  He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.”

His infamous February 2003 address to the UN Security Council accusing Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction was another effort at public relations but of a very different quality.  It proved to be free of accuracy and unburdened by reality, despite Powell’s own vetting efforts of the evidence.  This was a man fully enrolled in the service of regime change and making the case for it.

Every statement, claimed Powell, was “backed up by sources, solid sources”.  They were “not assertions.  What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”  The theatrics were ample.  “Let me remind you how ricin works.  Less than a pinch – imagine a pinch of salt – less than a pinch of ricin, eating just this amount in your food, could cause shock followed by respiratory failure.  Death comes within 72 hours and there is no antidote.  There is no cure.  It is fatal.”  To the US Senate, he could say that these were “real weapons.  We’re talking about anthrax.  We’re talking about botulinum toxin.  We’re talking about nuclear weapons programmes.”

This was heavy going, given that such solid intelligence had been gathered from the quicksand sources of the Iraqi National Congress, a notorious outfit of exile led by the oleaginous Ahmed Chalabi.  Powell’s chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson, noted how many “of these sources sort of tinged and merged back into a single source, and that inevitably that single source seems to be either recommended by, set up by, orchestrated by, introduced by, or whatever, by somebody in the INC.”

The Secretary of State also ran with the al-Qaida-Iraqi connection, another spurious link manufactured in the aftermath of 9/11 linking the terrorist attacks to Baghdad.  “Iraqi officials deny accusations of ties with al-Qaida.  These denials are simply not credible.”  His UN speech makes special reference to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, suggesting that al-Qaida “affiliates based in Baghdad now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies throughout Iraq for his network”.

Powell spent subsequent years calling his presentation “painful”, a “blot” that would “always be part of my record.”  But ever mindful of public relations, he could find other more worthy alibis for his conduct.  Blame could be saddled and pinned down elsewhere – for instance, upon the more nefarious Donald Rumsfeld.  Or the devious Vice President Dick Cheney, whose office authored the speech.

For those keen to confine the scope of Powell’s errors and assessments, it is also worth remembering that the taste for regime change did not stop with the placing of boots in Mesopotamia.  As chair for the Bush’s Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, Powell oversaw the production of a 2004 report advocating various ways the Cuban government might be overthrown.  These were familiar: insinuating market capitalism into the state; introducing multi-party elections; giving Cuban Americans living in the US restitution for losses suffered under the Castro regime.  Accordingly, Washington should “support the Cuban people as they … work to transform themselves” and enable them “to develop a democratic and civic culture … and the values and habits essential to both.”  Such mindful benevolence.

With the imperium in respectful lockstep and sighing deferentially to a departed soldier, Powell’s blemishes can be overlooked by glowing reference to his “service” and patriotism.  But in performing that service, Powell’s legacy will be associated with the murderous, not infrequently incompetent adventurism of US foreign policy and its messianic bent.

*

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

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

While we must always hold on to hope, true change can only be achieved through awareness and action. As opposed to the mainstream media’s lies and half-truths, it is the focus and objective of Global Research to ask real questions, seek honest answers, and help people take this knowledge to empower themselves to change the world for the better.

We have already hosted two Global Research Webinars, one in April and another in September. Both were a success, thanks to our authors, contributors and readers for the support. We plan to hold more webinars in the future, while continuing to produce Global Research TV videos, Global Research News Hour radio shows/podcasts, and Global Research Publishers E-books.

In order to support the development of initiatives such as these, with no external corporate or political sponsorship, we rely on financial contributions from our readers. Please help us spread the word far and wide by making a donation or becoming a member today!

Click to donate:

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation

---

Click to become a member (receive free books!):

Click to view our membership plans

---

Thank you for supporting independent media.

The Global Research Team

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Americans are the most propagandized people on earth. In place of a news media they have a propaganda ministry that is a lie machine. Americans live in a spun narrative of lies.

Few understand the evil intentions of their rulers and the way government is used to enrich the elite. British journalist Richard Medhurst explains how ten years ago US and French elites destroyed an entire country. See this.

The crudely evil Obama and the white bitch Hillary, together with French President Sarkozy, currently a jailbird, destroyed a highly successful country and murdered its leader for their own profit.

The destruction of Libya is one of the many crimes of Western colonialism that has undermined the confidence of Western intellectuals in Western civilization. It is crimes such as the murder of Libya that have resulted in the destruction or removal of statues and monuments and the teaching now institutionalized in schools that white people are racist.

When you think of the destruction of Vietnam, Iraq, Libya, and Palestine, and the attempted destruction of Syria and Iran, just to mention some of the atrocities of our current era, it is possible to comprehend why the West has lost its moral gloss and is increasingly despised by growing numbers of its own citizens in addition to Arabs, Africans, Latin Americans, Russians, and Asians.

Corrupt and evil Western “leaders” have succeeded in marginalizing the West. Every western country now consists of refugees from countries that the West has destroyed and citizens who have lost confidence in their leaders and culture. We ourselves are experiencing the fall of Rome.

*

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

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

There Has Been No Mandatory Vaccination Executive Order

By Renee Parsons, October 20, 2021

With civic guidance and political leadership absent on the heels of multiple national crises, the entire country is now roiled in an era of massive civilian disobedience campaigns as thousands of American workers seek protection from President Biden’s flawed vaccine dictates.

Study by Harvard Researcher Finds Countries with Lowest COVID-19 Vaccination Rates Have Fewer Cases of COVID than Fully Vaccinated Countries

By Brian Shilhavy, October 19, 2021

A new study published in the European Journal of Epidemiology proves what we “conspiracy theorists” have been saying all along about the COVID-19 shots: They cause symptoms leading to COVID-19 diagnoses rather than prevent them.

2 Navy SEALS, 4 Marines, Air Force Major All Sue Biden

By Bob Unruh, October 19, 2021

Liberty Counsel on Friday announced a class action lawsuit on behalf of members of all five branches of the U.S. military – the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard – against President Joe Biden over his orders they take the experimental COVID shots or face dishonorable discharge.

Groundbreaking: Nebraska AG Says Doctors Can Legally Prescribe Ivermectin, HCQ for COVID, Calls Out FDA, CDC, Fauci, Media for ‘Fueling Confusion and Misinformation’

By Megan Redshaw, October 19, 2021

At the request of the Nebraska Department of Health, on Oct. 15, Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson issued a legal opinion that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID, so long as they obtain informed consent from the patient.

Businesses: $700,000 Fine for Not Complying with Vax Mandate

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, October 19, 2021

Buried in the massive $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill is an unconstitutional vaccine enforcement mechanism that threatens to bankrupt businesses unless they force their employees to get a COVID-19 injection.

Colin Powell: Iraqis Will ‘Not Shed Tears’ for 2003 Invasion Architect

By Alex McDonald, October 19, 2021

For millions of Iraqis, Powell will be remembered as the man who presented false intelligence before the United Nations as to the existence and threat of former ruler Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Narrative Traps in India’s Decision-making

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, October 19, 2021

The problem with contrived narratives such as on Doklam in 2017 is that they can lead to situational blindness, whereby you are so focused on one aspect that you fail to notice the bigger picture.

The WHO Recommends Genetic Manipulation and Gene Editing of Humans “To Promote Public Health”

By Jens Bernert, October 19, 2021

Those who warned that Corona “vaccinations“ were the first step towards the genetic manipulation of humans faced harsh attacks from quality media, politicians and activists who denied this and ridiculed the corresponding fears.

The Canadian Government Must Protect Hassan Diab!

By Hassan Diab Support Committee, October 19, 2021

118 members of the legal profession and legal scholars in Canada recently signed an open letter to Justice Minister David Lametti calling on the Minister to take immediate action to protect the rights of Dr. Hassan Diab by (1) giving immediate assurances that Canada will not accept nor accede to a second request for Hassan’s extradition; (2) urging France to put an immediate end to this continuing miscarriage of justice; and (3) suspending the extradition treaty with France.

Free Alex Saab Delegation Attends Meeting of African Bar Association

By John Philpot and Roger D. Harris, October 19, 2021

An international Free Alex Saab delegation attended the annual meeting of the African Bar Association in Niamey, Niger, on Oct. 3-7. Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab, who has been under arrest in Cabo Verde since June 2020 by orders of the U.S., is fighting extradition to Miami.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

With civic guidance and political leadership absent on the heels of multiple national crises, the entire country is now roiled in an era of massive civilian disobedience campaigns as thousands of American workers seek protection from President Biden’s flawed vaccine dictates.

If you listen to Biden’s recent incoherent statement on vaccine mandates or you are an incurable aficionado of what used to be called mainstream media, you may think there is reason to believe that a formal Presidential Executive Order mandating national Covid vaccinations had been issued.  As with many Democratic initiatives, the truth and reality of Biden’s September 9th announcement are frequently at odds.

There was no mention of an Executive Order despite the widespread public message that a mandatory national vaccination decree was being applied to American businesses and the non-vaccinated public. Leave it to the Democrats to exaggerate their authority as they retain utter control over the lives of Americans; not unlike committed authoritarian gangsters intent on mugging what remains of our Constitutional republic.

Soon after the alleged ‘mandate’ was announced, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered further proof of how little the Democrats care about the American people or its economy when she announced that enforcement of the ‘mandate’ was included in the $3.5 trillion “reconciliation’ bill with a serious infraction costing employers up to $70,000 per violation and up to $700,000 for repeat offenders who dare question vaccine mandates as Un-American.

However, a visit to the White House website on Executive Orders (Federal Register) reveals that the Biden Administration has not, to date, filed any such EO.   It was reported that the object of the EO was to direct the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) to issue a rule mandating vaccinations for employees in America’s top one hundred companies or submit to weekly tests or be fired.

In addition, there appears to be no such EO action at the White House Office of Management and Budget as well as no evidence of OSHA preparation of an in-the-works standard to apply to the aforementioned unvaccinated.

So, while there is great media fanfare as if there is a bona fide national mandatory mandate to take the jab, currently no such legal foundation exists for any American business to force that mandate on its employees – nor is there any foundation, at this point, for any State to initiate a legal challenge against the Federal government.   In fact, there is simply no basis for a legal challenge to a mandated vaccination policy since the entire kerfuffle may be little more than a figment of Biden’s feeble brain and has never been adopted as a formal policy.

One possible explanation is that the actual issuance of an EO would have opened a writhing can of bogus worms which would negatively affect Biden’s sinking poll numbers. On the other hand, announcing a mandate without any actual executive order would provide American companies with the façade of a legal requirement while removing any possible legal action against The State.  In other words, while employees may be forced to get the jab, the government would remain immune from charges of acting in an unconstitutional manner and from exposure to a legitimate legal Court challenge.  Let’s say the State would put itself in a situation of having their cake and eat it too.

Let’s assume for the moment that the Biden EO had actually been promulgated.  The issue is whether a hypothetical Executive Order to the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA)  has the constitutional authority to issue a regulation to determine Covid as a ‘grave health concern” to the nation.  A major hurdle to Biden’s agenda is that such an ill-conceived EO would sabotage the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution which clearly allows Federal statute precedence over State law. However, the Biden Administration in its euphoria of Building Back Better has failed to grasp that an EO would not be comparable to Federal legislation; and therefore, would lack sufficient force of authority to supersede a state ban on a Federal mandate.   In addition, it can be expected that Red State Attorneys General will vigorously defend their states’ rights under the Tenth Amendment; Blue States not so much.

In other words, an EO is not on a par with Federal statute in that it does not carry the same legislative authority as a Congressional act.  That has not stopped the Biden regime from thoughtlessly abusing its power by unnecessarily manipulating thousands of Americans into an emotionally stressful life and family crisis, fearful of a loss of employment and into a legally untenable situation; all under the guise of a deceptive legal mandate.

Surely, companies that have since announced their compliance with the mandate, such as 3M, Boeing, United, and Southwest Airlines must have legal counsel who advised them that the mandate is not a legal requirement and perhaps only the wishful thinking of a demented President. And yet, Southwest suffered massive turmoil the weekend before last, with thousands of cancellations and delays, and proved how little they care about their own employees when it opposed its own pilots who sought injunctive relief from faux mandatory vaccinations.  To date, Walmart and JP Morgan Chase have not mandated vaccinations.

In direct response to Biden’s chimera,  Florida had already stepped in to protect its citizens from an arbitrary Federal mandatory vaccination requirement as in direct response to Biden. Texas Governor Abbott issued his own Executive Order prohibiting a Federal vaccination mandate.

So here we are left with a fraudulent Democratic Administration who dare to skew public policy, claiming to have been overwhelmingly elected as if the American public supports their Marxist views.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The resultant response to Biden’s mandatory vaccination announcement continues to fail as Americans in all walks of life join together and draw their line as they message  Biden that he is not their President.

*

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 American Thinker.

Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, staff in the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found at [email protected].

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is a screenshot from a video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

A new study published in the European Journal of Epidemiology proves what we “conspiracy theorists” have been saying all along about the COVID-19 shots: They cause symptoms leading to COVID-19 diagnoses rather than prevent them.

The study, Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States, was conducted by S. V. Subramanian, who is affiliated with Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, and also the Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

The study looked at data from 68 countries and 2947 counties in the U.S.

Vaccines currently are the primary mitigation strategy to combat COVID-19 around the world. For instance, the narrative related to the ongoing surge of new cases in the United States (US) is argued to be driven by areas with low vaccination rates.

A similar narrative also has been observed in countries, such as Germany and the United Kingdom. At the same time, Israel that was hailed for its swift and high rates of vaccination has also seen a substantial resurgence in COVID-19 cases.

We investigate the relationship between the percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases across 68 countries and across 2947 counties in the US.

They used COVID-19 data provided by the Our World in Data for cross-country analysis, available as of September 3, 2021.

For the county-level analysis in the US, they utilized the White House COVID-19 Team data, available as of September 2, 2021.

Comparing countries with various rates of percentages of their population fully vaccinated for COVID-19, they found that “countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”

At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1).

In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.

Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days.

The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.

Likewise, in the U.S. the counties with the highest vaccination rates have the highest incidents of COVID-19 cases.

Across the US counties too, the median new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people in the last 7 days is largely similar across the categories of percent population fully vaccinated (Fig. 2).

Notably there is also substantial county variation in new COVID-19 cases within categories of percentage population fully vaccinated. There also appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated (Fig. 3).

Of the top 5 counties that have the highest percentage of population fully vaccinated (99.9–84.3%), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identifies 4 of them as “High” Transmission counties.

Chattahoochee (Georgia), McKinley (New Mexico), and Arecibo (Puerto Rico) counties have above 90% of their population fully vaccinated with all three being classified as “High” transmission.

Conversely, of the 57 counties that have been classified as “low” transmission counties by the CDC, 26.3% (15) have percentage of population fully vaccinated below 20%.

Read the full study here. You might want to download the .pdf version, as these kind of studies proving Big Pharma and Government health agencies such as the FDA and CDC are lying to people, tend to be “retracted” once they are published.

COVID-19 vaccines not only offer no benefits, they are killing and injuring people, which is why so many dissenting doctors and scientists today call them “bioweapons.”

*

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

Featured image is from HIN

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Open Letter from Legal Professionals in Canada Supporting Dr. Hassan Diab

118 members of the legal profession and legal scholars in Canada recently signed an open letter to Justice Minister David Lametti calling on the Minister to take immediate action to protect the rights of Dr. Hassan Diab by (1) giving immediate assurances that Canada will not accept nor accede to a second request for Hassan’s extradition; (2) urging France to put an immediate end to this continuing miscarriage of justice; and (3) suspending the extradition treaty with France.

Read the open letter and view the list of signatories here.

Neve, Aiken and Champ: Canada’s Next Justice Minister Must Defend Hassan Diab’s Rights

“Will France have the audacity to seek Diab’s extradition a second time? Will it instead opt to try him in absentia, itself a flagrant violation of fair trial rights? Either way, Diab and his family, who have been trapped in a Kafkaesque world of injustice for 14 years, currently face the prospect of several more years of the same. It is intolerable and it must end. That is why we recently joined more than 100 lawyers and legal academics in an open letter to Minister Lametti during the recent election, urging him to convey to French authorities that Canada will not in any way continue to participate in this profound miscarriage of justice.”

Read the full opinion piece by Alex Neve, Sharry Aiken, and Paul Champ in the Ottawa Citizen here.

Should We Really be Handing Them Over?

“Under the current law, a state requesting extradition need only shows up with a summary of the evidence it claims to have. But that summary cannot be challenged or tested, says Robert Currie, a Schulich School of Law professor at Dalhousie University in Halifax. ‘It’s an unfair process.’… Currie says that the Diab case is an egregious example of how the Supreme Court’s intention in Ferras has failed. ‘If Hassan Diab could be committed for extradition, then there’s no meaningful way to challenge it at all,’ he says. ‘The judge just becomes a rubber stamp on the whole thing.’”

Read the full article by Dale Smith in the Canadian Bar Association’s National Magazine here.

Please Send a Letter to Prime Minister Justice Trudeau

We need to keep the pressure on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Canadian government to protect Hassan and end the Kafkaesque injustice he is facing.

Please send a letter to PM Trudeau and the Canadian government. You may write your own letter, or send the online letter at:

If you live in Canada: https://iclmg.ca/diab-letter
(a copy of the letter will be sent to your Member of Parliament)

If you live outside Canada: https://iclmg.ca/diab-letter-intl

Thank you for your continued support!

*

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: Hassan Diab, the Ottawa professor who was extradited to France by the Canadian government as a suspect in a decades-old terror bombing.  (THE CANADIAN PRESS)  

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Liberty Counsel on Friday announced a class action lawsuit on behalf of members of all five branches of the U.S. military – the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard – against President Joe Biden over his orders they take the experimental COVID shots or face dishonorable discharge.

“The Biden administration has no authority to require the COVID shots for the military or for federal employees or civilian contractors,” explained Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel chairman.

“Nor can the Biden administration pretend that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment do not apply to its unlawful mandates. The commander-in-chief must end this shameful treatment and abuse of our brave military heroes. Forcing the COVID shots without consent or consideration for their sincere religious beliefs is illegal.”

The action in U.S. District Court in Florida is on behalf of two Navy SEALs, a Navy EOD Officer, a Navy Senior Chief Petty Officer, a Navy Chaplain, two Marine Lt. Colonels, two Marine Lance Corporals, an Air Force Major, an Air Force Technical Sergeant, an Army National Guardsman, an Army Colonel, and a Coast Guard Lieutenant.

It seeks a temporary restraining order preventing Biden and his appointees from “enforcing, threatening to enforce, attempting to enforce, or otherwise requiring compliance with the Federal COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate…”

Other defendants are Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas.

Liberty Counsel said the non-military plaintiffs include a Department of Defense contractor who has conducted Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance quantitative and qualitative assessments and studies, whose assessments are briefed to DOD senior leadership to inform decisions on future employment, allocation, and procurement; a federal civilian engineer employed by a large military defense contractor that provides LCD screens used in United States Armed Forces aircraft; a federal civilian contractor employer whose company develops and supports military weapons systems, including current and next generation land vehicles for the Army and next generation Navy vessels; a federal nuclear contractor employee who is a young woman opposed to abortion and who desires to have children of her own one day; and a Department of Energy Civilian Nuclear Tech who works at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

The individuals for whom the case was filed are not named, but in a sworn statement on Navy chaplain explained, “I personally observed (and the Sailors told me in the course of counseling about) tremendous amounts of coercion, bullying, censorship, and intimidation being brought forth by the command to bear against the personnel who expressed objections of any kind to the COVID shot mandates, including religious objections…And clearly, the military has lost more lives to the increase in suicide from 2020-2021 (at least 1,012) than to all of COVID in 2 years (~52), but suicide has not been a focus.”

It was Austin who dispatched on August 24 the “Mandatory Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination of Department of Defense Service Members.”

But Matthew Oster, who is on Biden’s COVID task force, admitted the shots are “causing myocarditis” in “young men,” and the Journal of the American Medical Association Cardiology confirmed, “Myocarditis Following Immunization with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in Members of the U.S. Military.”

Then on Sept. 9 Biden issued a similar order for federal workers.

The case charges that under the federal Emergency Use Authorization law none of the vaccines has gotten full Food and Drug Administration Approval, so they cannot be mandated.

“Under the above statute, there is no legal basis on which the president may waive the EUA in order to mandate the COVID-19 vaccines for the military. Indeed, he has not done so because he has no statutory authority under the law,” Liberty Counsel explained.

Further, the mandates violate the constitutionally protected right to religion.

“The plaintiffs all hold sincere religious beliefs against the COVID shots on the basis that their body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and to defile it is a sin against God. In addition, the plaintiffs do not want to participate directly or indirectly or otherwise be associated with the destruction of human life through abortion by injecting a product that contains or was tested or developed with aborted fetal cell lines,” Liberty Counsel said.

But the military is telling the plaintiffs “there are NO RELIGIOUS exemptions, and merely submitting such a request will subject them to dishonorable discharge.”

Liberty Counsel said it also is representing clients on behalf of the 3.7 million employees under federal government contracts and two million federal employees who are under the Biden administration’s COVID shot mandate.

*

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: Hospital Corpsman 2nd Caine Collins instructs recruits on the importance of their COVID vaccination card before receiving their COVID-19 vaccine in Pacific Fleet Drill Hall at Recruit Training Command at Great Lakes, Illinois, May 26, 2021. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Spencer Fling)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

At the request of the Nebraska Department of Health, on Oct. 15, Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson issued a legal opinion that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID, so long as they obtain informed consent from the patient.

Few subjects have been more controversial than ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine — two long-established, inexpensive medications widely and successfully used in many parts of the world for the prevention and treatment of COVID.

By contrast, the use of both medications against COVID has been largely suppressed in the U.S, where doctors have been threatened and punished for prescribing them.

On Oct. 15, Nebraska Attorney General (AG) Doug Peterson issued a legal opinion that Nebraska healthcare providers can legally prescribe off-label medications like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID, so long as they obtain informed consent from the patient.

However, if they did neglect to obtain consent, deceive, prescribe excessively high doses or other misconduct, they could be subject to discipline, Peterson wrote.

The AG’s office emphasized it was not recommending any specific treatment for COVID.

“That is not our role,” Peterson wrote. “Rather, we address only the off-label early treatment options discussed in this opinion and conclude that the available evidence suggests they might work for some people.”

Peterson said allowing physicians to consider early treatments will free them to evaluate additional tools that could save lives, keep patients out of the hospital and provide relief for our already strained healthcare system.

The opinion, based on an assessment of relevant scientific literature, was rendered in response to a request by Dannette Smith, CEO of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.

Smith asked the AG’s office to look into whether doctors could face discipline or legal action under Nebraska’s Uniform Credential Act (UCA) — meant to protect public health, safety and welfare — if they prescribed ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine.

“After receiving your question and conducting our investigation, we have found significant controversy and suspect information about potential COVID-19 treatments,” Peterson wrote.

For example, a paper published in the Lancet — one of the most prestigious medical journals in the world — denounced hydroxychloroquine as dangerous, yet the statistics were flawed and the authors refused to provide analyzed data.

The paper was retracted, but not before countries stopped using the drug and trials were cancelled or interrupted.

“The Lancet’s own editor-in-chief admitted that the paper was a ‘fabrication,’ a ‘monumental fraud’ and a ‘shocking example of research misconduct’ in the middle of a global health emergency,” Peterson wrote in the opinion.

A recently published paper on COVID recognized that “for reasons that are yet to be clarified,” early treatment has not been emphasized despite numerous U.S. healthcare providers advocating for early treatment and “scores of treating and academic physicians” — who have published papers in well respected journals — urging early interventions.

Peterson cited numerous studies showing ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine reduced mortality by up to 75% or more when used as a preventative or prophylaxis for COVID, suggesting hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved had the drugs been widely used in America.

“Every citizen — Democrat or Republican — should be grateful for Doug Peterson’s thoughtful and courageous counteroffensive against the efforts of Big Pharma, its captive federal regulators, and its media and social media allies to silence doctors and deny Americans life-saving treatments,” Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender via email.

“We finally have a leader who puts constitutional rights, peer-reviewed science and human health above industry profits. Doug Peterson is uncowed and unbowed — a genuine hero on horseback for all Americans.” Kennedy said.

Children’s Health Defense President Mary Holland agreed.

“This Nebraska AG opinion lets doctors get back to being doctors — without being second-guessed by government, pharmacists and others interfering in the crucial doctor-patient relationship,” Holland said.

Although the AG’s office did not rule out the possibility that other off-label drugs might show promise — either now or in the future — as a prophylaxis or treatment against COVID, it confined its opinion to ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the sake of brevity.

Nebraska AG highlights science on ivermectin

In his legal opinion, Peterson concluded evidence showed ivermectin demonstrated striking effectiveness in preventing and treating COVID, and any side effects were primarily minor and transient.

“Thus, the UCA does not preclude physicians from considering ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID,” Peterson wrote.

In the decade leading up to the COVID pandemic, Peterson found numerous studies showing ivermectin’s antiviral acti­vity against several RNA viruses by blocking the nuclear trafficking of viral proteins, adding to 50 years of research confirming ivermectin’s antiviral effects.

In addition, safety data for ivermectin showed side effects were “vanishingly small.” The latest statistics available through VigiAccess reported only 5,674 adverse drug reac­tions to ivermectin between 1992 and October 13, 2021, an “incredibly low” number given that 3.7 billion doses have been administered since the 1980s, Peterson wrote.

Peterson cited several studies showing ivermectin led to improvement of COVID outcomes when used in early treatment or as a prophylaxis, while noting many studies with negative findings about ivermectin “excluded most available evidence,” cherry picked data within studies, misreported data, made unsupported assertions of adverse reactions to ivermectin and had “conclusions that did follow from evidence.”

Peterson also found that epidemiological evidence for ivermectin’s effectiveness, derived by analyzing COVID-related data from various states, countries or regions is instructive in the context of a global pandemic.

In one instance, a group of scholars analyzed data comparing COVID rates of countries that routinely administer ivermectin as a prophylaxis and countries that did not. The research showed “countries with routine mass drug administration of pro­phylactic … ivermectin have a significantly lower incidence of COVID-19.”

“This ‘highly significant’ correlation manifests itself not only ‘in a worldwide context’ but also when comparing African countries that regularly administer prophylactic ‘ivermectin against parasitic infections’ and African countries that do not,” Peterson wrote. “Based on these results, the researchers surmised that these results may be connected to ivermectin’s ability to inhibit SARS-CoV-2 replication, which likely leads to lower infection rates.”

Nebraska AG calls out FDA, Fauci on hypocrisy on ivermectin

Many U.S. health agencies have now addressed the use of ivermectin for COVID. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has adopted a neutral position, choosing not to recommend for or against the use of ivermectin — a change from its position in January 2021 where it discouraged use of the drug for treatment of COVID.

Peterson wrote:

“The reason for the change is the NIH recognized several randomized trials and retrospective cohort studies of ivermectin use in patients with COVID-19 have been published in peer-reviewed journals. And some of those studies reported positive outcomes, including shorter time to resolution of disease manifestations that were attributed to COVID-19, greater reduction in inflammatory marker levels, shorter time to viral clearance, [and] lower mortality rates in patients who received ivermectin than in patients who received comparator drugs or placebo.”

Yet, on Aug. 29, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases within the NIH, went on CNN and announced “there is no clinical evidence” that ivermectin works for the prevention or treatment of COVID. Fauci went on to reiterate that “there is no evidence whatsoever” that it works.

“This definitive claim directly contradicts the NIH’s recognition that ‘several randomized trials … published in peer-reviewed journals’ have reported data indicating that ivermectin is effective as a COVI D-19 treatment,” Peterson wrote.

In March 2021, the FDA posted a webpage, “Why You Should Not Use lvermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.”

“Although the FDA’s concern was stories of some people using the animal form of ivermectin or excessive doses of the human form, the title broadly condemned any use of ivermectin in connection with COVID-19,” Peterson wrote. “Yet, there was no basis for its sweeping condemnation.”

Peterson wrote:

“Indeed, the FDA itself acknowledged on that very webpage (and continued to do so until the page changed on September 3, 2021) that the agency had not even ‘reviewed data to support use of ivermectin in COVID-19 patients to treat or to prevent COVID-19.’ But without reviewing the available data, which had long since been available and accumulating, it is unclear what basis the FDA had for denouncing ivermectin as a treatment or prophylaxis for COVID-19.

“On that same webpage, the FDA also declared that ‘[i]vermectin is not an anti-viral (a drug for treating viruses).’ It did so while another one of its webpages simultaneously cited a study in Antiviral Research that identified ivermectin as a medicine ‘previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity.’”

“It is telling that the FDA deleted the line about ivermectin not being ‘anti-viral’ when it amended the first webpage on September 3, 2021,” Peterson noted.

Peterson said the FDA’s most controversial statement on ivermectin was made on Aug. 21, when it posted a link on Twitter to its “Why You Should Not Use lvermectin” webpage with this statement: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

“This message is troubling not only because it makes light of a serious matter but also because it inaccurately implies that ivermectin is only for horses or cows,” Peterson wrote.

Peterson said the FDA has assailed ivermectin’s safety while ignoring the fact that physicians routinely prescribe medications for off-label use and that ivermectin is a “particularly well-tolerated medicine with an established safety record.”

Peterson added the FDA is ignoring several randomized controlled trials and at least one meta­analysis suggesting ivermectin is effective against COVID. He pointed out the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention has adopted a similar stance — unsupported by scientific evidence — and the media has fueled confusion and misinformation on the drug.

Peterson questions professional associations’ stance on ivermectin

Professional associations in the U.S. and internationally have adopted conflicting positions on ivermectin and COVID. The American Medical Association (AMA), American Pharmacists Association (APhA) and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) issued a statement in September strongly opposing the ordering, prescribing or dispensing of ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID outside of a clinical trial.

But their statement relied solely on the FDA’s and CDC’s suspect positions.

The AMA, APhA and ASHP also mentioned a statement by Merck — the original patent-holder — opposing the use of ivermectin for COVID because of a “concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.”

“But Merck, of all sources, knows that ivermectin is exceedingly safe, so the absence of safety data in recent studies should not be concerning to the company,” Peterson wrote.

Peterson called into question the objectivity of Merck in providing an opinion on ivermectin that U.S. health agencies are relying upon. “Why would ivermectin’s original patent holder go out of its way to question this medicine by creating the impression that it might not be safe?” Peterson asked. “There are at least two plausible reasons.”

Peterson explained:

“First, ivermectin is no longer under patent, so Merck does not profit from it anymore. That likely explains why Merck declined to ‘conduct clinical trials’ on ivermectin and COVID-19 when given the chance.

“Second, Merck has a significant financial interest in the medical profession rejecting ivermectin as an early treatment for COVID-19. [T]he U.S. government has agreed to pay [Merck] about $1.2 billion for 1.7 million courses of its experimental COVID-19 treatment, if it is proven to work in an ongoing large trial and authorized by U.S. regulators.”

Merck’s treatment is known as “molnupiravir,” and aims to stop COVID from progressing when given early in the course of disease. When Merck announced Oct. 1, that preliminary studies indicated molnupiravir reduced hospitalizations and deaths by half, the drug maker’s stock price immediately jumped to 12.3%.

“Thus, if low-cost ivermectin works better than, or even the same as molnupiravir, that could cost Merck billions of dollars,” Peterson wrote.

Pharma giant Merck is facing accusations of price gouging after it charged the U.S. more than $700 per patient for a taxpayer-funded coronavirus treatment that, according to research, costs just $17.74 to produce.https://t.co/BSYYnPmRBl

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) October 8, 2021

Peterson takes on science of hydroxychloroquine

Peterson said based on his review of the evidence, his office did not find clear and convin­cing evidence that would warrant disciplining physicians who prescribe hydroxychloroquine for the prevention or early treatment of COVID after first obtaining informed patient consent.

Peterson pointed to similar findings with hydroxychloroquine — a less toxic derivative of a medicine named chloroquine — widely used since it was approved by the FDA in 1955 for treatment of malaria.

Peterson noted that as early as 2004, a lab study revealed chloroquine was “an effective inhibitor of the replication of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in vitro” and should “be considered for immediate use in the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV infections.”

In 2005, another study showed chloroquine had strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection and was effective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV in cell cultures.

Other studies showed hydroxychloroquine exhibited antiviral properties that can inhibit SARS-CoV-2 virus entry, transmission and replication, and contains anti-inflammatory properties that help regulate pro-inflammatory cytokines.

Peterson wrote,

“many large observational studies suggest that hydroxychloroquine significantly reduces the risk of hospitalization and death when administered to ­particularly high-risk outpatients as part of early COVID-19 treatment.”

Peterson said the drug is considered to be so safe it can be prescribed for pregnant women, yet during the pandemic, the FDA raised questions about hydroxychloroquine and adverse cardiac events.

These concerns prompted one group of researchers to conduct a systematic review of the hydroxychloroquine safety literature pre-COVID. Their review indicated people taking hydroxychloroquine in appropriate doses “are at very low risk of experiencing cardiac [adverse events], particularly with short-term administration” of the drug.

Researchers noted COVID itself can cause cardiac problems, and there was no reason “to think the medication itself had changed after 70 years of widespread use,” Peterson wrote.

Peterson said one piece of key flawed data had substantially contributed to safety concerns surrounding the drug — the admittedly fraudulent Lancet study that falsely claimed hydroxychloroquine increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID.

The findings were so startling that major drug trials involving hydroxychloroquine “were immediately halted” and the World Health Organization pressured countries like Indonesia that were widely using hydroxychloroquine to ban it. Some countries, including France, Italy and Belgium, stopped using it for COVID altogether.

Peterson wrote:

“The problem, however, is that the study was based on false data from a company named Surgisphere, whose founder and CEO Sapan Desai was a co-author on the published paper.

“The data were so obviously flawed that journalists and outside researchers began raising concerns within days of the paper’s publication. Even the Lancet’s editor in chief, Dr. Richard Horton, admitted that the paper was a fabrication, a monumental fraud and a shocking example of research misconduct in the middle of a global health emergency.”

Despite calls for the Lancet to provide a full expansion of what happened, the publication declined to provide details for the retraction.

As with ivermectin, the FDA and NIH adopted positions against the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID — making assertions that were unsupported by data. The AMA, APhA and ASHP, which opposed ivermectin, also resisted hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID.

By contrast, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and other physician groups, support the use of both ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as an early treatment option for COVID. Peterson cited an article co-authored by more than 50 doctors in Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine who advocated an early treatment protocol that includes hydroxychloroquine as a key component.

Governing law allows physicians to prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, AG says

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 38-179 generally defines unprofessional conduct as a “departure from or failure to conform to the standards of acceptable and prevailing practice of a profession or the ethics of the profession, regardless of whether a person, consumer or entity is injured, or conduct that is likely to deceive or defraud the public or is detrimental to the public interest.”

The regulation governing physicians states that unprofessional conduct includes:

“[c]onduct or practice outside the normal standard of care in the State of Nebraska which is or might be harmful or dangerous to the health of the patient or the public, not to include a single act of ordinary negligence.”

Peterson said healthcare providers do not violate the standard of care when they choose between two reasonable approaches to medicine.

“Regulations also indicate that physicians may utilize reasonable investigative or unproven therapies that reflect a reasonable approach to medicine so long as physicians obtain written informed patient consent,” Peterson wrote.

“Informed consent concerns a doctor’s duty to inform his or her patient, and it includes telling patients about the nature of the pertinent ailment or condition, the risks of the proposed treatment or procedure and the risks of any alternative methods of treatment, including the risks of failing to undergo any treatment at all.”

Peterson said this applies to prescribing medicine for purposes other than uses approved by the FDA, and that doing so falls within the standard of care repeatedly recognized by the courts.

Peterson said the U.S. Supreme Court has also affirmed that “off-label usage of medical devices” is an “accepted and necessary” practice, and the FDA has held the position for decades that “a physician may prescribe [a drug] for uses or in treatment regimens or patient populations that are not included in approved labeling.”

Peterson said the FDA has stated “healthcare providers generally may prescribe [a] drug for an unapproved use when they judge that it is medically appropriate for their patient, and nothing in the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) limit[s] the manner in which a physician may use an approved drug.”

In a statement to KETV NewsWatch 7, Nebraska’s Department of Health and Human Services said:

“The Department of Health and Human Services appreciates the AG’s office delivering an opinion on this matter. The document is posted and available to medical providers as they determine appropriate course of treatment for their patients.”

*

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

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Latest UK PHE Vaccine Surveillance Report figures on Covid cases show that doubly vaccinated 40-70 year olds have lost 40% of their immune system capability compared to unvaccinated people. Their immune systems are deteriorating at around 5% per week (between 2.7% and 8.7%). If this continues then 30-50 year olds will have 100% immune system degradation, zero viral defence by Christmas and all doubly vaccinated people over 30 will have lost their immune systems by March next year.

The 5 PHE tables below from their excellent Vaccine Surveillance Report, separated by 4 weeks, clearly show the progressive damage that the vaccines are doing to the immune system’s response.

People aged 40-69 have already lost 40% of their immune system capability and are losing it progressively at 3.3% to 6.4% per week.

Weekly Decline in doubly vaccinated immune system performance compared to unvaccinated people…

Everybody over 30 will have lost 100% of their entire immune capability (for viruses and certain cancers) within 6 months.
30-50 year olds will have lost it by Christmas. These people will then effectively have full blown acquired immunodeficiency syndrome and destroy the NHS.

The vaccine booster shots have to be the same as the vaccines themselves, because it takes forever to do clinical trials and get approval for something different. So if you take a booster shot, these figures show that you are giving yourself an even faster progressive form of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (after a couple of months of effectiveness).

Table 2. COVID-19 cases by vaccination status…

Cases reported by specimen date between week 32 and week 35 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 33 and week 36 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 34 and week 37 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 35 and week 38 2021 – see this.

Cases reported by specimen date between week 36 and week 39 2021 – see this.

Pfizer originally claimed a 95% efficiency for their vaccine (calculated as in the last column above). The figures above indicate that their figures may well have been correct immediately after vaccination (the younger age groups have had the vaccine for the shortest time).

But the figures above also show that the vaccines do NOT merely lose efficiency over time down to zero efficiency, they progressively damage the immune system until a negative efficiency is realised. They presently leave anybody over 30 in a worse position than they were before vaccination  For more see here.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Buried in the massive $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill are unconstitutional fines for employers who don’t mandate COVID-19 jabs or regular COVID-19 testing of their employees

Fines on employers could run as high as $70,000 for serious infractions and $700,000 for each “willful” or repeated violation

The unconstitutional fines as a mechanism for vaccine enforcement would bankrupt all but the largest businesses

Calling the vaccine mandate for businesses “tyrannical,” the No Taxation Without Congressional Consent Act, introduced September 30, 2021, would prohibit the federal government from imposing a fine, fee or tax on individuals or businesses for violating a COVID-19 vaccine mandate

*

Buried in the massive $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill is an unconstitutional vaccine enforcement mechanism that threatens to bankrupt businesses unless they force their employees to get a COVID-19 injection. If the measure is enacted into law, even employers that respect their employees’ rights to health freedom and informed consent would be left with an impossible decision — mandate COVID-19 jabs or essentially go out of business due to unbearable fines.

The White House announced in September 2021 that companies with 100 or more employees would have to ensure staff have gotten a COVID-19 injection or were tested regularly for COVID-19. The Labor Department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is to be in charge of enforcing the rule, which will affect more than 80 million U.S. workers.¹

In order to carry out this draconian measure, OSHA plans to use an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) — a drastic measure used to accelerate new orders that has only been attempted 10 times in the agency’s 50-year history. OSHA would also be able to enforce fines of up to $13,600 per violation of the rules — but the new measure tucked into the reconciliation bill raises the fines for noncompliance astronomically.

Before we get any further, it should be noted that the mandate doesn’t actually exist yet, in that it hasn’t been sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for approval, and it’s not yet a legally enforceable mandate. Still, by announcing it as though it’s an inevitable rule, it may have the same effect of triggering workers to get vaccinated — or allowing companies to enact mandates under the veil of the government “mandate.”²

$700,000 Fines for Businesses That Don’t Force Injections

On page 168 of the 2,465-page bill³ is wording that should send an authoritarian chill down the back of anyone who believes in health freedom. It outlines fines for employers that “willfully,” “repeatedly” or seriously violate the labor law, including by not requiring COVID-19 jabs or regular COVID-19 testing. As Forbes reported:⁴

“The increased fines on employers could run as high as $70,000 for serious infractions, and $700,000 for willful or repeated violations — almost three-quarters of a million dollars for each fine. If enacted into law, vax enforcement could bankrupt non-compliant companies even more quickly than the $14,000 OSHA fine anticipated under Biden’s announced mandate.”

In case you missed it, that $700,000 fine is for each violation, meaning it would bankrupt all but the very largest corporations if they don’t fully comply with COVID-19 jab mandates or take on the cost of weekly COVID-19 testing of their employees.

Currently, the fines only apply to businesses with 100 or more employees, but there’s nothing stopping them from changing it to 50 employees — or one employee. Anything could happen at this point. Some, such as Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, have called on businesses to “openly rebel” against the OSHA rule. But as Forbes put it:⁵

“It’s one thing to defy a $14,000 fine. It’s quite another to risk incurring hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines. One or two disgruntled employees, for example, could bring an employer $70,000-$140,000 in OSHA fines. If considered ‘willful,’ as per Rep. Roy’s tweet — just three ‘violations’ could quickly become a $2.1 million OSHA fine.”

As mentioned, the mandate that President Biden announced is currently a “mirage.”⁶ Speaking with The Federalist, a spokeswoman for the Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Administration explained, “There is nothing there yet that gives employers any mandate. The president made an announcement on this asking OSHA to do it, but we’ve not yet seen anything come from it yet.”⁷

An ETS may take six months to go into effect even after the mandate is put in the Federal Register — which hasn’t happened yet. OSHA’s COVID-19 Healthcare ETS also makes no mention of vaccine mandates at this time.⁸ ETS rules are also often overturned in court. In the last five decades, courts have challenged six of the 10 ETS standards that have been suggested, with five of the six getting overturned.⁹

However, using the ETS for the “mandate,” the Federalist pointed out, “allows the Biden administration to push its demands faster and without any public input or requirement of responding to public input, which is normally required of even legally laughable federal rule making like this one would be.”¹⁰

This may be why more lawsuits haven’t been filed to challenge the mandate — there’s nothing to challenge just yet. It’s also worth mentioning that less than 2% of U.S. businesses will be affected by the mandate, as more than 98% of U.S. businesses have fewer than 100 employees, exempting them from the mandate. Still, those 2% account for about two-thirds of U.S. employees, so they’re a sizeable minority.¹¹

Many of these large corporations have already put injection mandates into place or were planning to. The “mandate” announcement allows these mega-corporations to mandate the jabs without having to be the bad guy.

Congressmen Try to Block ‘Tyrannical Vaccine Mandate’

Roy and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced a bill — the No Taxation Without Congressional Consent Act — September 30, 2021, that would prohibit the federal government from imposing a fine, fee or tax on individuals or businesses for violating a COVID-19 vaccine mandate issued by OSHA or other agencies. If it passes, it would prevent the outrageous fines threatening to bankrupt small businesses under the reconciliation bill. Roy said:¹²

“Your decision about whether or not to get a COVID vaccine should be yours and yours alone … [the] proposed mandate is unconstitutional, and flat-out tyrannical. No freedom-loving American should comply. This country needs, and her people deserve, healthcare freedom.

That means taking control over our care back from politicians and bureaucrats. I am proud to introduce this legislation with my good friend Senator Mike Lee to gut the federal government’s ability to enforce this unconstitutional mandate.”

Further, being unvaxxed is not a crime. Allowing for these exorbitant fines only further attempts to segregate society into one of vaxxed versus unvaxxed. But, as Lee added:¹³

“Unvaccinated Americans aren’t the enemy. We should not be forcing employers to fire some of their valuable, and now hard to find, workers. We shouldn’t be threatening business owners with closure who do not wish to police their workforce’s decisions. Many simply cannot incur the cost of this enforcement in this economy.”

Jab Mandates Are Spreading

Vaccine mandates are targeting every angle, from places of employment to restaurants, gyms and sports arenas. Los Angeles recently approved one of the strictest mandates in the U.S. and will require a vaccine passport to enter indoor public spaces like shopping malls, museums, restaurants, spas and other locations.¹⁴

California also became the first U.S. state to require students in kindergarten through grade 12 to receive COVID-19 shots following full FDA approval.¹⁵ Council president Nury Martinez called the move “a necessary step towards returning to normalcy,” but there’s nothing “normal” about presenting proof of an injection to go about your daily life.¹⁶

This, however, is what the “new normal” is all about — increasing surveillance and authoritarian control while removing personal liberties, and vaccine passports have always been part of the plan.

The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) 2030 agenda is part and parcel of what is now advertised as The Great Reset,¹⁷ a plan that originated in something called the Global Redesign Initiative, drafted by the WEF in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis. The Transnational Institute’s website describes the initiative as “multi-stakeholderism,” a “corporate push for a new form of global governance.”¹⁸

Vaccine Passports as Part of the ‘New Normal’

WEF and the Commons Project created the Common Trust Network, which developed the CommonPass app that’s acting as a health passport. The app allows users to upload medical data such as a COVID-19 test result or proof of injection, which then generates a QR code that you show to authorities as your health passport.¹⁹

Eventually, the CommonPass framework will be integrated with already existing personal health apps such as Apple Health and CommonHealth. If you want to travel, your personal health record will be evaluated and compared to a country’s entry requirements, and if you don’t meet them, you’ll be directed to an approved testing and vaccination location. WEF is pushing for the World Health Organization’s collaboration, stating:²⁰

“Rather than building a set of rules that would be left to the interpretation of member states or private-sector operators like cruises, airlines or conveners of gatherings, we support the WHO’s effort to create a standard for member states for requesting vaccinations and how it would permit the various kinds of use cases.

It is important that we rely on the normative body (the WHO) to create the vaccine credential requirements. The Forum is involved in the WHO taskforce to reflect on those standards and think about how they would be used.”

This, too, is disturbing, since WHO’s history clearly illustrates its allegiance to Big Pharma and other industries. A review in the Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy went so far as to say the corruption of WHO is the “biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time,” particularly as it relates to WHO’s drug recommendations — including its “list of essential medicines” — which it believes is biased and not reliable.²¹

Given the strong and ongoing evidence that WHO is heavily conflicted and controlled by industry, its usefulness as a guardian of public health — and an arbiter of vaccine passports — needs to be seriously reevaluated.

Obey or You’ll Get Fined

Threats of punishment like fines have become increasingly common and accepted during the pandemic. Both Roy and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green, R-Ga., were fined for not wearing face masks on the House floor, for instance. The initial fine for such an offense is $500, but since this was Greene’s second “offense,” she was fined $2,500.²²

In the U.K., meanwhile, there’s the NHS COVID app, which notifies you if you’ve been in close contact (defined as within 6 feet for 15 minutes or more) with someone who tested positive for COVID-19. If you don’t self-isolate after being notified, you can be fined £1,000 ($1,390) or more.²³

Other penalties are also being rolled out for those who choose not to get the injection. On August 25, 2021, Delta Air Lines announced that unvaccinated employees who are on the company health plan will have a $200 monthly surcharge added, beginning November 1, 2021.²⁴

It’s yet another example of the injection-only mindset that has proliferated since the start of the pandemic. Meanwhile, in the U.S. and much of the world, COVID-19 is still being regarded as a disease that should only be treated once a person is hospitalized. At that point, the person is already seriously ill and has missed the opportunity for inexpensive, early treatment options that have shown significant success in reducing rates of hospitalization and death.²⁵

The penalties and punishments also reek of coercion. One of the principles of the Nuremberg Code is that humans must give voluntary consent when participating in medical experiments, and that consent must be given, among other things, “without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion.”²⁶

Given the emergency use authorization, not approval, the mass jab administration constituted a research trial. While the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 jab received FDA approval August 23, 2021, the injection’s approval represents the fastest approval in history,²⁷ granted less than four months after Pfizer filed for licensing May 7, 2021.²⁸ So, for all intents and purposes, it’s still in the research phase.

It’s quite possible that the decision to penalize people for choosing to avoid a COVID-19 injection could be seen as a form of coercion.

What About Natural Immunity?

The other glaring issue is there’s no mention of natural immunity. It’s the elephant in the room that the mainstream COVID-19 narrative refuses to acknowledge. A sizable number of Americans already have natural immunity from a prior COVID-19 infection.

How can you threaten a person with fines or loss of employment to get an injection for a disease to which they’re already immune? 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.²⁹

It’s important to keep your eyes open at this point in history and resist the insidious removal of freedoms from society that’s currently occurring. In their place are empty promises to give you your freedom back if you submit to an injection, a mask, a lockdown.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, for example, recently stated that vaccine passports are “all about” letting you know that “if you’ve done the right things, you get to be safe” wherever you go.³⁰ And those who refuse to do “the right thing,” well, they simply aren’t entitled to those same “freedoms.”

The disease countermeasures we currently see for COVID-19 won’t end with COVID-19, and fines for business owners who choose not to force their employees to make a certain medical decision are only the beginning. We must not continue down this rabbit hole. Now is the time to speak out in peaceful protest in order to compel positive changes in support of health and overall freedom.

*

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

Notes

¹ Reuters September 13, 2021

^{2, 7, 9, 10} The Federalist October 7, 2021

³ Reconciliation Bill September 25, 2021

^4, 5 Forbes September 28, 2021

^6, 11 Time September 21, 2021

⁸ OSHA, COVID-19 Healthcare ETS

^12, 13 Chip Roy, Texas September 30, 2021

^14, 16 AP October 7, 2021

¹⁵ Office of Governor Gavin Newsom October 1, 2021

¹⁷ World Economic Forum 2030Vision

¹⁸ Transnational Institute Global Redesign Initiative (Archived)

¹⁹ CNN December 27, 2020

²⁰ World Economic Forum May 5, 2021

²¹ Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy January 2015 Vol. 2, Issue 1

²² Upolitics September 12, 2021

²³ BBC News July 23, 2021

²⁴ CBS News August 25, 2021

²⁵ European Journal of Medical & Health Sciences 2020; 2(6)

²⁶ U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, Nuremberg Code

²⁷ The Defender August 23, 2021

²⁸ Pfizer May 7, 2021

²⁹ Israel National News July 13, 2021

³⁰ Twitter Rebel News September 19, 2021

Featured image is from Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

The death of former US Secretary of State Colin Powell has, as is usual with the death of a major political figure, provoked a discussion about his legacy and what his time in office meant to the world.

For millions of Iraqis, Powell will be remembered as the man who presented false intelligence before the United Nations as to the existence and threat of former ruler Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Powell’s claims that Saddam had links to al-Qaeda and was hiding WMDs helped push forward the momentum for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the resulting years of chaos and bloodshed that have continued to plague the country to this day.

Kamal Jabir, a politician with the Civil Democratic Alliance and former freedom fighter against Saddam in the 80s and 90s, saw many killed by Saddam’s administration and gave up much of his life to fighting and to exile because of him.

However, he still regards the Iraq war as having been a catastrophe.

“Since 2003, Iraqis suffered a greater deal because American administrations – Republicans and Democrats – insisted on supporting the most corrupt, most dishonest, and most disloyal officials and Islamic extremists to rise to power and ruin Iraq and slaughter Iraqis,” he told Middle East Eye.

He noted that while Powell had a reputation for decency as a politician, he failed to either object to the 2003 war or the “countless deliberate mistakes” made by Coalition Provisional Authority leader Paul Bremer during his rule over the occupied country.

“[Powell] chose to watch the massacres against Iraq and innocent Iraqis and do nothing about it. Iraqis today are busy trying to rescue their country and save tears for their young peaceful protesters, sons and daughters who got killed by the pro-Iranian militias and gangs,” he said.

“Iraqis will not shed tears for Colin Powell.”

A ‘reluctant warrior’

Powell died at the age of 84 on Monday from complications linked to a Covid-19 infection.

Much has been made of his status as the first black secretary of state and his reputation for caution and level-headedness in former president George W Bush’s administration, which was otherwise known for its hawkishness.

Obituaries have described him as a “pathbreaker” and branded him a “reluctant warrior” in the Iraq war. He would later disavow his famous 2003 speech at the UN, describing it as a “blot” on his career.

Salam Ali, a member of the central committee of the Iraqi Communist Party, said Powell’s speech at the UN helped influence people both inside and outside the US who were “reticent about launching the war on Iraq”.

“Colin Powell is among top officials in the US administration responsible for waging that criminal war, and misleading the world with fabricated information, who should have been held accountable for what they did.”

His relationship with Iraq began in 1991 when as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he helped drive Saddam’s forces out of Kuwait.

“Our strategy in going after this army is very simple,” he told reporters at the time.

“First, we’re going to cut it off, and then we’re going to kill it.”

Even though the US did not end up going that far in 1991, in 2003 Saddam’s forces were finally defeated, with Bremer disbanding the army and soon taking control – a move that would have disastrous consequences as waves of unemployed and disgruntled former soldiers joined the armed resistance against the US occupation.

Ahmed Habib, an editor at the Baghdad-based publication ShakoMako.net, said that Powell’s role in Iraq was irredeemable and pushed back at attempts to paint him like a dove whose role in the war was as an unwilling participant.

“Colin Powell’s legacy lives on in the millions of lives destroyed, either dead or exiled, in the prehistoric infrastructure that everyday Iraqis are forced to [endure] today, one that his actions are almost entirely responsible for,” he told MEE.

A violent legacy?

October 2019 saw Iraq swamped by anti-government protests that sought to unseat the political class the invasion had brought to power, and tackle the mass unemployment, poverty, corruption and foreign interference that has become a fact of life in the country.

The response from the government, security officials and armed groups has been to violently suppress and threaten the people calling for an improvement to their standard of living. In particular, Iran-backed groups have become a daily threat for many activists.

Ali Khyail, a democracy activist who grew up during the turmoil of the post-invasion era, said that the ultimate effect of Powell’s actions had been to “hand Iraq over to Iran”, while at the same time removing a threat to Israel.

“If it was about saving Iraq, Iraq would not have been handed over to a country with which there was a war that lasted eight years,” he told MEE.

“The United States was interested in saving Israel from Saddam’s threat and was not interested in liberating Iraq. Colin was seeking to save Israel from those who threaten it.”

Even though Iraq is no longer as soaked in blood as it was in the mid-2000s, violence and instability are still daily facts of life for many of its inhabitants.

Parliamentary elections on 10 October saw the lowest-ever voter turnout, with the political class – largely composed of exiles who returned to Iraq following the 2003 invasion – widely despised, and hope for a better future through the ballot box steadily diminishing.

As a crucial figure in the Bush administration that is largely responsible for this state of affairs, Powell’s legacy in Iraq will not be as a liberator of ordinary people from Saddam’s tyranny, but as someone who oversaw the country’s decline.

“We are terrified now and we will never forgive him,” said Khyail.

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Eight and one-half years ago on April 15, 2013, there was a bombing claiming three victims at the Boston Marathon that had elements of a false flag event, such as crisis actors with pretend injuries. Two brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were blamed for the bombing. Tamerlan apparently died while in police custody. Dzhokhar, shot by police, somehow managed to escape and was later found hiding under an overturned boat in someone’s back yard where he allegedly had written a confession in the dark on the side of the boat he was hiding under.

There were many anomalies about the bombing event, the getaway crimes allegedly associated with the brothers, and the capture of Tamerlan. The entire city of Boston, including airport, was shut down while police went house to house searching for Dzhokhar, a wounded 19 year old. Troops with tanks occupied the city. There was unethical intervention by US prosecutors with the Tsarnaev family. Media did not investigate and simply repeated the prepared narrative.

Image on the right: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Many experts raised questions. The crisis actors were exposed. The unprecedented closing of an entire city while police ordered families out of their homes while their homes were searched were shown to be extreme measures just to capture a wounded teenager.

In other words, a thriller terrorist story was orchestrated to make certain the public saw the brothers as dangerous terrorists.

I covered the story at length on my website (see for example August 17, 2015). John Remington Graham saw that the brothers were being quickly convicted in the media, which raised the question whether media conviction was substituting for the lack of evidence.

After 8.5 years the case has reached the U.S. Supreme Court. John Remington Graham, an experienced prosecutor and defense attorney filed an argument for friends of the court before the U. S. Supreme Court, pointing out that the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev ignored the exculpatory evidence that was never heard and proved him not guilty. Here is a statement from Graham’s argument:

“In sum, during the trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in Boston, decisive exculpatory evidence of record or subject to judicial notice, and showing the actual innocence of Mr. Tsarnaev, was never called to the attention of the jury at trial, was left unmentioned by counsel on both sides, and was ignored by the presiding judge when the sentence of death was imposed. The same decisive exculpatory evidence was called to the attention of the circuit court by these friends of the court on motion granted, then again ignored.”

In November 2017, attorney Graham intervened with the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit pointing out that exculpatory evidence had been ignored in Dzhokhar’s trial. The appeals court set aside the death penalty, not, however, on the basis of the ignored exculpatory evidence, but on the basis that Dzhokhar was under the influence of his older brother, Tamerlan, who was primarily responsible, and for the failure of the trial judge to question jurors whether they were influenced by extensive pre-trial news coverage.

Despite Biden’s opposition to the death penalty, the Biden justice (sic) department has asked the US Supreme Court to overrule the appeals court and to reinstate the death penalty. With the Boston Marathon Bombing narrative set in stone, the actual innocence of the accused has become irrelevant. The orchestrated narrative is likely to conclude with an act of judicial murder.

*

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

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

An international Free Alex Saab delegation attended the annual meeting of the African Bar Association in Niamey, Niger, on Oct. 3-7. Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab, who has been under arrest in Cabo Verde since June 2020 by orders of the U.S., is fighting extradition to Miami. 

His “crime” is organizing humanitarian missions to procure food and medicine for Venezuela – in violation of the illegal U.S. blockade.

The Free Alex Saab delegation was composed of Canadian John Philpot, a lawyer specializing in international law who represented the American Association of Jurists and regularly attends AFBAR conferences; Cabo Verdean-American Bishop Filipe Teixeira, who traveled to Cabo Verde in June in support of Alex Saab; Venezuelan Laila Taj El Dine, a diplomat to the United Nations, lawyer, university professor, and international analyst; and Venezuelan Pedro Carvajalino, media specialist.

African Bar Association welcomes Free Alex Saab delegation

The Free Alex Saab delegation was well received by the conference, which was attended by many honored African leaders, including Niger President Mohamed Bazoum, along with former presidents of Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Some conferees were already familiar with the egregious U.S. judicial over-reach that had resulted in Saab being seized from his airplane when it made a fuel stop in Cabo Verde on its way from Caracas to Tehran.

The fifty-year-old AFBAR is a professional body uniting individual lawyers and national legal associations in Africa. The association brings together the five African sub-regional associations spread over the continent. AFBAR seeks to foster policies to better the continent’s socio-economic and political development.

AFBAR President Hannibal Uwaifo delivered the opening address on respecting the rule of law in strong opposition to military coups. A theme running through the conference was the importance of resolving African problems in Africa, free from Western interference.

For example, AFBAR will not support cooperation with the International Criminal Court investigation of the Nigerian military and Boko Haram unless the investigation includes how Boko Haram is financed.

One participant, a young lawyer, explained that independence requires full national economic and military control. In his opinion, with a French and especially U.S. military presence in many countries, politicians may take their orders from outside powers.

Some African countries are independent, such as Algeria, which rigorously controls its own borders and its economy without neo-colonial control. However, Cabo Verde, one of the smallest and poorest countries in the world, evidently finds it difficult to resist U.S. pressure regarding Alex Saab.

Conference upholds ECOWAS Court decision to free Alex Saab

The regional Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) Court had ordered Cabo Verde to not only release Saab but also pay him $200,000 in damages. That was on March 15 of this year, but Cabo Verde has still not complied with the court order. Nevertheless, Cabo Verde had signed and ratified the treaty creating the court, attended the hearings, is a full member of ECOWAS, and has at least one judge on the court.

As the AFBAR conference reaffirmed, it is the duty of the bar associations to advocate for the ECOWAS Court. The conference session on the ECOWAS Court explained clearly that it was not an appeals court but an international court of primary jurisdiction created by treaty. The Saab delegation was afforded full status at the session, where delegates Felipe Teixeira and Laila El Dine spoke with AFBAR President Uwaifo in attendance.

Free Alex Saab press conference and Sanctions Kill report

The international Free Alex Saab delegation held a press conference at which it presented the case for freeing the Venezuelan diplomat to local media.

John Philpot presented and distributed copies of a report on “We don’t deserve this —  the impact and consequences of U.S. sanctions,” which more broadly addresses the unilateral coercive measures imposed on some three dozen countries, 15 of which are in Africa, that comprise a third of humanity.

Philpot, along with Rick Sterling and David Paul, authored the comprehensive report for the Sanctions Kill Coalition. A free PDF of the report is available online at tinyurl.com/f52h67ze.

At a session on contemporary legal problems and the rule of law, Laila El Dine and John Philpot presented the Alex Saab case, raising issues which go to the substance of his illegal detention. President Uwaifo once again spoke of the need to take positive action to ensure respect for the March 15 ECOWAS Court decision.

John Philpot stressed that these critical cases can be won, citing the recent release of Meng Wanzhou. She had been illegally detained by Canada for more than a thousand days in an attempt to extradite her over a transaction between a Chinese bank and Iran that allegedly was in violation of U.S. sanctions on Iran. U.S. judicial overreach can threaten diplomats and businesspersons worldwide if this tendency is not terminated.

The closing session included resolutions, followed by two press conferences, where the Free Alex Saab issue was further discussed and supported. The AFBAR press conferences, presided over by President Uwaifo, presented the Alex Saab defense issues, including respect for the ECOWAS Court decision. International delegates El Dine, Philpot, and Teixeira spoke at the second press conference.

AFBAR has taken the issue of the ECOWAS Court seriously, although the vice president of the court lamented the lack of enforcement mechanisms. Proposals were offered such as imposing sanctions against Cabo Verde officials, which would be legally constructed as a function of the regional ECOWAS community and not illegally, as with the unilateral U.S. sanctions.

Other measures, such as expelling Cabo Verde from ECOWAS and special legal procedures, were considered. A committee was formed to take this issue on actively, presided over by Chief Prosecutor of Liberia Sayma Syrenius Cephis.

*

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

In this era of police violence, pandemic worries, and economic crisis, it is no surprise that U.S. (and local) government agencies have a poor track record of sharing information honestly and directly—especially information about their own complicity in actions and policies that are undemocratic, militaristic, racist, sexist or otherwise oppressive.

Basic truths about the society we live in are actively suppressed and denied—including truths about the imprisonment of those whose political views and actions challenge the powers that be.

Though the growth of the prison industry has been well documented, there is virtually no documentation and even less news about the imprisonment of many who would be considered political prisoners by any international human rights standards. This is due to a joint coverup effort by both the government and corporate media.

But that coverup may no longer be sustainable

An historic International Tribunal on U.S. Human Rights Abuses Against Black, Brown and Indigenous Peoples will take place in New York City on October 22-25, 2021. It is designed to propel this and related issues into the forefront of public consciousness.

See More Details on the Event At The End Of This Article

The Tribunal coalesces an unprecedented alliance of attorneys, academics, and organizers ranging from Black Lives Matter activists, former Black Panthers, civil rights advocates and the Puerto Rican decolonization movement, to immigrant rights survivors of the detention centers, and Indigenous peoples fighting for their sovereignty against land theft, fracking, and neglect.

This coalition could not have come together—nor can it remain united and organize for effective future change—without fully understanding the historic context for this work. December 2021 will be the 70th anniversary of a similar campaign for human rights launched a few years after the United Nations was formed. At that time prominent African American leaders and their allies brought a petition to the U.N. that boldly stated: “We Charge Genocide!”^[1] The 2021 Tribunal will reassert this charge and relate it to more recent efforts oriented towards 21st Century conclusions.

A 1991 article by one of us (Bob Lederer) [see below] reported on the previous year’s International Tribunal on the Human Rights Violations of Political Prisoners and Prisoners of War in the United States,^[2] as well as earlier efforts to internationalize these issues.

Citing past successes from grassroots worldwide organizing, it noted “[A]ctivists believe that even those facing life sentences may yet see the light of day.” Indeed, over the past three decades, that has come to pass for perhaps half of the then-100+ U.S. political prisoners. While some were released on parole with strong legal work and minimal mobilizations, most only got out after sustained grassroots pressure campaigns, often carried out for many years and including strong international components.

Among the many successes:

• In 1997, after 27 years behind bars and a massive international campaign, Black Panther veteran Geronimo Ji-Jaga Pratt was released from prison. After years of effort, Pratt had uncovered indisputable evidence that FBI wiretaps showed he was 400 miles away from the crime for which he was convicted.^[3] With official recognition that prosecutors had concealed evidence and that Pratt was a survivor of the U.S.’s illegal Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO), he was able to win a federal civil rights lawsuit demonstrating that he was framed and $4.5 million in damages.^[4]
• In 1999, following a coordinated, years-long effort which included a global petition signed by a dozen Nobel Peace Prize laureates and calls for release from across the fiercely divided Puerto Rican political spectrum, 14 militant activists for the independence of Puerto Rico (a U.S. colony since 1898) were granted clemency by President Bill Clinton. Many had been incarcerated for as long as 19 years. Convicted in many cases of the thought crime of “seditious conspiracy,” they were met by large cheering crowds that greeted them as heroes.^[5]
• In 2007, another repressive and vindictive U.S. government attempt saw six elder former Black Panthers arrested and charged in San Francisco with conspiracy for crimes that took place decades earlier. (In 1975 a federal court had dismissed related charges against two of them based on a court ruling that they had been illegally tortured by local police.)^[6] This was an obvious attempt to spread fear among a new generation of resisters inspired by the Panthers. A year later, substantial educational efforts from coast to coast not only exonerated the six and dropped all charges against them, but also spotlighted the two additional Panthers indicted in the same case (collectively known as “the San Francisco 8”^[7]) who were already serving long prison sentences, and whose efforts for parole were both ultimately successful in the years that followed.

Source: Graypantherssf.igc.org

• The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal, once described by The New York Times as the world’s “best known death row inmate,” has caused protests, letter-writing, and massive campaigns in every corner of the planet over the past three decades. An award-winning journalist and still-active author and radio commentator whose 1982 trial has been found by numerous human rights organizations to have been plagued by massive police and judicial bias and perjured testimony, Abu-Jamal’s death sentence was overturned in 2001 by the Federal District Court of Pennsylvania.^[8] Though still fighting for full release, Mumia’s release from death row was widely celebrated, and the broad international campaign to free him has intensified as he has faced life-threatening illnesses (see below).

• Russell Maroon Shoatz, a former Black Panther and Pennsylvania Black Liberation organizer pursued by the FBI’s COINTELPRO and unjustly sentenced in 1970 to life in prison, has been described by supporters as “implacable,” the word used in the title of an anthology of his writings. He has been known not only for his political militancy, but also as a mentor to his incarcerated colleagues wherever he landed in prison. With two successful escapes, Shoatz was placed in solitary confinement in 1992 and held there for a torturous 22 consecutive years! With United Nations experts designating as torture any solitary confinement lasting more than 14 consecutive days, Shoatz’s case attracted international attention for its obviously punitive intent and heinous content.^[9] Returned to general population in 2014, Shoatz still suffers the effects of those decades and fights for release from prison under still-draconian conditions (see below).
• Released on parole after more than 33 years as a political prisoner/prisoner of war (and initial police torture, including with a burning cigar, that left him with serious long-term damage), the success of the case of Sekou Odinga, a founder of the International Chapter of the Black Panther Party, was a product of grassroots, long-term organizing, legal agitation, and legislative reform of parole. With growing consciousness about and admiration of the Panthers from hip-hop artists and cultural workers in the community, and pressure on lawmakers and politicians to release aging prisoners whose rate of recidivism and return to crime after decades behind bars is extremely low, Odinga returned to the community in 2014 and today sits on the International Tribunal’s Coordinating Committee.^[10] Other New York State prisoners, including former Panthers Robert Seth Hayes (who died in 2019)^[11] and Jalil Muntaqim,^[12] won similar parole releases after years of struggle to shift incarceration policies in New York State and elsewhere.

• Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera was held for 36 years of his original 55-year sentence for “seditious conspiracy,” including long stints in maximum-security conditions described by human rights lawyers as tantamount to torture. During President Obama’s second term, as the global campaign for his release reached a fevered pitch, the heads of state of Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba declared López Rivera to be “the Mandela of the Americas.”

With life-size cardboard cutouts of Oscar seen in small towns, mountain communities, and every major city throughout the island archipelago, an unprecedented array of pro-statehood advocates, status quo “commonwealth” supporters, and independentistas joined forces to demand his unconditional release. After the annual United Nations Decolonization Committee hearing on Puerto Rico in 2016, the Committee—in addition to joining the global outcry to “bring Oscar home”—vowed to form an official U.N. delegation to visit him in prison if he were not released in the coming year. In 2017, just days before leaving office, Obama announced the plans for López Rivera’s freedom; he returned to his country a celebrated national hero.^[13]

• Despite the constitutionally questionable “felony murder doctrine” and a scandalous exit from office, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo commuted the life sentence of white anti-imperialist David Gilbert during his last twelve hours in office this year. Gilbert’s history as a peaceful anti-war activist, his work in prison as a mentor of young men and co-developer of a trail-blazing AIDS peer counseling program, and his consistent statements of remorse about the deaths which resulted from a 1981 action for which he was an unarmed driver earned him the support of the heads of the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, Friends (Quakers), and Unitarian Universalists, as well as the daughter of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., granddaughter of Mohandas Gandhi, and children of some of those killed in the original crime.^[14] Gilbert, who was previously serving 75 years to life, will have a parole hearing this month (October 2021).

Nonetheless, three dozen U.S. political prisoners still remain incarcerated, the majority of them in their senior years and ailing, in some cases with terminal illnesses. Prison medical care is substandard at best for all incarcerated people, but political prisoners have also faced the wrath of a vengeful police apparatus. All are now the focus of urgent pressure campaigns by their supporters demanding (depending on the case) immediate parole, clemency, or court-ordered release.^[15] Some examples include:

• Russell Maroon Shoatz, incredibly called “a risk to escape and a threat to society” at a 2021 parole hearing despite being diagnosed with terminal stage-4 pancreatic cancer and having barely survived COVID-19, being partially blind, dependent on a urinary catheter bag, and wholly confined to a wheelchair! Shoatz’s supporters, including Nobel Peace Prize laureates, consider him a prime candidate for immediate compassionate release.^[16]
• Dr. Mutulu Shakur, New Afrikan (Black) liberation activist heavily targeted by COINTELPRO and a leader of Chinese medicine clinics under Black and Latinx community control in New York City, had been scheduled for mandatory release from a 60-year sentence in 2016, but was held back for punitive and vengeful reasons. Today at age 71, he struggles with bone-marrow cancer and is in constant pain. Various legal channels seeking his compassionate release have so far proved fruitless.^[17]

• Sundiata Acoli was a noted mathematician employed by the NASA space program who became a famed member of New York’s “Panther 21” manufactured conspiracy case (in which a jury acquitted everyone) and later co-defendant of Assata Shakur, arrested in 1973 and unjustly convicted along with her to life in prison (see below). At age 84, after 49 years in prison, Acoli has been eligible for and denied parole for almost three decades.^[18] He recently survived COVID-19 but has numerous other ailments, some life-threatening. An urgent campaign for his release continues with widespread community admiration and the support of even some law enforcement groups.^[19]
• Leonard Peltier, an American Indian Movement elder (now 77) who has been in prison since 1977, has enjoyed widespread support from members of Congress, international Parliaments, Nobel Prize laureates, and countless human rights experts.^[20] Despite the fact that all his co-defendants are free, Peltier’s deteriorating health and the prosecutorial misconduct of his original case make him one of the most famous U.S. political prisoners still behind bars.^[21]

• Mumia Abu-Jamal, though well known and widely supported, has had—after nearly 40 years of incarceration, including lengthy solitary confinement—a multitude of life-threatening health crises in recent years for which he suffered blatant medical neglect and maltreatment. These include a dangerous and painful cirrhosis of the liver, congestive heart failure, hepatitis C, diabetes, and recently diagnosed COVID-19. When Abu-Jamal was faced with emergency heart surgery in early 2021 (and the threat to remain shackled during the procedure), a group of ten U.N. experts from the Human Rights Council declared, “This ongoing and continuing cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, including deliberate disregard of his dignity and inhumane conditions of confinement, is a clear violation of Mr. Abu-Jamal’s most fundamental rights.”^[22]Meanwhile, Abu-Jamal’s supporters proclaimed: The only appropriate treatment for these ailments is FREEDOM!^[23]

These campaigns are especially urgent in the wake of the deaths in prison or shortly after release of 21 U.S. political prisoners over the past 35 years.^[24] In many cases, family members and doctors are convinced that, had the prisoners been freed as they got sicker, they might have had a chance to survive longer by escaping high stress prison conditions and having access to better quality medical care.

Meanwhile, several former political prisoners and activists targeted by the state but not arrested have been living in exile for many years. The most renowned, former Black Panther Assata Shakur, was arrested and shot in the back by police in 1973. She then overcame seven separate COINTELPRO-orchestrated charges but was ultimately railroaded to a life sentence on the eighth (along with Sundiata Acoli, see above)—in a trial her lawyer called “a legal lynching and a kangaroo court.” (See Rosemari Mealy, ed., “Assata Shakur: The Life of a Revolutionary,” CovertAction Quarterly, Fall 1998 (No. 65), pp. 34-44.)^[25]

After surviving an oppressive all-men’s prison in New Jersey, Shakur escaped in 1979 with the help of clandestine Black and white radical comrades.^[26] She was later granted political asylum by Cuba, where she has been active in community life. Successive U.S. and New Jersey governments have boosted the bounty for her forced return to $2 million, requiring her to be especially cautious to prevent kidnapping by the CIA or a vigilante.^[27]

Meanwhile the past three decades have seen a whole new generation of political prisoners incarcerated, mostly from the newer movements that have blossomed, though some 1960s activists have also been framed years later by an FBI determined to punish their longtime adversaries. Some examples:

• Longtime Black Liberation leaders: Two leading Black Liberation activists and religious leaders, Imam Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin and Rev. Joy Powell, were framed for crimes they didn’t commit and given long sentences in 2000 and 2006, respectively. Imam Al-Amin (aka H. Rap Brown) was a famed civil rights and Black Panther leader in the 1960s. He was harassed and arrested at FBI direction, later became a religious leader, and was convicted of a murder in Atlanta, Georgia, without clear evidence, for which another man confessed. Now 78, he is serving a life sentence and has been denied needed medical care in prison.^[28] Rev. Powell worked against police brutality and corruption for years in Rochester, New York, and is now serving two sentences totaling 25-years-to-life in trials rife with prosecutorial misconduct.^[29]

• Black Lives Matter: Since racist police and vigilante murders sparked this movement and related justice struggles in 2014, numerous street protesters and organizational leaders, almost all Black, have served prison time for felony charges. Possibly the longest sentence (10 years) is being served by a white solidarity activist, Eric King, who has been isolated and assaulted in prison.^[30] More than 350 are now facing federal felony charges, and many more have received state charges, flowing from the nationwide street uprisings against genocidal police terror provoked by the May 2020 videoed lynching of George Floyd in Minneapolis.^[31] The National Lawyers Guild and a grassroots coalition in six cities are leading campaigns, backed by more than 90 organizations, to have those charges dropped.^[32]

• Indigenous-led environmental/sovereignty defense: Four water and environmental protecters from the movement to stop the highly polluting Dakota Access (oil) pipeline on Lakota land in Standing Rock, North Dakota, in 2016-17 have served prison time of several months each.^[33] Red Fawn Fallis, an Oglala Lakota Sioux citizen and supporter of the American Indian Movement, received the harshest sentence—nearly five years for charges related to a gun given to her by her then-boyfriend, an undercover FBI informant.^[34]

Also, Jessica Reznicek, a North American Catholic Worker ally, is serving eight years for related civil disobedience actions against the same pipeline in Iowa.^[35] Since 2020, a similar, Indigenous-led movement against Line 3 (another oil pipeline encroaching on Native land) in Minnesota has led so far to several people being charged with felonies. Those cases are pending.^[36]

• Arab and Muslims accused of “terrorism”: Hundreds of Arab and Muslim immigrants and U.S. citizens have been swept up in the post-September-11^th, years-long manipulated fury against the Arabs and Muslims living in the United States. Several were convicted on “terrorism” charges, often manufactured or based on entrapment.^[37] Most notorious is the case of Dr. Afia Siddiqui, a Pakistani, U.S.-educated neuroscientist who was rendered from her homeland to the U.S. by the CIA in 2008 and sentenced to life in prison, where she was seriously injured in an assault this year.^[38]
• “Green Scare” activists: As new movements have targeted corporate destruction of the natural environment and clear-cutting logging operations, factory farms, fur manufacturers, agribusiness-related labs researching eco-harmful GMOs (genetically modified organisms), and animal-abusing medical testers, the U.S. government has charged dozens with felonies, often using new laws criminalizing eco/animal protests and heightening penalties.^[39] Since the early 1990s, more than 50 activists have done lengthy prison time on such charges. Three remain imprisoned today. One of those, a transgender man named Marius Mason serving 22 years in federal prison since 2009, was first held in a restrictive control unit based on his politics and then struggled for many years before he obtained a medical diagnosis that finally allowed him to seek hormone therapy and transfer to a male prison.^[40]

• Plowshares protesters: More than 200 activists from the largely religious “Plowshares” movement, led by the Catholic Workers, have been imprisoned since 1980 – two were sentenced to 18 years – for 100+ civil disobedience actions symbolically damaging and pouring blood on nuclear weapons, war jets, and military bases to demand nuclear disarmament and an end to U.S. militarism.^[41]

• Military resisters and whistleblowers: Many U.S. military personnel have served prison time since 1991 for resisting or disclosing war crimes (whistleblowers) in the Gulf War (1991), Afghan invasion/occupation (2001-2021), Iraq invasion/occupation (2003-date), and other illegal U.S. attacks against nations in the Global South.^[42]

Most notably, army soldier Chelsea Manning spent seven years in military prisons, during which a U.N. Rapporteur found her to have been tortured. After many grassroots campaigns, protests and honors in LGBT Pride marches, President Obama granted clemency in 2017.^[43] Later that year, under Trump, she was reincarcerated for 12 months for refusing to collaborate with a grand jury investigation.^[44] During her initial incarceration, she came out as trans and had to sue to obtain gender-affirming care.^[45]

In a related case, WikiLeaks publisher and Australian citizen Julian Assange is now facing extradition to the U.S. from the U.K. and possible life in prison for publishing data on war crimes, repression and corruption released by whistleblowers. (See CovertAction Magazine, Sept. 7, 2020.) A British judge has denied extradition on grounds that U.S. prisons could not adequately protect him from the risk of suicide (following his years of U.S. and British persecution).^[46] Yahoo News reported in September 2021 that, in 2017, the CIA discussed possible plans to kidnap or assassinate the journalist in London.^[47]

Kevin “Rashid” Johnson, political prisoner. [Source: rashidmod.com]

Pursuing freedom or at least less life-threatening conditions for all of these prisoners, the various support organizations have used a variety of techniques (in addition to the people’s tribunals described below): petitions, mass email campaigns, demonstrations at courts and prisons, packing court proceedings, civil disobedience actions, lobbying, and more.

Importantly, efforts have continued to bring some of these cases, and the larger movements against genocide and eco-cide from which they developed, to international bodies. In 2001, the National Black United Front, December 12th Movement, and others brought charges of genocide against Black people to the U.N. World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa.^[48] For years, the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva has heard consistent testimony from the U.S. Human Rights Network (USHRN) and others, who have filed documents at the Universal Periodic Review sessions conducted for all nation-states.^[49] The USHRN has utilized other U.N. mechanisms to bring U.S. human rights abuses before United Nations-affiliated bodies.

In addition, between 1992 and 2001, a variety of coalitions led by Black, Brown and Indigenous freedom organizations built on the successes of previous efforts to convene international tribunals on U.S. human rights violations and genocide:

• 1992 – The International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationswas held in San Francisco. The Tribunal challenged the 500^th anniversary of the “discovery of America” by Christopher Columbus and discussed the massive, systematic violations of human rights and international law against people of color. It included perspectives from Black people, Puerto Ricans, Native Americans, Mexicans/Chicanos, and white anti-imperialists.^[50]

• 1993 – The Ka Ho’okolokolonui Kanaka Maoli Tribunal marked the centennial of the U.S. overthrow of Hawaiian Queen Liliuokalani and visited each island illegally seized and annexed by the U.S. It centered the Indigenous Kanaka Maoli claim for sovereignty on an international stage.^[51]

• 1998 – Based on a call by Black Liberation political prisoner Jalil Muntaqim (who also called for a “Spirit of Mandela” coalition in 2018),^[52] a successful Jericho March to the White House, attended by over 5,000 and organized by the newly formed and now ongoing National Jericho Movement, demanded recognition and amnesty for all U.S. political prisoners across lines of race and nationality.^[53]

• 2001 – The International Commission on Inquiry in San Juan, Puerto Rico, found repeated U.S. government violations of human rights in suppressing protests and civil disobedience actions against the U.S. Navy’s 60-year occupation and frequent life-threatening and environment-destroying bombing practice on the island of Vieques.^[54] The strong verdict was one of many sparks that forced the Navy’s withdrawal and return of the island to full Puerto Rican sovereignty in 2003.

*

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.

Bob Lederer is a progressive print and radio journalist, longtime queer anti-racist and anti-imperialist activist, and member of the grassroots collective Resistance in Brooklyn. He has extensively covered and supported U.S. political prisoners for over 35 years and contributed to the book Let Freedom Ring: A Collection of Documents from the Movements to Free U.S. Political Prisoners. In 1985 he was a grand jury resister and political prisoner himself, and was a cofounder of the 1990s group Queers United in Support of Political Prisoners. Bob can be reached at: [email protected].

Matt Meyer is an internationally noted author, historian, and organizer, re-elected in 2021 as Secretary-General of the International Peace Research Association. Meyer is the Senior Research Scholar of the University of Massachusetts/Amherst’s Resistance Studies Initiative, working primarily in solidarity with the still-occupied peoples of Puerto Rico, Palestine, West Papua, Western Sahara, Kashmir, and Ambazonia in Central Africa. Matt is the editor of the book Let Freedom Ring: A Collection of Documents from the Movements to Free U.S. Political Prisoners. His local work with Resistance in Brooklyn, the Northeast Political Prisoner Coalition, and the Spirit of Mandela Coalition focuses on freeing all political prisoners. Matt can be reached at: [email protected].

Notes

1. https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/primary-documents-global-african-history/we-charge-genocide-historic-petition-united-nations-relief-crime-united-states-government-against/; 

2. https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjll/vol2/iss1/7/ 
3. https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3549https://escholarship.org/content/qt9q53f87c/qt9q53f87c.pdfhttps://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/112/795.html 
4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/04/27/ex-panther-settles-lawsuit-over-false-imprisonment/8efad425-1259-4363-bb92-15f953a32ef0/ 
5. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/keyraces2000/stories/faln091199.htmhttps://prcc-chgo.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Campaign-to-release-FALN-prisoners-by-Margaret-Power.pdf 
6. http://publici.ucimc.org/2007/08/the-return-to-torture-the-case-of-the-san-francisco-8/
7. https://www.freethesf8.org/ 
8. https://campaigns.organizefor.org/petitions/to-da-krasner-stop-defending-mumia-abu-jamal-s-convictionhttps://jamaljournal-movement.blogspot.com/2021/02/colin-kaepernicks-nov-16-2020-statement.html 
9. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/jul/12/solitary-confinement-russell-shoatz-pennsylvania-black-panthershttps://russellmaroonshoats.wordpress.com/about/https://www.pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=541 
10. https://www.democracynow.org/2016/10/28/sekou_odinga_on_15_black_panthers
11. https://www.democracynow.org/2019/12/24/headlines/former_black_panther_robert_seth_hayes_dies_at_age_of_72 
12. https://prismreports.org/2021/01/27/for-black-radicals-released-after-decades-in-prison-the-carceral-system-is-still-a-threat/ 
13. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/17/barack-obama-commutes-sentence-oscar-lopez-rivera-puerto-rico-activist, https://blog.pmpress.org/2019/05/21/oscar-lopez-riveras-32-years-of-resistance-to-torture-will-president-obama-pardon-the-longest-held-independentista/https://www.mic.com/articles/165766/who-is-oscar-l-pez-rivera-the-story-behind-the-man-who-received-barack-obama-s-clemency 
14. https://friendsofdavidgilbert.org/https://www.democracynow.org/2021/8/24/andrew_cuomo_clemency_david_gilbert 
15. https://newrepublic.com/article/162144/black-panther-party-never-popular-actual-black-panthers-forgotten 
16. https://russellmaroonshoats.wordpress.com/ 
17. https://mutulushakur.com/https://campaigns.organizefor.org/petitions/support-parole-and-compassionate-release-for-dr-mutulu-shakur 
18. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/sundiata-acoli-black-panther-parole/2021/03/12/68254ace-81c2-11eb-ac37-4383f7709abe_story.htmlhttps://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.33/n1u.e88.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/About-Sundiata-Acoli-and-His-Case.pdf 
19. https://secureservercdn.net/198.71.233.33/n1u.e88.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Sundiata-Press-Release-2.pdf 
20. https://www.amnestyusa.org/cases/leonard-peltier/ 
21. https://www.whoisleonardpeltier.info/transfer-leonard-peltier-now/ 
22. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=27011&LangID=E 
23. https://jamaljournal.blogspot.com/2021/06/elder-abuse-incarceration-remains.html 
24. https://thejerichomovement.com/prisoners/ancestors 
25. See also https://www.akpress.org/assata.html 
26. https://www.essence.com/culture/assata-shakur-facts-call-return-from-cuba/ 
27. https://www.democracynow.org/2013/5/3/angela_davis_and_assata_shakurs_lawyerhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10999949.2018.1434351?journalCode=usou20 
28. https://www.thejerichomovement.com/profile/al-amin-jamil-abdullah 
29. https://www.freejoypowell.org/ 
30. https://cldc.org/cases/other-cases 
31. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/27/americas-protest-crackdown-five-months-after-george-floyd-hundreds-face-trials-and-prisonhttps://theintercept.com/2020/08/27/black-lives-matter-protesters-terrorism-felony-charges/ 
32. https://www.nlg.org/90-organizations-and-4600-individuals-tell-biden-administration-to-dropthecharges-against-blm-protesters/https://www.dropthecharges2020.org/drop-the-federal-charges 
33. https://cldc.org/standing-rock/ ↑
34. https://nativenewsonline.net/currents/standing-rock-water-protector-red-fawn-fallis-released-from-federal-prisonhttps://theintercept.com/2018/07/13/standing-rock-red-fawn-fallis-sentencing/ 
35. https://www.democracynow.org/2021/7/6/headlines/jessica_reznicek_sentenced_to_8_years_in_prison_for_eco_sabotage_on_dakota_access_pipelinehttps://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/rekha-basu/2021/07/22/dakota-access-pipeline-dapl-iowa-climate-activist-jessica-reznicek-prison-sentence-not-terrorist/7955826002/ 
36. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/10/protesters-line-3-minnesota-oil-gas-pipelinehttps://www.vogue.com/article/letter-from-a-jailed-line-3-water-protector 
37. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/9/11/the-war-on-terror-and-the-disciplining-of-american-muslimshttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/magazine/fbi-terrorism-terry-albury.html 
38. https://www.cage.ngo/aafia-siddiqui-calls-for-public-support-after-enduring-serious-assault-in-texas-prison 
39.  https://theintercept.com/2019/03/23/ecoterrorism-fbi-animal-rights/ 
40. https://supportmariusmason.org/about-marius/ 
41. https://kingsbayplowshares7.org/plowshares-history/
    https://theintercept.com/2020/11/16/nonviolent-protest-plowshares-nuclear/ 
42. https://couragetoresist.org/category/gi-resisters/
43. https://sparrowmedia.net/2016/12/100000-supporters-urge-president-obama-to-exercise-his-clemency-powers-to-commute-chelsea-mannings-sentence-to-time-served/https://sparrowmedia.net/2017/05/statement-from-chelsea-manning-and-legal-team-on-her-upcoming-release-from-military-prison/ 
44. https://sparrowmedia.net/2020/02/legal-team-files-motion-to-release-chelsea-manning/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/03/chelsea-manning-is-out-of-jail-after-almost-a-year/https://couragetoresist.org/chelsea-manning-free-fines-nearly-paid/ 
45. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/14/493877895/chelsea-manning-ends-hunger-strike-army-agrees-to-gender-affirming-surgery 
46. https://www.democracynow.org/2021/6/28/julian_assange_extradition_case 
47. https://news.yahoo.com/kidnapping-assassination-and-a-london-shoot-out-inside-the-ci-as-secret-war-plans-against-wiki-leaks-090057786.html 
48.  https://chicagocrusader.com/local-news/december-12th-movement-nbuf-and-the-reparations-movement/ 
49. https://www.upr2020.org/ 
50. https://search.freedomarchives.org/search.php?view_collection=17 
51. https://www.hawaiianvoice.com/products-page/history-transcript/ka-hookolokolonui-kanaka-maoli-peoples-international-tribunal-hawaii-1993-transcript-of-proceedings-island-of-oahu/ 
52. https://sfbayview.com/2021/10/jalil-muntaqim-why-its-time-for-the-international-tribunal/ 
53. https://www.thejerichomovement.com/about 
54. http://unescopaz.rrp.upr.edu/documentos/Inquiry.html 
55. https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/we_charge_genocide_petition 

56. https://www.nytimes.com/1964/08/13/archives/malcolm-x-seeks-un-negro-debate-he-asks-african-states-to-cite-us.html

    https://www.passblue.com/2020/06/16/the-human-rights-council-confronts-racism-in-the-usa/

    https://time.com/5850623/malcolm-x-human-rights/ 

Featured image: Kevin “Rashid” Johnson, political prisoner. [Source: rashidmod.com]

---

Appendix

The 2021 International Tribunal: In the Spirit of Nelson Mandela

Oct. 22-25, 2021

Livestreaming at tribunal2021.com and on Facebook and online via Zoom

Register here.

Schedule of Events

The 2021 International Tribunal itself derives from a historic legacy and trajectory, initiated by a U.S.-based coalition, In the Spirit of Mandela. Created in 2018, the coalition recognizes and affirms the rich history of diverse global activists, including Nelson Mandela, Winnie Mandela, Graca Machel Mandela, Ella Baker, Dennis Banks, Cesar Chavez, Fannie Lou Hamer, Fred Korematsu, Lolita Lebron, Rosa Parks, Ingrid Washinawatok, and many more in the resistance traditions of Black, Brown and Indigenous Peoples. Though separate and independent from the In the Spirit of Mandela coalition that called for the Tribunal, the Panel of Jurists (see below) recognizes the important historical precedents that have shaped the charges against U.S. government agencies.

The year 2021 marks the 70^th anniversary of the campaign in which African American human rights leaders Paul Robeson and William Patterson, with the support of eminent sociologist Dr. W.E.B. DuBois, presented the “We Charge Genocide” petition to the burgeoning United Nations headquarters in 1951.^[55] Then in 1964, Minister Malcolm X (El Hajj Malik el-Shabazz) formed the Organization of Afro-American Unity, in part to bring the case of U.S. human rights abuses to the attention of the U.N.^[56] The 2021 Tribunal verdict itself will be delivered in front of U.N. headquarters, but hearings and community testimony will take place at the site of Malcolm X’s assassination, the now-refurbished and Columbia University-affiliated Malcolm X and Dr. Betty Shabazz Memorial and Educational Center in Harlem.

The Panel of Jurists is composed of nine members, with representatives including a former South African Member of Parliament; a board member of the distinguished Nobel Peace Laureate organization with a dozen Nobel Peace officer awardees; a Puerto Rican legal scholar who serves as an expert for the U.N. Committee on Decolonization; a U.N. representative of the oldest inter-faith pacifist organization in the world; an internationally accredited expert on genocide; the director of the only people-centered U.S. human rights network with ECOSOC status and consistent U.N. advocacy; the youngest elected Chair of the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and leader of UNITY/the United National Indian Tribal Youth; and the former Chair of the United Nations Working Group on People of African Descent and a judge of the Permanent People’s Tribunal. They are majority women and majority Global South-rooted, from India, Eritrea, Haiti, France, Puerto Rico, the USA and elsewhere. (See list at tribunal2021.com/panel-of-jurists.)

These jurists will preside over two days of testimonies from impacted victims, expert witnesses, and attorneys with first-hand knowledge of specific incidents raised in the charges/indictment.

At the Tribunal, a team of experienced human rights attorneys, acting as prosecutors on behalf of U.S. Black, Brown, and Indigenous people as a class, will be charging the U.S., state and local governments with human and civil rights violations under the following five sections:

• Racist police killings of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people,
• Hyper/mass incarcerations of Black, Brown, and Indigenous people,
• Political incarceration of Civil Rights/National Liberation era revolutionaries and revolutionaries and activists, as well as present-day activists,
• Environmental racism and its disparate impact on Black, Brown, and Indigenous people,
• Public health racism and its traumatic and disparate impact on Black, Brown, and Indigenous people.

As a result of the historic and systemic charges of all the above, the overarching charge of genocide will also be argued, based on 18 USC Sec. 1091 (the U.S. statute making genocide a felony) and the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention of Genocide.

The Panel of Jurists will deliver its Verdict following deliberations and discussions, planned for delivery at the Church Center for the United Nations on Monday, October 25, 2021.

Between the Verdict of the independent Jurists and the ongoing work of the Spirit of Mandela coalition, the lessons of the past will be brought forward to build U.S.-based human rights movements into the future. With these bold visions and newly produced tools, organizers hope that continued repressive measures, including the warehousing of political prisoners, will be left in the past as we step back from the specter of genocide and struggle together for lasting liberation.

Background on the 2021 Tribunal and planned next steps are here.

For more on efforts to free U.S. political prisoners from the 1980s to 2008, see Let Freedom Ring: A Collection of Documents from the Movements to Free U.S. Political Prisoners, Matt Meyer, ed. (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2008). See also the National Jericho Movement website and  the Northeast Political Prisoner Coalition’s Facebook page.

After Corbyn, Israel Lobby Turns Its Guns on UK Academia

By Jonathan Cook, October 18, 2021

A sociologist, Miller had been at the forefront of research into the sources of Islamophobia in the UK. His work includes a detailed examination of the Israel lobby’s role in fomenting racism towards Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians.

Indonesia: America’s Model “Democratic Leadership”. A Historical Review

By Shane Quinn, October 18, 2021

It may be no exaggeration to say that, in the post-World War II period, Iran has been persecuted largely without a break. The threats continue to the present day, with the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel pondering how to curtail Iranian influence. 

The Age of Chatham House and the British Roots of NATO

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, October 18, 2021

One America has been defended by great leaders who are too often identified by their untimely deaths while in office, who consistently advanced anti-colonial visions for a world of sovereign nations, win-win cooperation, and the extension of constitutional rights to all classes and races both within America and abroad.

“Expert” Calls for Denying Life-Saving Hospital Treatment to the Unvaccinated

By Paul Joseph Watson, October 18, 2021

An “expert” whose work on cybersecurity has been cited by the NY Times and the Washington Post announced on Twitter that the unvaccinated should be denied life-saving hospital treatment because they are “not fit for life on earth.”

Proof that the CDC Is Lying to the World About COVID Vaccine Safety

By Steve Kirsch, October 18, 2021

The CDC and the FDA claim that we can safely ignore the huge spike in event rates reported to the VAERS system this year (this is the official adverse event reporting system relied on by the FDA and CDC to spot safety signals).

It All Makes Sense Once You Realize They Want to Kill Us

By Mike Whitney, October 18, 2021

Yes, the experiments on mice showed that a low dose of the vaccine induces a robust antibody response to the infection. But, no, the antibodies were not able to attack the spike protein from a different strain of the virus.

The Revolving Door: All 3 FDA-authorized COVID Shot Companies Now Employ Former FDA Commissioners

By Jordan Schachtel, October 18, 2021

In today’s America, you can buy yourself a former FDA commissioner, and use the public-sector private-sector revolving door system of corruption to impose your will on the American public, and make a windfall for your executives and shareholders in the process.

Zoom Out

By Nowick Gray, October 18, 2021

Today in the grip of a worldwide pandemic of fear and control, our personal devices are always on; and we’re paradoxically being forced to drop out of previously normal social, cultural and economic life, while being practically forbidden to opt out of a medical mafia squeeze play.

Global Supply Chain Crisis? Pandemonium Looms as ‘Everything Shortage’ Meets ‘Dark Winter’

By Dr. Mathew Maavak, October 18, 2021

A global supply chain crisis is brewing, leading to a full-spectrum shortage of essential items. This is the result of mass centralization, where policies are dictated and synchronized by the aristocrats of the New Normal.

World Economic Forum Unveils COVID Passport that Uses Blood Test Markers to Determine Vaccination Status

By Infowars.com, October 18, 2021

The WEF COVID passport proposal is based on a blood sample – not documentation provided by a doctor – tied to a QR code to prove you have been vaccinated.

The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 18, 2021

Peer reviewed reports confirm the causes  of vaccine related deaths and adverse effects (injuries) including among others blood clots, thrombosis, myocarditis, fertility.

The Banners of the King of Hell Advance. A World of Endless Propaganda

By Edward Curtin, October 18, 2021

Try to look ahead and see if you can see what’s been coming for decades.  Try to climb higher and see the beautiful things that Heaven bears, where we came forth, and once more see the stars and raise a banner of resistance to the King of Hell and all his henchmen.

Wall Street’s Takeover of Nature Advances with Launch of New Asset Class

By Whitney Webb, October 18, 2021

A project of the multilateral development banking system, the Rockefeller Foundation and the New York Stock Exchange recently created a new asset class that will put, not just the natural world, but the processes underpinning all life, up for sale under the guise of promoting “sustainability.”

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Nurse Luba refuses the COVID-19 vaccine and tells her story.

From the hospital where she’s currently suspended, a negative PCR test result twice a week is a requirement in lieu of COVID shots. 

She has not worked for three weeks now.

Watch the video below.

*

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

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. Visit the author’s website at https://www.marktaliano.net where this interview was originally published.

---

Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes  the mainstream media narratives on Syria. 

Voices from Syria 

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-1-6

Author: Mark Taliano

Year: 2017

Pages: 128 (Expanded edition: 1 new chapter)

List Price: $17.95

Special Price: $9.95 

Click to order

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Women play an increasingly important role in resolving issues that society and the state encounter and in the modern world, they should not face the choice between family and self-fulfillment,

According to Russian President Vladimir Putin at the third Eurasian Women’s Forum held in St. Petersburg on October 13-15.

“It is completely obvious that in modern conditions a woman should not face the choice between children and family or professional fulfillment. That is why in Russia the conditions are consistently created for a woman after childbirth to begin or resume her professional career at any moment, to become accomplished, to achieve growth in what she enjoys,” Putin stressed.

The Eurasian Women’s Forum, held since 2015, is one of the largest international platforms uniting female leaders from all continents to examine and discuss the role of women in the modern world and work out new approaches to solving global problems.

The forum was organized by the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation and Interparliamentary Assembly of the Commonwealth of Independent States (IPA CIS). This forum has won wide recognition as an effective mechanism of interaction and dialogue for women who are influencing social, political and economic decisions. It facilitates the growing participation of women’s movements in resolving global challenges.

The chosen theme of the third forum “Women: A Global Mission in a New Reality” has much significance for today’s world. Boosting international cooperation to enhance the role of women in order to meet the goals of sustainable development, forming women’s agenda and new approaches to solving global problems in the new reality – these are the main objectives for participants and organizers.

The participants, indeed, devoted key debates to the role of women in ensuring global security, the transition to new models of economic growth and social progress, overcoming the adverse consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, developing healthcare, balancing universal digitization, and addressing global environmental and climate problems.

For the first time, the forum feature meeting of the International Working Group of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency on improving gender balance in the nuclear energy industry.

Expert sessions featured prominently for international organizations and associations. Those include field sessions of Women 20, the UN session on industrial development (UNIDO), the World Bank session, the BRICS Women’s Business Alliance meeting, international club of APEC BEST AWARD winners and participants, and International Club of Women Regional Leaders.

Throughout the world, there is a growing demand for female leadership. Research has shown that companies with women on their boards of directors enjoy better results. As new skills requirements are emerging, so educational programmes for female leaders are becoming critical. The ability to share experience at an international level of implementing such programmes help foster joint initiatives. This shows a turn for women in political sphere.

In the face of global challenges, there is an increasing need for a new paradigm, along with a renewed focus on changing attitudes to women. Women have made an enormous contribution to efforts to improve health, raise life expectancy, and improve quality of life. These are the first role as women in the family, and this is unchangeable fact in the world.

Previously there had been some innovations. The BRICS Women’s Business Alliance was first presented at the 2nd Eurasian Women’s Forum. The leaders of Brazil, India, China, Russia, and South Africa gave their unanimous support to the initiative, and adopted the declaration on the establishment of the alliance. Last year (2020) saw the official launch of the BRICS Women’s Business Alliance.

The alliance seeks to implement multilateral cooperation projects aimed at consolidating and strengthening its role in the global economic agenda. The alliance’s areas of focus include the development of innovation, healthcare, food and environmental security, an inclusive economy, the creative industries, and tourism.

Women have been forging alliances and ahead of this forum for instance, the Women’s Business Association of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FLO FICCI), considered as the largest women’s business association in India, signed a memorandum of understanding with Russia. This collaboration aims at developing women’s entrepreneurship, social communications and at creating favourable conditions for cooperation between business circles in Russia and India.

It plans promoting entrepreneurship and professional excellence through seminars, conferences, lectures, trainings, and other events aimed at encouraging and stimulating the involvement of the skills, experience, and energy of women in all sectors and at all levels of economic activity.

The Eurasian Women Association has so many programmes and projects with other women’s groups and associations in the Eurasian region, in Asia, Africa, and Europe. Obviously, women have come a long way throughout the world, since their first conference held 1986 in Beijing, China and resultantly declared March 8 – as International Women’s Day marks annually throughout the world. Women have taken up the fight, sometimes collaborating with women-conscious men and thus paving the way up to the top echelon in all economic and social spheres. Women now have associations structure from the grassroots, in all countries, and up to regional organizations and to the United Nations.

Speaker of the Federation Council, Valentina Matviyenko, in her opening speech at the plenary session, highly stressed that the main goals of the global women’s community as that directed towards improving people’s quality of life as well as building mutual understanding and trust between countries and peoples in the name of peace and sustainable development.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister, Viktoria Abramchenko, similarly noted in her speech that women are directly involved in implementing broad scope of development tasks in Russia and beyond on international platforms.

Vietnamese Vice President, Vo Thi Anh Xuan, made a video conference presentation. She said that the forum is bringing together the majority of women around the world. “The role of women today is extremely important. We can make the world more just and help fight global challenges,” she said.

Chairwoman of the National Assembly of Azerbaijan Sahiba Ali gizi Gafarova believes that the topics discussed at the Eurasian Women’s Forum provide an opportunity to consider the most pressing issues of modern life and enhance women’s status around the world. Gafarova unreservedly stated that fully unleashing women’s potential would be the foundation for building a healthy society.

Chairwoman of the Senate of Uzbekistan Tanzila Narbaeva noted that the forum once again demonstrated women’s growing role in resolving the socioeconomic issues facing their countries, and demonstrates new approaches to the women’s agenda.

Narbaeva stressed that Uzbekistan, for instance, is ready to share its experience in various areas and is open for multifaceted cooperation. She invited the participants to take part in the women’s forum during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in 2022, planned in Samarkand, the second largest city in Uzbekistan.

Chairwoman of the Lower Chamber of Parliament of Turkmenistan, Gulshat Mammedova, said the forum is an important platform for interaction between women and helps to harmonize efforts in addressing various issues of our time as well as exchange views and experience in promoting women’s rights.

Participation of African women was modest, that included for example President of the Senate of Gabon Lucie Milebou Aubusson, Liberian Dr. Jewel Howard-Taylor and Zimbabwean First Lady Auxillia Mnangagwa among a few others. President of the Assembly of Mozambique, Esperança Laurinda Francisco Nhiuane Bias, delivered a speech at the forum.

Zimbabwean First Lady, Auxillia Mnangagwa, on the sidelines held a special working discussion with the Speaker of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, Valentina Matviyenko, focusing on developing inter-parliamentary relations, women in sustainable development, education and charity.

The First Lady and the Speaker snapshotted on the possibility of greater participation of Russian economic operators in the development process in southern African region. Both women have expressed an appreciation cooperating on various questions on international platforms. Diplomatic relations between the two marked its 40th year.

On October 15, the participating African women took part an exclusive discussion solely on “the Role of Women in the Integrated Development of the African Continent” at the Tauride Palace. It was attended by women from international organizations, business circles, scientific or academic community and non-governmental organizations.

Matviyenko held discussions with President of the Central American Parliament Fanny Carolina Fernandez on the margin of the forum. The conversation mainly focused on expanding interparliamentary ties, reaffirmed the growing interest of Central American countries to bolster ties with Russia.

She emphasized the fact that “Russia is ready to sign an agreement on its participation as an observer in the Central American integration system, which would provide an additional impetus to developing the entire range of ties.” She expressed support for the initiative put forward to establish the Eurasian – Latin American Parliamentary Assembly. In the nearest future, this project needs to be studied in terms of developing dialogue mechanisms for the Eurasian integration space and the Latin American region.

Thereafter, Matviyenko and the Senator of the National Congress of the Republic of Chile, Ximena Cecilia Rincón, had an interactive meeting to discuss inter-parliamentary ties between the two countries and opportunities for further mutually beneficial collaboration. Russia is keen to strengthen its cooperation with Chile on all fronts. The dialogue, so far, between Russian and Chilean parliamentarians has traditionally been productive and there is scope to enhance cooperation.

In addition, the brief meeting touched on issues such as ensuring bilateral economic and cultural collaboration, working together to combat coronavirus and facilitating exchanges between higher education institutions in the two countries.

Ximena Cecilia Rincón Gonzalez noted the importance of strengthening and developing Chile–Russia relations, both in a parliamentary setting as well as in the economic, technological and cultural spheres.

The entire third forum, organized primarily to review how women have performed in men-dominated world, identify challenges and roadblocks on their way to gender equality and fight for higher social status and, of course, outline new strategic goals for the future. Held partly offline using modern formats such as video conferencing and online broadcast, it aimed at ensuring extended outreach and providing audience engagement. The rules and regulations for physical presence was in strict accordance with safety measures aimed at preventing the spread of COVID-19.

*

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

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

Featured image is from the author

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The United States Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM) in cooperation with the Army Research Laboratory and university partners from the Internet of Battlefield Things Collaborative Research Alliance (IoBT CRA) are hard at work on a new battlefield artificial intelligence (AI) solution.

The aim is to develop a system that can provide battlefield applications with pressing machine intelligence, even when the local environment is not able to facilitate AI processing.

The solution offloads data from the battlefield to remote processing engines by enabling a much higher degree of compression of the data than previously possible.

Transferring data between field devices like Army-relevant sensors, such as cameras, LiDARs, radars, IR sensors and a remote server usually takes a significant amount of time.

Compressing the data puts less burden on the battlefield system, allowing it to send the data to the processing machine elsewhere more efficiently.

Researchers recently tested the compression solution by offloading an image from one device at the lab’s Multi-Purpose Sensing Area at White Sands Missile Range and an IoBT CRA server in Massachusetts.

Testing of this solution showed that compression was four times more effective than an image’s compression capability, which is the current image compression standard.

This ultra-high compression was achieved by analyzing and then preserving only the data features the AI will need to use later for accurate processing.

For example, in an application where the goal is to recognize different types of vehicles in an image, it is important to identify what cues are used by the AI to distinguish the different types of vehicles.

Those cues should be preserved by compression when data is sent from the field. Other irrelevant information can be compressed away to improve compression abilities.

If successful, this solution can revolutionize AI for Army applications and increase autonomy in mission execution by bringing AI virtually to the point of need in the field through faster offloading and remote processing.

At a time when autonomy and machine intelligence play increasingly bigger roles in future conflicts, efficient solutions for moving complex sensor data to the right processing engines will become critical.

As a result, this new technology of Compressive offloading, and other sensing and processing research, are essential to the Army in effectively preparing for the future battlefield.

This sort of quick processing could lead to more effective AI-controlled defensive and offensive system. As it was reported earlier, the United States is lagging behind the United Kingdom in terms of active AI-operated defense systems for armored vehicles, but this could rapidly improve the capability.

Other significant improvements that it can lead to relate to greater precision for offensive strikes and preparation for attacks and raids.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Lithuania – a new government, a manufactured crisis

In 1980, when Russia was hosting the Moscow Olympics, I took my daughter and a close friend on a package tour of Moscow, Leningrad and Tallinn. Internal flights meant we got to see Vilnius in Lithuania, and I recall thinking how different it was to how it was portrayed, with beer-cellars, progressive shops and a strong German influence. No doubt we were being shown the most positive face of the Soviet Union.

What we saw of Lithuania and Estonia through the coach windows, outside the cities, was little more than vast tracts of forest-land and open countryside with occasional mansions, which the guide said were high-ranking and Politburo family dachas (holiday homes). It demonstrated, if demonstration was necessary, that no political system is devoid of its privileged class – individuals who enjoy more ostentatious lifestyles than the hoi polloi.

Lifestyles today in Lithuania come largely in three tiers: the elite, the controlled and the free. Unlike former class tiers they do not span traditional divides.

There is a fourth tier, the ultra-elite, very small in number, who operate on a global scale and dictate by means of IMF and World Bank coffers what the media broadcast, what governments are allowed to do and say, the modus operandi of all authorities and all public utilities. Their agents, from the elite down, ensure that there is a unified global response to all activities. In other words this coterie controls the agenda. As the ultra-elite sit outside of Lithuania itself, and as hardly anybody gets to meet these manipulators and puppeteers who rank themselves above the law, their nasty work has to be done by others.

The elite

The elite, dacha-owning parasites are still there, like ex-prime minister, Andrius Kubilius, and politician turned TV celebrity, Arunas Valinskas. Both of whom have wished death on people choosing not to get “vaccinated”.

While poor people are always with us so are the vampires who feed on them. These are the ones pushing the agenda – and they should be on trial for killing and maiming people, having taken bribes to enforce the World Bank-funded vaccination purge of the human race. Such contemptible beings are in control of the controlled.

The controlled

The controlled group, a happy-go-lucky, live-now-pay-later majority, comprises those who have unwittingly fallen for the elite’s propaganda. Brainwashed by government and media they have bared their arms to take the loaded shots and some, just like Coriolanus, can already show their battle-scars to the crowds. For being good citizens they have received a pass, called an Opportunity Pass. Ironically, this allows them to do the things they used to do without a pass. The Opportunity Pass is a means of keeping tabs on those who carry it.

Those belonging to the controlled tier may not remember Soviet days, when a пропуск (propusk) or permit, was required to go into all official buildings. Younger generations had better get used to this old way of life. Because today it is a whole lot worse than then. The data collected now puts on file everything about everyone. Step out of line and it won’t just be a штраф (shtraf), a fine enforced upon you, but the whole income and household budget of Lithuanians is potentially in jeopardy.

Welcome to the Orwellian and Kafkaesque 21st century. You think not? Read on.

The free

To demonstrate how serious government stooges are at total control of everyone and everything you only need to look at the way the free are being treated. The free are the biggest danger to the elite, and ultra-elite’s, plans for a system of complete subordination. Free people are a stumbling-block which can bring down this totalitarian control. The Lithuanian government, in true Soviet style, is trying everything conceivable, carrot and stick, to bring to order those choosing freedom.

The carrot

A bribe was offered early in the injection rollout which purportedly took the form of compensation should there be adverse reactions. Compensation, if any but a chosen few get it, only applies to people who voluntarily roll up their sleeves for the life-threatening jab. So, if choice is removed, and the injections become mandatory there will be no compensation for those forced to take a shot if they subsequently suffer collateral damage. What emerges also from a CMS ‘question and answer’ sheet shows that the likelihood of compensation is slim to non-existent whether voluntarily or compulsorily jabbed.

Anyone suffering from “vaccine” damage or death must prove:

1. the occurrence of damage,
2. existence of defects in the product,
3. the causal link between the defects and the damages.

Furthermore “claims for damages caused by the vaccine can only involve the liability of the manufacturer.” As we all know the vaccine manufacturers have exempted themselves from liability.

“It is also worth mentioning that Civil Code of the Republic of Lithuania establishes cases when the manufacturers could be exempted from the liability, for example, in cases when manufacturers prove that at the time of putting the product into circulation, the level of scientific and technical knowledge was not sufficient to identify the defect of quality.”

Source

So legally, and perhaps even physically, the claimant hasn’t a leg to stand on. That carrot does not even exist.

Offering the carrot to the elderly

Wiser, older people – those who remember Soviet days – are not happy to see the return of initiatives to take away their liberties. They have seen it all before. After all, they were the ones who fought to gain this freedom in the first place.

On 12 October 2021 the Lithuanian Seimas, the legislative body of parliament, rubber-stamped a government plot to cajole the elderly into getting their toxic shots. Not surprisingly the uptake among seniors for this experiment has been low. The scheme – which is unlikely to bear much fruit – was put together whereby those of 75 and over, who have up to now avoided the life-changing jab, will receive 100 euros if they get all their shots (presume 3) by 1 December. Only pressure from impecunious family members is likely to sway life-educated seniors who are aware of the history of their country.

Part of the carrot approach is the presentation of a plethora of lies about just how good the vaccines are. To promote the lie Lithuania’s statistics office issued a statement about the Pfizer vaccine without a scintilla of documentary evidence. This statement flies in the face of what is known about the Pfizer vaccine.

Fully vaccinated people have about five times less risk of infection; this is a highly effective vaccine

Source

A spokesman called it “an excellent result”.

Such claims, coming from an office allegedly responsible for statistics are dishonest and even ludicrous. The Statistics Office should be called out on this failed attempt to spin the truth. Demands should be made to see the evidence.

This is the same Statistics Office which in mid-September tried to spin the following:

“Lithuania registered 1,300 new coronavirus infections and eight deaths from Covid-19 over Wednesday, September 15, the country’s statistics office said on Thursday morning.

Notably, three out of the eight fatalities were persons either not vaccinated or only partially vaccinated.”

Source

Wonderful! You only need a handful of brain-cells to do the arithmetic on that one. Indeed, it looks like all of these people were killed by the “vaccines”. Five after the second dose, three after the first. All countries, because of the increasing death-toll, have been instructed by Big Pharma and its backers to call any death where the toxic shots have caused the death within fourteen days of a shot: “unvaccinated”.

When this crisis is over Lithuanians should never let it be forgotten their government tried to bribe old people with 100 euros that they may not have lived long enough to receive. They might as well have offered a bribe to take a cyanide capsule to have their deaths recorded as “unvaccinated”.

More follows on what has really happened statistically after the stick approach to getting the populace injected. And it is damning.

The stick

Individuals and families who choose to be free of the toxic jabs are made to suffer in countless ways. Restrictions are placed on them whereby they cannot participate in everyday life in a meaningful way. Many of these were outlined by a moving report smuggled out of Lithuania by Gluboco Lietuva, whose Twitter thread on the subject was removed. Gluboco is not anti-vaccine. Here are just some of the restrictions placed on those refusing the gene therapies.

• Not allowed in restaurants, cafes or bars
• Not allowed in hypermarkets and larger supermarkets
• Not allowed in non-essential shops
• Not allowed to visit people in hospital (except for terminally ill and children)
• Not allowed in polyclinics
• Not allowed to get a haircut
• Not allowed in banks (with a few exceptions)
• Not allowed to go to the gym
• Not allowed to go to the library
• Not allowed to sit in lectures
• Not allowed on inter-city transport

More on Lithuanian Covid-19 statistics

You cannot have a vaccination programme without something to vaccinate against and unlike most countries Lithuania had experienced very few deaths ascribed to Covid-19 until October 2020 when death-rate figures started to rise. In short it was getting on with life. The exact date on which certain factions of government took the bribe is unknown but it looks to be about the end of September beginning of October.

Source: Our World in Data

The “vaccination” programme began on 27 December by which time a figure of 1,613 deaths had been labelled Covid-19 deaths – regardless of what had been the real cause of death. To put it into perspective it means that 99.94% of the population had not died from Covid-19 – even if official figures were to be believed.

Source: Our World in Data

Following “vaccination”, deaths have increased to 5,282. Injections have unknown contentsand many people think they are giving people a variant of Covid-19. How else could it account for a whopping 227% increase in deaths? Yet, according to the Lithuanian office of statistics, those taking the “vaccine” have five times less risk of infection. Please!

How the media is managing to sell such nonsense is unbelievable. Stop the toxic shots and you stop the pandemic. It is as simple as that. The shots are giving recipients something much worse than Covid-19. It has only recently become apparent that there are foreign substances in the phials not listed on the manufacturers’ ingredients list. All sources of information – other than from the real media – withhold this information.

Lithuanians buying into the nonsense need to start asking why the truth is being withheld? Because they are not getting bribes from the World Bank. They’re getting the toxic shots. That is criminal. And now there really is a serious crisis in hospitals which did not exist before the conservatives became the strongest party.

Lithuania – regime change

Those who engineer regime change, whether through the gun or ballot box, are working in the background long before it becomes evident to the general public. Lithuania, like its neighbour Belarus, had experienced no “pandemic” of any note. Lithuania is more pluralist in its parliamentary structure than most western states. Regime change was engineered and the majority, by the smallest of margins, took over backed by George Soros money which was funding the media campaigns of Andrius Tapinas, the head of Laisvės TV.

Before the change of parliamentary structure suddenly, from nowhere, deaths began to appear. What could have happened was that some inducement took place to make testing centres increase the number of cycles in their PCR tests so that more people appeared to have died having tested positive for Covid-19.

While testing-centres were pushing up the death-rate an election was taking place and the media played its role in blaming the increase in deaths on the Lithuanian Farmers and Greens Union (LVŽS), which was the largest party. With a new, obviously compliant, parliament installed the vaccine manufacturers moved in and the same garbage fell out of the mouths of government, government organisations, media, health authorities, education authorities and local authorities, all who voiced worries and promoted mandates to combat the non-existent pandemic in a cacophony of simultaneous death-chants. Fear was instilled in the public psyche that Covid-19 had arrived in Lithuania. If its people did not get “vaccinated” against it, they would all die.

One of the good things that Belarus, which borders Lithuania, did, was to divulge details of an attempted bribe of its president, Aleksandr Lukashenko, from the World Bank. Other leaders have said the same bribes were offered them so it is known that all the countries promoting the fake pandemic were corrupt enough to take the bribe. Is your country one of them?

Last year Lukashenko was re-elected despite attempts at regime-change. His opponent fled to Lithuania.

Source: Our world in data

Take a look at the comparative deaths from Covid-19 of Lithuania and Belarus as of 15 October 2021.

On the face of it there does not seem to be much difference between the two countries, other than the regular shape of the Belarus line, and Lithuania appears to have a better earlier record. Graphs can be misleading and this shows actual deaths, not per capita deaths. It is also claimed that earlier Lithuania was not recording all of its so-called Covid-19 deaths.

Belarus has nearly 3.5 times the population of Lithuania. What that means is that 1 in every 2,195 people has been recorded as having died from Covid-19 in Belarus. Whereas in Lithuania it is 1 in every 528 people. And following the vaccination programme which is giving people Covid-19 Lithuania really does have a crisis. Last week hospitals recorded 507 Covid patients including 10 children, and 48 ICU patients.

As explained in my last article in this series, if PCR testing for Covid-19 had never taken place, there would be no pandemic and the people who died would have had their cause-of-death recorded as something more in line with what actually killed them. Now the “vaccines” have arrived on the scene everyone taking them is liable to be diagnosed with Covid-19 – but what they’ve really got is a dose of poison called a vaccine.

As Belarus borders Lithuania it may be a safe haven to flee for Lithuanians who choose to avoid the jabs. As things stand there is still a choice in Belarus – even though sanctions are being applied to bring the country into line.

In Lithuania there is a substantial number of people still resisting, as well-attended protests show.

Source: dp.ru

Relocating might need to be done soon because Lithuania is planning a barbed wire fenceacross its border with Belarus. The government argument is to prevent more immigrants from Belarus entering the country. It is true that last year people fled to Lithuania from Belarus but that was after the failed regime change via the ballot-box, and they fled for political reasons.

Those fearful of the jab and living in Belarus now are unlikely to go to Lithuania knowing there is four times the chance of being killed by Covid-19 vaccines. The exodus is much more likely to be from Lithuania to Belarus.

*

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

Featured image is from nakedtruth.in

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It is disappointing that the Malaysian government has chosen to adopt a passive approach to the Pandora Papers. Leaving it to the police to investigate may suggest that the government is not prepared to assume leadership in setting the moral tone for society especially since some of the underlying ethical concerns in the Pandora Papers may have serious implications for society as a whole.    

The Pandora Papers refer to the millions of leaked documents that allegedly reveal offshore accounts of present and past leaders, including  presidents, prime ministers, billionaires and prominent business people put together by an international consortium of investigative journalists and made public on the 2^nd of October 2021.  Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the current Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta, are on the list. It is now public knowledge that the Malaysian finance Minister, Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz and one of his predecessors, Tun Daim Zainuddin are also named.

The inclusion of their names in the Pandora Papers, why they as public figures chose offshore accounts for their assets, and how this impacted upon the local economy are matters which should be investigated.  At the very least it would help to clear their names. It is in this spirit that a number of governments, like the Pakistani government, have chosen to investigate allegations in the Papers against their people.

In investigating the allegations, the authorities and the public will have to examine seriously both the legal and ethical dimensions. Beyond the rules pertaining to off-shore accounts and the like, there is the more powerful issue of how off-shore accounts of important and wealthy personalities drain the economies of many countries.  A 2016 report by Oxfam estimated that a third of the wealth of rich Africans — about 500 billion US dollars — was kept in off-shore accounts.  This resulted in a huge loss in tax revenue, about 1. 4 billion a year, for the people, enough to pay for the healthcare of millions of poor. A global network of tax havens enable the very rich to hide 7.6 trillion US dollars.

This is why a firm message to the nation from the government that it will not tolerate off-shore accounts is imperative. It must be part of the overall endeavour to eradicate corruption. Private gain should never take precedence over the public good. Parliament should immediately establish a small committee of say 3 persons to investigate thoroughly the Malaysians named in the Pandora Papers with the focus upon the public-office holders. The committee should be independent, credible and committed. Its report should be submitted directly to the Dewan Rakyat for scrutiny within two months of its appointment.

*

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

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

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Thailand’s government is using green chiretta to treat people with asymptomatic or mild coronavirus infections, following a trial in prisons which found that 99% of those who consumed the plant recovered.

In Thailand’s fields, convicted criminals tend to a precious crop.

In the blazing sun, in neon orange tops, they bend and scrape, painstakingly weeding the ground around neat lines of dark green plants.

They’re growing green chiretta (Andrographis paniculate) – or Fah talai jone, as it’s called in Thailand.

Chainat jail is using the herbal remedy to treat prisoners

It’s a traditional herbal medicine commonly used in Thai homes to treat colds, but it is now playing a central role in the country’s fight against COVID-19.

“Its properties help to reduce fever and coughing,” one of the prisoners tells me.

In jail for drugs offences, the 31-year-old is now tasked with harvesting a plant which has been used to treat more than 69,000 other offenders with coronavirus.

“I feel proud to be looking after these Thai herbs that are used to help cure prisoners who have COVID,” he says.

Image on the right: Jail medic Chitsanuphong Saublaongiw believes the traditional tablet successfully eased mild symptoms

After his team snips and gathers all the mature stems, the plant is dried and ground by another group.

The dark green powder is then packed into capsules before being shipped to other prisons nearby.

In July, Thailand’s cabinet approved green chiretta for use in people with asymptomatic or mild coronavirus infections following a successful trial in prisons.

The government claims that out of 11,800 inmates who took it to treat coronavirus, 99.02% recovered.

A few miles down the road from where the plants are being harvested, Chainat jail is one of those using the herbal remedy.

During an outbreak of COVID-19 in August, more than 700 inmates took 15 pills a day for five days.

Staff say all of them recovered.

Jail medic Chitsanuphong Saublaongiw believes the traditional tablet was effective in easing mild symptoms.

“From the research, green chiretta has a substance called andrographolide, which is the substance that helps limit the spread of the virus,” he explains.

“After taking green chiretta, the prisoners had better chest X-ray results, fewer symptoms, the disease was less severe, and they returned to normal quickly,” he adds.

“Asymptomatic patients didn’t develop any severe symptoms.”

Critics say more testing is needed to prove green chiretta’s efficacy against COVID-19

Often overcrowded and cramped, the virus has spread rapidly in Thailand’s jails.

Around a quarter of the country’s prisoners tested positive in the six months from April 2021.

Severe infections are still treated with antivirals or hospital care, but cheap and available green chiretta has offered Thailand an alternative option for those in the early stages of COVID-19 at a time when the country has been tackling a surge in cases.

Prisoners tell Sky News they are proud to be harvesting green chiretta

“In prisons, we sleep close to each other, so we can’t [social] distance,” says Poj, one of those given the tablet at Chainat jail.

His name has been changed to protect his identity.

“I had a high fever, then after taking green chiretta, the fever reduced,” he explains. “[My] sore throat and cough also reduced when I took green chiretta for five days.”

Some 141 jails around the country now plan to produce 38 million green chiretta tablets by November. They’ll be used to treat more inmates.

Experts say the plant contains a substance called andrographolide which helps limit the spread of the virus

The government has also been trialling the treatment in some hospitals and is encouraging 24,000 villages to grow the crop, so they have supplies.

“If we use modern medicine, the cost is 20 times, 30 times, 50 times higher… and in the prisons, it’s very crowded,” Somsak Thepsuthin, Thailand’s minister of justice, tells me at a chiretta event in Bangkok.

“We must have this to treat people. If it’s a mild illness, we can use this medicine, as it’s inexpensive and effective.”

But green chiretta isn’t a silver bullet to cure the world of COVID-19.

Green chiretta is traditionally used to treat colds but is now being produced as a COVID treatment

Thai authorities have only cleared it for use in mild cases – it doesn’t stop you from getting the virus, and it isn’t a substitute for a vaccine.

The World Health Organisation’s list of recommended drugs to treat coronavirus doesn’t mention the herbal remedy.

Critics in Thailand say more testing is needed to prove its efficacy.

“Andrographolide is referred to as a substance found in green chiretta that helps suppress viruses and inflammation,” says associate professor Dr Mayuree Tangkiatkumjai, of the department of clinical pharmacy at Srinakharinwirot University.

“However, COVID-19 is still a new emerging infectious disease, so there is no sufficient research to confirm that green chiretta can prevent and cure COVID-19 yet.”

Two more trials of green chiretta involving COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms are being conducted on 1,400 people

While she supports people with colds using it at home, this is no replacement for antivirals in severe coronavirus cases.

“The suitable amount of andrographolide for patients is still debatable, and it still needs further studies to verify its efficacy and side effects,” Dr Tangkiatkumjai adds.

Two more trials of green chiretta involving COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms are being conducted on 1,400 people, with initial results due next spring.

While Thailand has also been investing in revolutionary coronavirus vaccines and antivirals, green chiretta, a traditional herbal pill, has a new role in fighting a modern pandemic.

*

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

Featured image: Somsak Thepsuthin, Thailand’s minister of justice, says the medicine is ‘inexpensive and effective’; All images in this article are from Sky News

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Peter McCullough speaks at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on October 2, 2021.

Watch the video below.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Wieso haben unsere Kinder mit Drogen zu tun? Weil der Drogenhandel ein gutes Geschäft ist mit großem Profit. Wenn damit nicht viel zu verdienen wäre, hätten Eltern keine Sorgen, der Jugendliche würde nicht an Drogen herankommen und daran zugrunde gehen, der Markt wäre leer (1). Die in Deutschland von der grünen, liberalen und sozialdemokratischen Partei geforderte Legalisierung von Cannabis könnte jedoch einen Wirtschaftsboom auslösen. Die Staatskasse würde von der im Land am häufigsten konsumierten illegalen Droge profitieren; das heißt, der Staat würde zum Dealer werden. Deshalb ist die Forderung nach Legalisierung rein politischer Natur und wissenschaftlich nicht gerechtfertigt.

Vor dem Hintergrund neuerer Studien über die schweren psychischen „Kollateralschäden“ der Corona-Maßnahmen bei der jungen Generation ist eine Legalisierung der Einstiegsdroge Cannabis noch weniger zu befürworten als in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten. Die staatlich verordneten Einschränkungen wie Lockdowns, „social distancing“ und das Verbot von Schulbesuchen, musischer und sportlicher Aktivitäten führten 2020 speziell in dieser Altersgruppe zu einem starken Anstieg von Depressionen, Angststörungen und Einsamkeitsgefühlen (2). Diese prekäre Gefühlsgrundlage darf durch den Konsum leicht verfügbarer illegaler Drogen und wegen der Gefahr einer Abhängigkeit auf keinen Fall betäubt und verstärkt werden. Die Konsequenzen für die Betroffenen und ihr familiäres und gesellschaftliches Umfeld wären verheerend. Persönliche Erfahrungen als Vater, Lehrer und Psychologe mit drogengefährdeten und -abhängigen Jugendlichen in Deutschland und der Schweiz bestätigen meine unabhängige wissenschaftliche Argumentation.

Wie wäre es, wenn ihr Kind Drogen nähme?

„Ich bin eine ganz normale Mutter von ganz normalen Kindern – aber ich bin auch die Mutter eines ehemaligen Drogenabhängigen.“ Mit diesem Satz beginnt der Vortrag einer Mutter aus einem Elternkreis drogengefährdeter und drogenabhängiger Jugendlicher. Und sie sagt weiter:

„Dabei hatten mein Mann und ich, sicherlich wie die große Mehrzahl von jungen Eltern, einen so schönen Traum von einer Familie, von unserer Familie. Unser Heim sollte von Liebe, von Freude, Vertrauen, Fürsorge, Stabilität und Wärme erfüllt sein. Wir waren bereit und willens, alles zu tun, das zu verwirklichen. Wir erlebten auch, dass unser Traum wahr wurde…bis…bis er sich über Nacht zum Albtraum wandelte. Liebe wurde zur Erpressbarkeit, Freude zur Beklemmung, Vertrauen zu Misstrauen, Fürsorge zur Sorge, Stabilität zum Ausgeliefertsein und Wärme zur Angst. (…) Wir konnten uns überhaupt nicht vorstellen, dass eines unserer Kinder Drogen konsumieren oder drogenabhängig werden würde.“ (3)

Die Legalisierung liegt in der Luft

Der Vortrag der betroffenen Mutter hatte den Titel „Können Sie sich vorstellen, wie es wäre…wenn Ihr Kind Drogen nähme?“ und wurde am 11. November 1985 gehalten. Es war die Zeit einer regelrechten Drogenschwemme, die sich seit den sechziger Jahren mit Hilfe einer stark propagierten Drogenideologie lawinenartig in Europa ausbreitete. Und wie ist die Situation in Deutschland heute, siebenunddreißig Jahre später? Müssen sich Eltern Sorgen machen?

Ja, das müssen sie! Nicht nur die drei möglichen Regierungsparteien rühren die Werbetrommel für eine umgehende Legalisierung von Cannabis. Auch ein Brandenburger Amtsrichter und Cannabisaktivist meint laut „SPIEGEL“ vom 13. Oktober: „Die Legalisierung liegt in der Luft“ (4). Deutsche Polizeigewerkschaften hingegen warnen eindringlich vor einer Legalisierung (5). Mit einer Liberalisierung der Drogenpolitik wird der missbräuchliche Konsum nicht eingedämmt, sondern im Gegenteil ausgeweitet. Bereits eine die Gesundheitsgefahren verharmlosende Argumentation der Befürworter einer Legalisierung wirkt sich negativ aus.

Cannabis – eine berauschende gesundheitsgefährdende Substanz

„Kiffen“ ist die Szene-Bezeichnung für das Inhalieren von Cannabis bzw. von Marihuana (zerkleinerte Blätter oder Teile der ganzen Pflanze) und Haschisch (das gepresste Harz der Blüten). Cannabis enthält mindestens vier rauscherzeugende Cannabinoide (chemische Stoffe). Das bekannteste mit dem größten Anteil an der Erzeugung des Rausches ist das Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). Die gefährliche Eigenschaft der Cannabinoide besteht in deren Fettlöslichkeit. Das heißt, sie lagern sich im menschlichen Fettgewebe ab – speziell im peripheren Nervensystem, im Gehirn und in den Fortpflanzungsorganen – und entfalten dort ihre Wirkung.

Da die Cannabinoide nur sehr langsam abgebaut und aus dem Körper ausgeschieden werden, kommt es zu einer Anreicherung von Giftstoffen. So dauert es drei Tage bis zu einer Woche, bis nur die Hälfte des THC von einer einzigen Marihuana-Zigarette abgebaut und ausgeschieden ist. Wissenschaftlich nachgewiesen sind seit vielen Jahren Schädigungen der Lunge, des Herzens, des Immunsystems, des Erbmaterials, der Sexualentwicklung, der Embryonalentwicklung bei Schwangerschaft, des Gehirns und das Auslösen von Psychosen. Aus diesem Grund haben sich in der Drogenkonvention der Vereinten Nationen 184 Staaten – darunter Deutschland – verpflichtet, den Umgang mit Cannabis und anderen Drogen ausschließlich zu medizinischen oder wissenschaftlichen Zwecken zuzulassen. Die Wirkungen der Droge sind bei einem Jugendlichen in der Pubertät zudem völlig anders und wesentlich schädlicher als bei Erwachsenen (6).

Alle diese wissenschaftlichen Befunde sind seit Jahrzehnten bekannt und unter seriösen Wissenschaftlern unstrittig. Ein Experten-Beitrag zum Cannabis-Konsum mit dem Titel „Kiffen vergiftet die kreativsten Köpfe“ von Professor Holm-Hadulla, Facharzt für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatische Medizin und Psychotherapie bestätigt die bisherigen Befunde. (6) Holm-Hadulla zitiert darin u. a. die angesehene Fachzeitschrift „New England Journal of Medicine“, die 2014 die wissenschaftlichen Daten zum Cannabis-Konsum zusammengefasst und bewertet hat und zu alarmierenden Ergebnissen kam:

„Bei häufigem Konsum von den heute üblichen hochdosierten Cannabisprodukten verdoppelt sich das Psychose-Risiko. Schädigungen der Hirnentwicklung, die mit Störungen von Motivation, Konzentration und Gedächtnis einhergehen, gelten als wissenschaftlich bewiesen. (…) Besonders gefährlich ist der Cannabiskonsum während der Pubertät. Diese Lebensphase ist wegen der in dieser Zeit stattfindenden neuralen Umbauprozesse besonders anfällig. Deswegen ist es katastrophal, wenn Jugendliche schon mit zwölf Jahren oder früher beginnen, Haschisch und Marihuana zu rauchen und große Mengen Alkohol zu trinken. (…) Neben Hirnveränderungen und psychotischen Erkrankungen kann Cannabis zu weniger deutlichen, aber doch gravierenden Entwicklungsbeeinträchtigungen führen. (…) So dient Cannabis eben nicht dem emanzipatorischen Unabhängigkeitsstreben, sondern dem resignativen Einfügen in bestehende Missstände.“ (7)

Faktoren, die zum Drogenkonsum führen

Die Entscheidung, Drogen zu nehmen, ist von verschiedenen Faktoren abhängig. Einer der entscheidendsten ist ihre Verfügbarkeit. Wenn mit dem Drogenhandel nicht sehr viel zu verdienen wäre, hätten Eltern keine Sorgen. Der Jugendliche würde nicht an Drogen herankommen und daran zugrunde gehen, der Markt wäre leer. Des Weiteren ist die schon erwähnte Einstellung der Bevölkerung, speziell die von Eltern und Lehrern gegenüber dem Drogenmissbrauch von großer Bedeutung – also die soziale Akzeptanz oder Nichtakzeptanz von Drogen. Soziale Akzeptanz bedeutet für den jungen Menschen, dass die Droge ungefährlich ist und er mit ihr experimentieren kann. Mangelnde Aufklärung, Verharmlosung oder sogar Propagierung von Drogen senken die Hemmschwelle für den Einstieg. Deshalb ist ein gesetzliches Verbot wichtig. Es stellt für den Jugendlichen eine Klippe dar und damit einen Schutz vor dem Abgleiten in den missbräuchlichen Drogenkonsum.

Ein Grund für die Verbreitung der Sucht ist die direkte persönliche (d. h. psychosoziale) Ansteckung zwischen einem Drogenkonsumenten und einem Neueinsteiger aufgrund des Gruppendrucks von Gleichaltrigen (peer-pressure). Gerade in der Pubertät, einer Zeit des Suchens nach Selbstfindung, nach der eigenen Identität und einer Zeit des Erprobens neuer Verhaltensweisen bekommen die Gleichaltrigen (peers) neben Eltern und Lehrern eine immer größere Bedeutung für den einzelnen. Die frühe Stärkung der Persönlichkeit und des Selbstwertgefühls des Jugendlichen in Familie und Schule ist deshalb der größte Schutz. Er ist dann in der Lage, nein zu sagen, wenn ihm Drogen angeboten werden (8).

*

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

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, NRhZ-Online.

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel ist Erziehungswissenschaftler und Diplom-Psychologe.

Noten

(1) Der vorliegende Artikel ist eine Aktualisierung und teilweise Ergänzung eines entsprechenden Artikels in der „Neuen Rheinischen Zeitung“ (NRhZ) Nr. 531 vom 7.10.2015 „Wie wäre es, wenn ihr Kind Drogen nähme“ http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22110

(2) http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=27727, https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/das-wagnis-des-wissens

(3) Vortrag von Frau Elsa Meyer am 8. 11.1985. Veröffentlicht in der EK Schriftenreihe Nr. 1 des Elternkreises drogengefährdeter und drogenabhängiger Jugendlicher e. V., Bonn

(4) https://www.spiegel.de/panoramajustiz/cannabis-wie-richter-and…cannabisaktivisten-wurde-a-e4ecb378-1419-4980-be54-5a642fae80d9

(5) https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/cannabis-polizeige…warnen-vor-legalisierung-a-6492feda-b3b6-4e1d-9fe9-9696eaa4a8e0

(6) http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22110

(7) A. a. O.

(8) A. a. O.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

 

 

In the interview below, Palestinian writer, researcher and activist Khaled Barakat, co-organizer of Masar Badil (The Alternative Palestinian Path Conference: Towards a new revolutionary commitment, Madrid, Spain, October-November 2021), says:

We are confident that the decisions, actions and plans of the conference will spread widely to the Palestinian people, the Arab nation and all of the friends and supporters of Palestine and the liberation movements of the world, through mobilization, joint action and common struggle. The conference is fundamentally a first step to build forward to make this alternative revolutionary path a reality.

And what a confident stride this revolutionary march towards Palestinian liberation seems to have despite the substantial obstacles arrayed against it. The grave challenges are, to my mind, akin to those faced by Neil Armstrong, who nevertheless was able to declare in 1969 when his left foot first touched the moon’s surface: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”

Image on the right: https://masarbadil.org (Conference of the Alternative Palestinian Path): Towards a new revolutionary commitment, Madrid, Spain, October-November 2021. The website of the conference is available in several languages.

I am planning to attend this conference in Madrid and will be blogging on how the decisions made there will translate into a commitment among activists of every stripe to building “a meaningful and substantial popular movement among the Palestinian people, in diaspora and exile as well as inside Palestine.” So, please stay tuned.

Following are Khaled Barakat’s answers to a few questions about Masar Badil I put to him:

Rima Najjar (RN): I have the impression that preparations for the conference have been operating a bit under the radar in that very few people are aware of its activities and exciting potential for Palestine. How much of this is deliberate and how much is it the result of other factors?

Khaled Barakat (KB): The preparatory committee for the Masar Badil conference has been working for over a year to discuss and envision a revolutionary alternative path for Palestine. This year’s conference coincides with the 30th anniversary of the infamous Madrid conference, one of the most momentous steps toward Arab official normalization with Zionism and with a U.S.-dominated, so-called “peace process” that served to dismantle the Palestinian revolution and its structures of popular participation. On the 30th anniversary of the Madrid conference, we are working to bring together the grassroots organizers and leaders of Palestinian communities, especially those in exile and diaspora around the world, for conferences in Madrid and Beirut.

Of course, there are many institutional obstacles. This conference has received no institutional funding or official sponsorship from any party, so all participants are paying their own way to attend. The venues for the conference are being arranged by grassroots organizations in Madrid, working with community centers and popular institutions. What all of this means is that, like all elements of the Palestinian struggle, there will always be a challenge to break through the dominant voices, especially in English-language media, that push for yet more pointless negotiations and normalization and do not wish to see the Palestinian movement regain its revolutionary voice, vision and direction. We are confident that the decisions, actions and plans of the conference will spread widely to the Palestinian people, the Arab nation and all of the friends and supporters of Palestine and the liberation movements of the world, through mobilization, joint action and common struggle. The conference is fundamentally a first step to build forward to make this alternative revolutionary path a reality.

“Resistance is the choice of the Palestinian people, not normalization and capitulation to imperialism, Zionism and reactionary regimes that host U.S. military bases and sign deals with the Israeli occupation.”

RN: As I see it, among many other things, this conference is a push to reflect on the world stage the true image of Palestinian resistance (as opposed to the image Israel’s hasbara and US complicity have long succeeded in imposing on western media). At a human level, this means the image of individual resistance leaders — in the student, feminist, labor or armed struggle movements (whether these individuals are imprisoned or martyred). Can you speak to that?

KB: One of the central aspects of this conference is celebrating and pushing forward the path of resistance for the Palestinian people, the clear alternative of the failed path of Madrid and Oslo. The Palestinian resistance and the Palestinian people and their friends everywhere around the world made it clear this May — if it was not already quite clear — that resistance is the choice of the Palestinian people, not normalization and capitulation to imperialism, Zionism and reactionary regimes that host U.S. military bases and sign deals with the Israeli occupation. One of the central focuses of the conference is supporting Palestinian prisoners, the representatives of the resistance inside Israeli prisons. Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network is one of the organizations working to bring this conference together, aiming to highlight and build global solidarity for the prisoners, not only as victims of torture and human rights violations, but as leaders of the Palestinian resistance pointing a way forward for the Palestinian movement. This includes prisoners like Ahmad Sa’adat, Khitam Saafin, Mahmoud al-Ardah and the heroes of the Freedom Tunnel, and the thousands of men, women, children and elders imprisoned for their resistance to Israeli occupation. It also includes political prisoners like Georges Ibrahim Abdallah, jailed for 37 years in France because he will not abandon the path of resistance. By organizing, building and acting together, we can not only reclaim the image of these resistance leaders but also work to meaningfully obtain their liberation.

RN: In what way is this conference a threat to the Palestinian Authority and Israel’s entrenched desire to hold on to the status quo?

KB: The Palestinian Authority is an outcome of the process of Madrid and Oslo. It exists in order to serve as a subcontractor for the Israeli occupation and to engage in security coordination to undermine the resistance, not to represent the Palestinian people. Therefore, Israel wants to preserve the PA in order to maximize the effectiveness of its colonial control. This conference reflects the political will of the Palestinian people for a popular movement that can organize the vast energies and profound commitment and dedication of the people in order to obtain our liberation. Palestinians in diaspora must no longer be cut off from the processes of decision-making and leadership in the revolution, alongside our sisters and brothers throughout occupied Palestine, from the river to the sea. This is the only way to a real national unity, based on resistance and not on positioning for control and power in the Authority, because that form of “power” is only illusionary. We believe that the Palestinian people and their resistance can and will achieve victory, and that we must organize in order to make that day sooner.

“Of course, the Zionist movement, right-wing forces and imperialists do not want to see the conference or, more importantly, its goals, succeed. These are the forces that brought about the Madrid conference and that disastrous path for the Palestinian people 30 years ago today.”

RN: What kind of push-back to the goals and spirit of the conference are you envisioning?

KB: Of course, the Zionist movement, right-wing forces and imperialists do not want to see the conference or, more importantly, its goals, succeed. These are the forces that brought about the Madrid conference and that disastrous path for the Palestinian people 30 years ago today. We can expect the usual attacks, attempts at intimidation and suppression, and right-wing media smears. Our comrades in Spain organizing the conference have already seen this locally, with their activism smeared by Zionist forces, alongside the political parties and organizations they work with to build broad support for Palestine. We can also expect apologists for the Palestinian Authority and the Oslo path to oppose this alternative path for Palestine, because it does present a real alternative for our people away from this failed, destructive road. However, all of this is nothing new for any movement aiming to obtain the liberation of Palestine, and we are confident that such attempts will not succeed, because Palestine needs a new path forward, for liberation, from the river to the sea, and no amount of propaganda will lessen the commitment of our people to achieve that goal.

RN: What, in your view, will it take to catapult this conference into the world stage and signal a commitment to real change, especially among activists who might be committed to a divergent “path” to Palestinian liberation.

KB: What it will take is following up on the commitments to action made at the conference. The conference’s decisions have yet to occur, so I cannot speak for them yet. However, it is clear that the conference will commit to building a meaningful and substantial popular movement among the Palestinian people, in diaspora and exile as well as inside Palestine. This means organizing hand in hand with our people in the refugee camps, building bridges with our sisters and brothers inside occupied Palestine, and building the unions of women, writers, students, workers, health professionals and others that are necessary to harness the tremendous vision and dedication of the Palestinian people and our comrades on the road to liberation. This is a Palestinian, Arab and international movement with a Palestinian, Arab and international view of liberation, committed not only to organizing and writing and to action. We invite all who share this vision and goal to join us in making that a reality.

*

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

Rima Najjar is a Palestinian whose father’s side of the family comes from the forcibly depopulated village of Lifta on the western outskirts of Jerusalem and whose mother’s side of the family is from Ijzim, south of Haifa. She is an activist, researcher and retired professor of English literature, Al-Quds University, occupied West Bank. 

Rima Najjar is a frequent contributor to Global Research

Featured image: Poster behind writer and activist Khaled Barakat says: “Vietnam — Palestine.” [courtesy of Khaled Barakat]

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Why are our children involved with drugs? Because the drug trade is a good business with big profits.

If there wasn’t much to be made from it, parents wouldn’t have to worry, young people wouldn’t get their hands on drugs and would perish from them, the market would be empty (1).

However, the legalisation of cannabis demanded in Germany by the Green, Liberal and Social Democratic parties could trigger an economic boom. The state coffers would profit from the most commonly consumed illegal drug in the country; that is, the state would become a dealer. Therefore, the demand for legalisation is purely political and not scientifically justified.

Against the background of recent studies on the severe psychological “collateral damage” of Corona measures among the young generation, legalisation of the gateway drug cannabis is even less to be advocated than in previous decades. The state-imposed restrictions such as lockdowns, “social distancing” and the prohibition of school attendance, musical and sporting activities led to a sharp increase in depression, anxiety disorders and feelings of loneliness in 2020, especially in this age group (2). This precarious emotional basis must under no circumstances be anaesthetised and intensified by the use of easily available illicit drugs and because of the danger of addiction. The consequences for those affected and their family and social environment would be devastating. Personal experience as a father, teacher and psychologist with young people at risk of and addicted to drugs in Germany and Switzerland confirms my independent scientific argumentation.

What would it be like if your child took drugs?

“I am a very normal mother of very normal children – but I am also the mother of a former drug addict.” With this sentence, a mother from a group of parents of drug-endangered and drug-addicted youths begins her talk. And she continues:

“Yet my husband and I, certainly like the vast majority of young parents, had such a beautiful dream of a family, of our family. Our home should be filled with love, with joy, trust, care, stability and warmth. We were ready and willing to do everything to make that a reality. We also experienced our dream coming true…until…until it turned into a nightmare overnight. Love became blackmail, joy became anxiety, trust became mistrust, care became worry, stability became vulnerability and warmth became fear. (…) We could not imagine at all that one of our children would use drugs or become addicted to drugs.” (3)

Legalisation is in the air

The concerned mother’s talk was entitled “Can you imagine what it would be like…if your child took drugs?” and was given on 11 November 1985. It was the time of a veritable drug glut that had been spreading like an avalanche in Europe since the sixties with the help of a strongly propagated drug ideology. And what is the situation in Germany today, thirty-seven years later? Do parents have to worry?

Yes, they do! Not only the three possible government parties are beating the advertising drum for an immediate legalisation of cannabis. According to “SPIEGEL” of 13 October, a Brandenburg district judge and cannabis activist also thinks: “Legalisation is in the air” (4). German police unions, on the other hand, warn urgently against legalisation (5). With a liberalisation of drug policy, abusive use will not be curbed but, on the contrary, expanded. Even an argumentation of the advocates of legalisation that plays down the health risks has a negative effect.

Cannabis – an intoxicating substance hazardous to health

“Smoking pot” is the scene term for inhaling cannabis or marijuana (crushed leaves or parts of the whole plant) and hashish (the pressed resin of the flowers). Cannabis contains at least four intoxicating cannabinoids (chemical substances). The best known with the largest share in producing intoxication is tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The dangerous property of cannabinoids is their fat solubility. This means that they are deposited in the human fatty tissue – especially in the peripheral nervous system, in the brain and in the reproductive organs – and develop their effect there.

Since the cannabinoids are broken down and excreted from the body only very slowly, there is an accumulation of toxins. Thus, it takes three days to a week until only half of the THC from a single marijuana cigarette is broken down and excreted. It has been scientifically proven for many years that marijuana damages the lungs, the heart, the immune system, the genetic material, sexual development, embryonic development during pregnancy, the brain and triggers psychoses. For this reason, 184 states – including Germany – have committed themselves in the United Nations Convention on Narcotic Drugs to allow the use of cannabis and other drugs exclusively for medical or scientific purposes. Moreover, the effects of the drug on an adolescent in puberty are completely different and much more harmful than on adults (6).

All these scientific findings have been known for decades and are undisputed among serious experts. An expert article on cannabis consumption entitled “Kiffen vergiften die kreativsten Köpfe” (Smoking pot poisons the most creative minds) by Professor Holm-Hadulla, a specialist in psychiatry, psychosomatic medicine and psychotherapy, also confirms the previous findings. (6) In it, Holm-Hadulla quotes, among other things, the respected professional journal “New England Journal of Medicine”, which in 2014 summarised and evaluated the scientific data on cannabis consumption and came to alarming conclusions:

“Frequent use of today’s high-dose cannabis products doubles the risk of psychosis. Damage to brain development, which is accompanied by disturbances of motivation, concentration and memory, is considered scientifically proven. (…) Cannabis use during puberty is particularly dangerous. This phase of life is particularly vulnerable because of the neural rebuilding processes that take place during this time. That is why it is disastrous when adolescents start smoking hashish and marijuana and drinking large amounts of alcohol at the age of twelve or earlier. (…) Besides brain changes and psychotic illnesses, cannabis can lead to less obvious but still serious developmental impairments. (…) Thus, cannabis does not serve the emancipatory striving for independence, but the resigned insertion into existing grievances.” (7)

Factors leading to drug use

The decision to use drugs depends on various factors. One of the most decisive is their availability. If there were not very much to be earned from drug dealing, parents would have no worries. The young person would not get hold of drugs and would perish from them, the market would be empty. Furthermore, the already mentioned attitude of the population, especially that of parents and teachers towards drug abuse is of great importance – i.e. the social acceptance or non-acceptance of drugs. Social acceptance means for young people that the drug is harmless and that they can experiment with it. Lack of education, trivialisation or even propagation of drugs lowers the inhibition threshold for getting started. That is why a legal ban is important. It represents a cliff for the young person and thus a protection against sliding into abusive drug use.

One reason for the spread of addiction is the direct personal (i.e. psychosocial) contagion between a drug user and a newcomer due to peer pressure. Especially during puberty, a time of searching for self-discovery, for one’s own identity and a time of trying out new ways of behaving, peers become more and more important for the individual besides parents and teachers. Strengthening the young person’s personality and self-esteem at an early age in the family and at school is therefore the greatest protection. He is then able to say no when drugs are offered to him (8).

*

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

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, NRhZ-Online.

Dr Rudolf Hänsel is an educationalist and qualified psychologist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes

(1) This article is an update and partial supplement of a corresponding article in the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung” (NRhZ) No. 531 of 7.10.2015 “Wie wäre es, wenn ihr Kind Drogen nähme” http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22110

(2) http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=27727, https://www.rubikon.news/artikel/das-wagnis-des-wissens

(3) Lecture by Ms. Elsa Meyer on 8.11.1985. Published in the EK Schriftenreihe No. 1 of the Elternkreis drogengefährdeter und drogenabhängiger Jugendlicher e. V., Bonn.

(4) https://www.spiegel.de/panoramajustiz/cannabis-wie-richter-and…cannabisaktivisten-wurde-a-e4ecb378-1419-4980-be54-5a642fae80d9

(5) https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellschaft/cannabis-polizeige…warnen-vor-legalisierung-a-6492feda-b3b6-4e1d-9fe9-9696eaa4a8e0

(6) http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=22110

(7) op. cit.

(8) op. cit.

This carefully documented article on “Vaccine Mandates” was published on September 11, 2019, almost four months before the outbreak of the Covid-19 crisis in early January 2020

***

I am a veteran of the vaccine war in the US, and today [ September 2019] I feel compelled to speak about what I saw in that war.  Legislators were forced to change their votes to revoke vaccine exemptions and rescind the historic right to consent to medical procedures.

The vaccine war is a dirty war, in which platitudes about protecting the most vulnerable are invoked by the same pharmaceutical companies that paid $2.7 billion in criminal penalties in the US between 2012 and 2015. The vaccine industry generates enormous profits (estimated 10-40%), benefits from a government-guaranteed market, and receives almost total liability protection.  No other industry can rival these benefits.  And this industry’s rapacious desire to grow and guarantee its Canadian market is the reason we are here today.

Let me add context to this discussion by noting that in 2014, the NY Times said it cost $2200 to fully vaccinate one child.  At that price, it cost $163 billion dollars to fully vaccinate every US child.

May I apologize at the outset for using mostly US data?  I provide Canadian and New Brunswick information when available.

1. Pharma’s Pilgrimage to New Brunswick

Since March 2019, representatives of the three largest vaccine manufacturers in North America:  GSK, Merck and Sanofi, have made their way to New Brunswick to meet with ministers, public servants and lawmakers. This is not coincidental. Pharmaceutical companies are colluding to expand on legislative victories gained in the US. Using a media storm over measles, censorship of numerous vaccine-related websites, new support for mandates from professional organizations that have benefitted from industry largesse, and deals with Democratic party leaders, the right to religious and philosophic vaccine exemptions has been voted away by legislatures in California, New York and Maine.  In the recent case of New York, the Speaker of the NY Assembly was caught on videotape directing a committee member to change his vote in order for the mandate legislation to move forward.

This was not an idle pilgrimage to one of Canada’s smallest provinces. For Pharma it is the gateway to all of Canada.

The vaccine industry in 2019 is at a crossroads.

On the one hand, the vaccine business is booming.  Several vaccines have been newly licensed, a robust industry-FDA revolving door has been established, and the children of North America are receiving more vaccines than ever before. Merck, for example, reported increased sales in the second quarter of 2019 for Gardasil HPV vaccine of 46% (to over $3 billion US annually) compared to last year, and increased sales of 58% for its MMRV (measles, mumps, rubella and varicella) vaccine.  These are Merck’s 3d and 4th biggest sellers.  This year’s US measles outbreak (about 1200 cases) and media-driven fears of contagion contributed to vaccine uptake.

The table reflects sales of the company’s top pharmaceutical products, as well as sales of animal health products. (Source)

On the other hand, the industry does not want to shoulder the considerable expense of developing, testing and licensing new vaccines–over 100 of which are in development–without a government guarantee that they will be purchased.

Vaccines are being developed for everything from acne to cancers.

Vaccine mandates guarantee a vaccine market, now and in the future. Mandates put in place today will enforce the uptake of vaccines on the currently required list, plus other vaccines yet to be added. 

Industry Challenges

In 2019, the vaccine industry faces threatening legal challenges.

1. a) An expert witness for the US Department of Justice (DOJ) in the 2007 omnibus vaccine autism case (affecting the outcome for thousands of cases of alleged vaccine injury leading to autism), neurology professor Andrew Zimmerman, MD recently filed an affidavit stating that his expert testimony was altered by DOJ lawyers–that he told them that in certain cases, autism can be a consequence of vaccination.  The case for which Prof. Zimmerman’s testimony was allegedly changed resulted in a denial of benefits for thousands of families with autistic children.  It also led to a negative conclusion in the US Vaccine Court, for all future cases, that autism might be a consequence of vaccination.  Potentially thousands of denied cases will need to be re-litigated.

4. b) Gardasil, a Merck vaccine used to prevent HPV infections and putatively cancer, is facing lawsuits around the world for neurologic injuries and deaths. The Japanese government rescinded its recommendation for Gardasil due to the widespread side effects reported.  Recall that Merck, the manufacturer of Gardasil, MMR, varicella and other vaccines, hid the lethal side effects of Vioxx for nearly five years, paying out $4.85 billion US dollars to settle 27,000 injury claims. FDA scientist David Graham, MD estimated that 39,000 to 61,000 excess deaths occurred due to Vioxx.

1. c) Danish physician and anthropologist Peter Aaby, and the group he leads, have been studying vaccines in Africa for 40 years. After completing hundreds of vaccine studies, they have concluded that the DPT vaccine increases infant mortality, by 100% or more, in African infants.  His group notes, “All studies of the introduction of DTP have found increased overall mortality.”  You may be interested in his eye-opening talk at a recent Symposium on Scientific Freedom in Copenhagen.

The Best Defense is a Good Offense

Facing these challenges, in 2019 the vaccine industry seized its opportunity from a prolonged US measles outbreak. A flawlessly conducted PR campaign conducted for the industry helped ram through legislation for enforced vaccine mandates in the US, and now the industry is repeating the strategy in Canada.

In the wake of the 2015 Disneyland measles epidemic, coupled with millions of dollars in lobbying fees and direct donations to legislators, California’s legislators voted to end non-medical vaccine exemptions. And this month, they are considering a bill that would tighten the granting of medical exemptions.

One of the unforeseen consequences of California’s vaccine mandate was the wholesale withdrawal of children from public schools.  California’s Department of Public Health reported that the number of homeschooled, unvaccinated kindergartners soared from 2,000 to nearly 7,000 between 2016 and 2018, following California’s vaccine mandate.

Is New Brunswick prepared for a significant reduction in the number of children who attend public school?

2. You have been assured that “Vaccines are safe and effective.”

It has a reassuring ring, but conveys nothing.  In fact, each vaccine is very different from every other.  Generally, we know something (but not enough) about the benefit, but only a little about the harms of different vaccines.  According to the Institute of Medicine, “The process of anticipating, detecting, and quantifying the risks of rare adverse events following immunization presents an enormous challenge.”  Like drugs, each is appropriately used when the benefit outweighs the risk. Because vaccines are given to healthy people to prevent disease, they should be even safer than drugs.

The initial effectiveness of the different childhood vaccines ranges from about 40% to 93%.  Immunity then wanes over time.

There is a big problem at the heart of vaccine safety assessment:  adverse event information is cloaked in secrecy, withheld from physicians and the public by public health agencies.  Undesirable results are massaged or falsified until they appear acceptable.  Because this is hard to believe, I will give you 3 important examples of CDC’s data manipulation.

1.  Thomas Verstraeten was a young physician on a CDC fellowship who in 1999 studied the statistical relationship between cumulative amounts of thimerosal (mercury) infants received from vaccines and neurological illnesses. His results–including that children exposed to the highest levels of mercury from vaccines after birth had 7 times the level of autism as children not exposed–were so disturbing that CDC convened a private meeting of vaccine experts to discuss and manage them.  No reporters or members of the public were permitted, but a copy of the meeting transcript was leaked.  (I have provided you with an unpublished abstract obtained by FOIA showing some of Verstraeten’s data before it was massaged to remove the effect of mercury.  His published 2003 paper says, “No consistent significant associations were found between thimerosal (mercury) containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes.”  I also gave you a letter from physician Congressman Bill Weldon to Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the CDC about this data manipulation.  The issue is unresolved.  Merck was later found to have misled the public about when it removed thimerosal from infant vaccines.2.     Dr. William Thompson admitted that his group of CDC scientists was directed to destroy data in their study that linked early MMR vaccination in black males to increased rates of autism. The group met in a conference room, and put all data showing this effect into a garbage can. Thompson secretly retained a copy, and made it available to Congressman Bill Posey. The published paper denied any autism connection. Congressman Posey has called for an investigation, but none has occurred. The movie Vaxxed is about this matter.3.    Poul Thorson was a physician, CDC employee and later CDC contractor who both manipulated Danish data to remove the adverse effects of thimerosal, and stole funds from the CDC.  Thorson is currently on the Department of Health and Human Services’ list of fugitives from justice.

Despite strong evidence of scientific misconduct in these 3 CDC cases, the papers published in top medical journals with these manipulated data have never been retracted from the medical literature.  Instead, they provide foundational support for the safety of the MMR vaccine and of mercury in vaccines.  The fraudulent papers pollute the medical literature, making it impossible to discern the true adverse effects of vaccines.

Since 1995, when Congress chartered the CDC Foundation, over $800 million dollars has been donated to CDC through this Foundation vehicle.  Health Canada, Merck, Pfizer, Novartis and other vaccine companies donate to the CDC Foundation, sometimes to sponsor programs that increase sales.  Former CDC Director Gerberding became the President of Merck Vaccines after leaving CDC. Financial conflicts of interest at CDC with respect to vaccine safety have long been documented.

Vaccine safety science

It is very difficult to link an adverse reaction to a vaccination unless it occurs soon afterward.  In general, late adverse reactions are only identified as caused by vaccines if they occur many times more often than expected.

The National Academy of Sciences was chartered by Congress in 1863 to provide expert advice to government.  Congress requested the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine to conduct a series of vaccine safety studies to inform vaccine policy.

In 2011, the US National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine examined the evidence for vaccine causality for 8 vaccines and 158 possible adverse effect-vaccine combinations.  In the vast majority (85%) of cases, in the language used by the Academy, “the evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship.”  The science remains unsettled.

President Ken Shine of the Institute of Medicine/National Academy of Medicine wrote, in the US National Vaccine Plan 2013Annual Report:

“While few health problems are clearly associated with vaccines and some putative associations can be rejected based on evidence, in the majority of cases evidence was inadequate to accept or to reject a causal relationship… Confidence in vaccine safety requires more than surveillance and reporting in real time. In light of the paucity of strong conclusions about possible vaccine side effects, continued and selective investment in epidemiologic and other investigations into the risks of immunization will be necessary… About the best one can do is to estimate, based on the evidence, the probability that the frequency of an adverse event is less than a specified, low level. This may be enough for the physician who weighs the public health and personal health benefit against a very low risk, but not enough to satisfy a wary parent.

Continued, candid, and open communication is also an essential ingredient to a successful vaccine safety regime. This means more than the experts explaining the benefits and risks to parents and families. It means listening carefully to the anxieties and doubts, staying true to the strength of evidence without exaggeration or misrepresentation, and reporting fully and fairly on scientifically sound investigations into possible adverse events.“

By 2019 the winds had changed at the Academy of Medicine.  A new President, Victor Dzau, himself and some of his advisory panelists tainted with undisclosed financial conflicts of interest, dismissed the concerns of his predecessor about lack of vaccine safety evidence, signing a brief whitewash:  “Our work has validated that the science is clear–vaccines are extremely safe.”

We now know that the National Academies of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine/National Academy of Medicine has received millions of dollars from drug companies that have interest in its work. Merck has given between $5 and $10 million dollars; AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson and Johnson, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, and United Therapeutics have each given between $1 and $5 million.

Knowledge of the adverse effects due to single vaccines, combinations of vaccines, or the number of vaccines remains murky.

Canadian physicians examined the health of babies after their 12 and 18 month vaccinations.  They found an excess emergency room visit for one in every 168 babies vaccinated at 12 months with the MMR vaccine, occurring between one and two weeks later.  They concluded, “There are significantly elevated risks of primarily emergency room visits approximately one to two weeks following 12 and 18 month vaccination. Future studies should examine whether these events could be predicted or prevented.”

1300 cases of narcolepsy were caused by the 2009 swine flu Pandemrix vaccine. This particular side effect was able to be linked to the vaccine because millions of people were vaccinated simultaneously, the narcolepsy that developed was severe and required intense medical attention, the rate of narcolepsy was 10-16 times higher than expected, and vaccine oversight had been increased to evaluate new pandemic vaccines.  Canadians received a virtually identical vaccine (Arepanrix) but it was manufactured in a different facility, and by chance alone the Canadian version did not cause narcolepsy.

3. Is New Brunswick undergoing a crisis of vaccine-preventable disease?

The answer is no.  And if there was a crisis, Bill 39 would not wait to go into effect until 2021.

Measles.  As of August 3, Canada had 84 cases of measles in 2019, and no measles deaths since 2014. Surprisingly, given the media hoopla over measles, only three Americans have died from measles in the last 20 years.  The last US child death occurred in 2003, in a 14 year old after a bone marrow transplant.

In a 2011 measles epidemic in Quebec, where over 95% of the population was vaccinated, 50% of those developing measles had received 2 doses of measles vaccine.  After the Disneyland measles epidemic, it was found that 73 cases of measles (38% of those typed by CDC) were due to viruses from the measles vaccine.

Pertussis.  Canada averages one death from whooping cough per year. There are many cases, most going undiagnosed and unreported.  Some estimate a million US cases of whooping cough yearly.  This is because vaccine protection wanes rapidly. More than 80% of whooping cough cases occurred in fully vaccinated children in a recent study.

Diphtheria.  There is one case of diphtheria every two years in the US.

Mumps.  Canada reported 180 mumps cases yearly from 2011-2013.  Mumps outbreaks are a result of waning of vaccine-induced immunity.  “Data from outbreak studies showed that the odds of developing mumps increased by 10 to 27% with each year post-vaccination.”

Rubella.  All recent US rubella cases were all infected in other countries.

Polio.  There is no polio in Canada.  The last wild (natural) polio case in Canada occurred in 1977.  There have been 3 reported cases in the US since 2005, all from vaccine strains of polio.  Worldwide, there are more new polio cases due to vaccine strains that became virulent than there are due to wild polio viruses.  Last year, vaccine-derived viruses paralyzed 105 children worldwide; the wild virus just 33.

Vaccines containing live viruses, such as the MMR, Varicella, and oral polio can infect, harm and very rarely kill the recipient, especially if the child has an unknown immune deficiency.  There are extensive warnings on the MMR vaccine information sheet which I have provided you, about who should not receive the vaccine.

Although it is not usually acknowledged, vaccination is not a one-size-fits-all procedure.  According to the Mayo Clinic, “Human antibody response to measles vaccine is highly variable in the population.”  Females have more adverse reactions than males.  Gender and race influence the response.  As does heredity.  Families that have experienced a serious vaccine reaction are right to be concerned about additional vaccinations and the safety of sibling vaccination, for their family is probably at higher than average risk of a reaction.  What goes unreported is that many unvaccinated children are themselves a vulnerable group, and should not be vaccinated.  However, there are no existing standards for doctors to use to determine the risk of vaccination to most children.  So medical exemptions must be improvised, and are generally hard to come by.

4. Herd Immunity is undermined by high rates of vaccine failures

The Quebec measles epidemic I mentioned demonstrates that even a vaccination rate over 95% didn’t prevent a large measles outbreak. Herd immunity rates are based on statistical modelling, and are only projections.  The reason that 50% of measles cases occurred in vaccinated children is primary or secondary vaccine failure.  Primary vaccine failure means the vaccine never produced immunity, while secondary failure means the immunity was lost over time.

For most vaccines, primary and secondary failures go unnoticed, because children are not being exposed to most of these infections.  The infections children do get exposed to are pertussis and influenza, and then vaccine failure is obvious–because most cases of pertussis and many of influenza occur in fully vaccinated children.

5. Do unvaccinated children put immunocompromised children at risk?

The fact is that immunocompromised children are not dying from vaccine preventable diseases, and few are getting them, with the exceptions of influenza, pertussis and varicella–because vaccines for these 3 infections provide limited immunity.

Fewer than one American dies yearly from measles, mumps, rubella, polio, or diphtheria. On average, one Canadian dies from whooping cough (pertussis).  Ten Canadian children die from influenza.  One American child dies yearly from varicella (chickenpox).

You are looking at 11 child deaths per year in Canada.  Would vaccinating every child fully against whooping cough, varicella and influenza prevent these deaths? Remember, most whooping cough and varicella patients are fully vaccinated.  And while the immunity generated in young children from flu shots varies yearly, it is usually less than 50%.

Herd immunity cannot be achieved for whooping cough or influenza because neither vaccine is adequate.  Pertussis vaccine immunity wanes so quickly that little protection is left after 3-4 years.  Transmission to others can occur before you realize you have influenza or pertussis.

Even if 100% of Canadians were vaccinated, these diseases would continue to circulate within the vaccinated and the unvaccinated population.

Varicella cannot be eradicated both because the vaccine is not optimal (85% efficacy), waning occurs, and because the virus stays in your body permanently after vaccination or infection.  Most immunocompromised children who develop varicella infections do so from virus already resident in their bodies.  The claim that vaccine exemptions put immunocompromised children at risk was invented by PR firms, with no evidence behind it.  In fact, immunocompromised children are at more risk from the shedding of live viruses in vaccines by other children who were recently vaccinated.

6. Sufficient population immunity appears to exist

While vaccination rates reported in New Brunswick are low, non-medical exemption rates are also low:  2%.  The likeliest explanation for lack of epidemics despite low recorded vaccination rates is inadequate recordkeeping.

In Maine, with similar demographics, vaccination rates for each of the required vaccines is about 95%. Exemption rates vary by vaccine.  Only 1% of US children receive no vaccines.  Up to 25% receive some, but not every available vaccine.

7. Should we be concerned about vaccine quality and origin?

Vaccines are biologics.  According to the FDA, “Most biologics are complex mixtures that are not easily identified or characterized.”  Translation:  vaccines contain unknown substances, unknown even to the FDA and Public Health Agency of Canada.  This makes them challenging to regulate.  The FDA relies on vaccine manufacturers to provide accurate data about each step in the manufacturing process.  When a problem occurs during manufacturing, the FDA expects to be told and expects the manufacturer to recall affected lots of vaccine when necessary.  I have provided you information on 5 vaccine recalls or other issues in Canada since 2012.

See this, this, this, this and this.

 

The quality of manufactured drugs has been diminishing.  Over 80% of the drugs sold in the US are manufactured overseas, mostly in India and China.

The FDA usually redacts information about the locations where vaccine ingredients are manufactured. I am under the impression that at present, US vaccine products are made in Europe and North America.

However, the World Health Organization has a system for approving (or “prequalifying”) vaccines made in underdeveloped countries for sale internationally–generally to other underdeveloped countries.

Large multinational pharmaceutical companies, such as Sanofi, which has vaccine manufacturing facilities in both India and China, are manufacturing vaccines in underdeveloped nations.  China and India each have over 20 vaccine manufacturers.  It is probably only a matter of time before vaccines manufactured in countries known for inadequate government monitoring of pharmaceuticals are being used in Canada and the US.

China experienced vaccine scandals in 2016 and in  2018:

“In July, China experienced its “worst public health crisis in years” as stated by South China Morning Post. Chinese vaccine maker Changsheng Biotechnology was found to have fabricated production and inspection records and to have arbitrarily changed process parameters and equipment during its production of freeze-dried human rabies vaccines. Furthermore, substandard diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) vaccines produced by Changsheng Biotechnology were administered to 215,184 Chinese children; and 400,520 substandard DPT vaccines produced by Wuhan Institute of Biological Products were sold in Hebei and Chongqing. On July 25, China’s drug regulator launched an investigation into all vaccine producers across the country. Fifteen people from Changsheng Biotechnology, including the chairman, have been detained by Chinese authorities.

This latest vaccine scandal follows on from a series of fake and substandard food and drugs issues in China. As a result, many parents have lost faith in the vaccine system.”

8. Influenza, and the Fluad vaccine

Influenza is a disease that affects from 3-20% of the population yearly.  There were 6515 reported influenza deaths in the US in 2017, during the decade’s worst outbreak.  CDC uses mathematical models to estimate influenza deaths, and the estimates include deaths from other heart and lung conditions, in people who had influenza. These estimates usually range from 30-50,000 deaths yearly, related to influenza.  Ninety percent of influenza deaths occur in those over age 65.  While most people over 65 receive annual flu vaccines in the US, this age group is less likely to develop immunity from the vaccine, compared to younger people.  Overall, flu vaccine effectiveness averages about 40%, according to the CDC.

Each year, influenza vaccines are newly made to contain the dominant strains predicted for that season.  Because of the need to make different products each year, and make them rapidly available for each flu season, they are not tested to the same extent as other vaccines.  Clinical trials to test for safety are not required for yearly changes to flu vaccines.  Effectiveness trials are impossible to do prior to mass use.  Yearly flu vaccines are “grandfathered in,” although they are checked for manufacturing defects.

In 2009, a GSK vaccine for pandemic flu caused 1300 cases of narcolepsy in Europe, mainly in adolescents and young adults. The European Medicines Agency failed to warn the public of this problem in a timely manner, leading to extended use of the problematic vaccine.

Possible reasons this occurred include the revolving door between vaccine manufacturers and regulators, the abbreviated safety testing of flu vaccines, and the liability protection given to manufacturers by governments.  The episode provides a warning that regulators’ first priority may not always be the public’s welfare.

The response of elders to flu vaccines is particularly poor.  Two strategies are being tried to enhance vaccine immunity in this age group.  The first involves using higher concentrations of antigens in the vaccines.  The second involves using novel adjuvants, which are substances that provide increased stimulation to the immune system.  Potentially this can improve immunity, but it might increase inflammation and autoimmune illnesses.

The Fluad vaccine is the only influenza vaccine in Canada and the US to contain a novel, immune-boosting adjuvant.  The adjuvant is called MF59 C1.  Originally produced by an Italian company, the adjuvant-containing flu vaccine was licensed for elders only, in Italy, in 1997.  It was not licensed in the US until 2015, for elders only, presumably because they were less likely to experience complications from the vaccine’s additional immune stimulation.  I have been unable to find unbiased literature on the MF59 adjuvant or the Fluad vaccine, as all the research has been sponsored by its manufacturers (Sclavo, then Chiron, then Novartis, and now Sequirus).

Fluad was licensed for elders in Canada in 2011.  The government of Ontario’s fact sheet on the vaccine makes clear that by 2016 it was still not known whether the excess immune stimulation it provides actually improved protection against the flu:

“How well does the Fluad® vaccine protect against influenza? Influenza vaccines may decrease hospitalizations and deaths among elderly individuals. According to the product monograph, Fluad® produces a higher immune response in elderly individuals when compared to other influenza vaccines without an adjuvant. The higher immune response may indicate that Fluad® works better than unadjuvanted vaccines, although this is not known for certain.”

Nor is it known how safe the adjuvanted vaccine is.  It causes about 15% more local reactions than nonadjuvanted flu vaccines, but we don’t know if it causes more serious, or later onset, adverse reactions.

FluWatch reports that 10 Canadian children died from flu last season, 8 aged 2-4 years old.  Nine children died the prior season.  Canada and the US recommend yearly flu vaccines for all eligible children aged over 6 months, while most of Europe does notrecommend flu vaccine for healthy children.  Very young children generate a poor immune response to current influenza vaccines.  But few die from the disease.

Canada’s National Advisory Committee on Immunizations reviewed the literature on the use of the Fluad, MF59-adjuvanted vaccines in infants and young children in 2015.  From their report’s Executive Summary:

“Severe reactions are rare, but several of the reviewed studies were too small to detect clinically significant but rare adverse events. In particular, the safety information is limited for ATIV (adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines) in children with immunodeficiencies and other chronic illnesses…

There are insufficient data to assess whether ATIV (adjuvanted flu vaccine) is more effective than UTIV (unadjuvanted flu vaccine) or LAIV (live attenuated flu vaccine) in practice or to make an informed risk-benefit analysis.”

The reviewers also noted that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) failed to license the vaccine for European children in 2012.  The EMA report found a number of problems with the single pivotal clinical trial of Fluad in children. Furthermore, the EMA report states,

“The current application, although related to a product developed more than 15 years ago and authorized for use in the elderly, includes only one study addressing clinical vaccine efficacy.” The report concludes, “The overall benefit-risk balance of Fluad Paediatric is negative.”

Despite a) the lack of evidence of benefit, b) limited and c) unreliable safety information, d) rejection in Europe, and e) no evidence of any other country using it for children, f) let alone use in infants–in 2015 the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) licensed Fluad pediatric for use in infants and babies aged 6 months to 2 years. 

It seems that Canada’s youngest children have been selected to serve as the unwitting guinea pigs in a massive immune stimulation experiment of this novel-adjuvanted vaccine.

What was the PHAC thinking?  Will Canadian children serve as experimental subjects, without their parents’ knowledge, for additional vaccines selected for them by their public health agency?

If vaccine exemptions are removed, how can they be protected from public health officials whose primary allegiance may not be to the public?

Public health officials use the mass media, medical professionals and the levers of government to encourage, exhort and cajole vaccinations.  Their conduct with the Fluad pediatric vaccine has shown they must not be given the power to compel.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Anthrax Vaccine.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Have an experimental drug that needs rapid authorization from the FDA in order to be sold to the masses? Looking to siphon billions of dollars from the U.S. taxpayer for your newfound pharmaceutical product? In today’s America, you can buy yourself a former FDA commissioner, and use the public-sector private-sector revolving door system of corruption to impose your will on the American public, and make a windfall for your executives and shareholders in the process.

That appears to be the exact strategy utilized by Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and the company that founded Moderna, which have rostered a series of former top ranking government officials into top positions in their respective organizations.

Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, the ultimate personification of the revolving door mechanism, sits on the board of Pfizer. The frequent Pfizer-sponsored CNBC guest also maintains several thousand shares of Pfizer stock, and he is compensated well into the six figures on an annual basis. Gottlieb earns millions from his continually increasing board appointments to a plethora of pharmaceutical and healthcare companies.

The pandemic profiteer also sits on the boards of Illumina and Tempus Labs, which sell FDA-authorized COVID-19 test kits. Additionally, he sits on the board of Aetion, which has partnered with the FDA on researching COVID-19 policy.

Stephen Hahn, who led the FDA when it authorized Moderna’s COVID shots, recently took an executive level post with Flagship Pioneering, the company that launched Moderna. Flagship holds 20 million shares of Moderna stock, which as of October 16, 2021, is valued at $6.5 Billion. They earned $1.4 billion through the sale of Moderna stock earlier this year.

There is virtually no separation between Flagship and Moderna. Flagship CEO Noubar Afeyan, who co-founded Moderna and owns over 2 million shares of Moderna stock, is the current chairman of Moderna. Additionally, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel is listed as a Flagship “special partner.”

In September, Hahn was appointed the Chief Medical Officer of Flagship-launched YourBio health, a company that sells COVID-19 testing kits.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

In the psychedelic sixties, Timothy Leary famously advised the baby boom generation to “Turn on, tune in, and drop out.” Today in the grip of a worldwide pandemic of fear and control, our personal devices are always on; and we’re paradoxically being forced to drop out of previously normal social, cultural and economic life, while being practically forbidden to opt out of a medical mafia squeeze play. Interpersonal encounters are masked or virtualized, as we Zoom in to learn more about what is really going on. The results of that nano-scale research gives us pause, and our balancing response is to zoom back out, to gain a wider perspective on the big picture.

What is the problem, at the larger levels of scale? And what are the overarching solutions that bring accountability to the global players and their microscopic miscreations?

Truth and Reconciliation for the Last Nations

All humans are treated now like the First Nations have been: under subjugation, assimilation or eradication, forcibly removed from our former, traditional ways of life. In the current era of global takeover, we live in the Last Nations–conquered and colonized this time by bureaucratic fiat and technocratic sleight of hand, into the New World Order (rebranded as the Great Reset).

The last five days of September were designated as Truth and Reconciliation Week, to remember the historical crimes of physical and cultural genocide against the original peoples of North America. When will we recognize and take action against the new crimes perpetrated upon all the peoples of the world by a synthetic totalitarianism?

It doesn’t matter if you live in Lithuania or Australia, Canada or Indonesia. The WHO and the CDC rule over all, beholden to Gates and the WEF, bent on a transhuman agenda of depopulation with survivors locked into a digital control grid.

With Nationalism decried as a relic, Freedom denigrated as selfish, Truth and Science announced by decree, Health wholly captured by bioweaponry, how can there be Reconciliation with our precious humanity?

Where are the memorials to our children in masks, our elders dying alone, our healthcare workers and military summarily terminated, our businesses commandeered to enforce an evidence-free apartheid?

Where the acknowledgment of sovereignty never surrendered? Where the apology for unceded bodily autonomy? Where the punishments and reparations for the lives cut short or irreparably diminished by force of policy? And by what authority is such policy declared and implemented?

Lacking such genuine authority, the ruling elite manufacture it and mass produce it through the media channels they own. The liturgy is then delivered from on high, meant to be digested like the sacramental body and blood of the god of love they killed in our name. “They” are the high priests of what former mainstream journalist Matt Taibbi calls The Cult of the Vaccine: “The only way to avoid the certain evil of audiences engaging in unsupervised pondering over information was to eliminate all possibility of subtext, through a new communication style that was 100% literal and didactic. Everyone would get the same news and also be instructed, often mid-sentence, on how to respond.”

When the cult are instructed to “Follow the Science,” it is code for the new fundamentalist religion.

Follow the Science of. . . God?

‘“There’s people out there who aren’t listening to God and what God wants.” Gov. Hochul added that the vaccine “is from God to us and we must say, thank you, God,” and said to her “smart” vaccinated supporters: “I need you to be my apostles.”’ —New York Governor Kathy Hochul

‘None of this makes any sense except as a means for control and cultural dominance.. . . What conceivable argument can be mounted to justify this mass firing of public health care workers in the name of protecting the public health? If you had to seek medical care at a hospital and are fully vaccinated — and thus, according to President Biden, face a “very low risk” of serious illness from COVID — would you rather be cared for by unvaccinated doctors and nurses who have worked in that facility for years, or National Guard officers or recently graduated students or retired people with “lapsed” medical licenses who, in a slapdash and manic way, have been tossed into the hospital to satisfy Gov. Hochul’s desire to punish the disobedient? Again, if you are vaccinated, why would you regard unvaccinated doctors and nurses as a risk to you? —Glenn Greenwald, An NBA Star and New York’s Governor Show That Liberal COVID Discourse is Devoid of Science

See also: One-World Scientism and its “Trust the Science” Refrain

The Silent Forty Percent

Both Clif High and Mattias Desmet speak of that middle section of the population, around forty percent, with the remaining sixty percent split into those whose minds are made up, either under the spell of the mass hypnosis or irrevocably awake to the gigantic con.  So far the “silent majority” in the middle are swayed by coercion, mass media, and peer pressure to remain silent while appearing to go along with the ruling agenda. Their loyalty is fickle, though; if presented with enough reality checks, their weight can shift rapidly into resistance.

How to leverage that shift, against the weight and force of Big Tech-Media-Pharma-Government? Mattias sketches a path forward blazed by Solzhenitsyn, urging our commitment to speak out while we still can. That courage helps to break the spell of the fake consensus; to share a counternarrative; and to inspire others to stand up for themselves too.

The overall field of battle (or divine play, as Krishna might put it) might be seen in a progression or sequence covering the following four critical areas. We start with a shared sentiment of common ground, empathy with all our fellow humans. They will start to take notice as more and more are betrayed in their formerly blind trust in authority–as lies surface, fraud is exposed, conspiracy proved.

Then the common fear of the virus is likely to shift to a new, more worthy object of anxiety: another increasingly visible enemy, those who engineered this planned exercise–an excuse for, and distraction from, the real agenda. The centrist population needs to realize it’s the rulers who fear their weight of numbers, as the ranks swell to damn the great reset to the technodystopian hell it was hatched from. Instead we set a renewed path to a natural future, a greater reset to core human ethics.

In the last few days I have noticed a number of formerly progressive, mainstream, or middle-of-the-roaders, with large platforms, reputations and followings, suddenly speaking out in clear and ringing truth about the unholy deception that has captured our world. These include former Guardian and Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald, former Rolling Stone contributing editor Matt Taibbi, former Occupy voice Charles Eisenstein, and former democratic Congresswoman and Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, joining ranks of already outspoken experts and whistleblowers in all fields.

Charles Eisenstein in particular has leaped several mountain ranges over from his previous carefully guarded prevarications to appease his fan base and stick to his classical liberal, aesthetic–spiritual stance. In the last few months he has moved to confront issues of intolerance in speech, and misrepresentation of science. With his most recent post, “The Rehearsal is Over,” the gauntlet is thrown down. No more mister nice guy, this is Arjuna after his chariot chat with his blue god Krishna, riding into virtuous battle, not for victory but for justice: “God says, ‘Show me that you want a more beautiful world enough to actually risk something with no guarantee. Then you will see results beyond all reckoning.”

More timely and eloquent inspiration follows:

‘We are fighting for the end of the time of dictating each other’s choices, thinking I know better than you what you should be doing.

‘Bravery is not a personal achievement; it is a community function. It is a contagion. It is a mutual awakening.

‘It is the moment of truth over consequences.

‘If I am not brave, what reason have I to hope others will be? Courage and cowardice both are contagious. My choice establishes a principle of human nature. It declares not only who I am, but what a human being is. and what the world shall be. Each choice is therefore a prayer. Our choices scaffold divine creation.

‘That is why synchronicity so often congeals around bravery. Synchronicity is the snapping of the laws of probability as reality shifts to align with brave choices.’

Accountability: Who Will Enforce Justice?

In the TV series Pillars of the Earth, based on the historical novel by Ken Follett, the long-disputed title of Earl of Shiring is finally awarded to its rightful heir. But there’s a condition: the Crown will not enforce the transition from the current usurper. The rightful new earl will have to raise his own army to take what is his.

As it happens, the abused young wife of the false earl orders Shiring’s guard to stand down, and a one-on-one duel to the death settles the matter in favor of the righteous. But what about now? With lawless decrees ruling our lives, what recourse do we have to a return of power to the people?

Political insider Maria Zack discusses the situation–“the shadow government is being taken down”–with Canadian natural law proponent Christopher James (A Warrior Calls), outlining alternative means including military tribunals and local courthouse actions under common law. Supporting evidence is provided in data reveals such as the Pandora Papers and forensic audits of the US election.

According to Zack, the pyramid of power that needs to be called to account is headed by thirty-eight big cheeses calling the shots, including the usual suspects: Soros, the Pope, the Queen, the Rothschilds, Gates, Buffett, Fink, Bezos, Bloomberg, and Munger, to name a few. Not coincidentally, they have profited most from the reset they have orchestrated:  “The world’s billionaires gained $3.9 trillion while working people lost $3.7 trillion in 2020”(Colin Todhunter, The Fear Pandemic and the Crisis of Capitalism).

Below them, also operating in the shadows to carry out their agenda, are the agencies and operatives of the Deep State. Below them the bag carriers–politicians and NGOs–deliver these orders to the compliant masses.

While such an overview paints a large target easy to call “conspiracy theory,” the purveyors of the real-time conspiracy make no apology for their plan to save the planet. . . from us. “The World Economic Forum. . . far from being “shadowy” publish all of their plans on a glossy website and upload talks and panel discussions from their glitzy annual meetings at Davos” (Ian Jenkins). More detailed expositions of the intended global makeover are readily available in such critiques as 2030 Unmasked and The Viral Panopticon: Public Health’s Prison Planet.

As of this writing, the long overdue arrests and negotiations, plea bargaining and reparations, are yet to be forthcoming. In the meantime, Zack has simple but powerful advice: “Remove fear; remove the mask; go out and live your life.”

The Antidote

Metaphysical practitioner Rachel Elnaugh provides a truly zoomed out focus with her esoteric understanding of the Dark Forces playing out the end game on planet Earth, by whatever names we choose to call them: evil, satanic, ahrimanic (Steiner), reptilian (Icke), archontic (Gnostic), or wetiko (Paul Levy). I will summarize her presentation here.

The door (or floor) of human experience that offers  protection from these lower-dimension, parasitic, nonhuman energies/entities is made porous with cracks and leaks from trauma, especially in childhood.

How is trauma induced? The primal emotions when under threat, motivating the fight or flight response, are anger and fear, respectively. When parents and schools prevent either response, the emotional energy is trapped, frozen, and becomes toxic. Stress without outlet or expression becomes chronic; meanwhile emotions are shut down. The individual learns not to feel, and thus to become immune to empathy or compassion. Those most lacking in these attributes excel in politics or the military, banking or business, rising to the top, where they can exercise control over others without conscience.

Unresolved trauma creates vulnerability to triggering, and to traumatizing others (“Hurt people hurt people”). One type of response is to be “stuck on,” and to release the energy aggressively on others: the Persecutor. The other response is “stuck off”–depressive, anxious, fearful: the emotions of the Victim.

The antidote to this codependent trap is to recognize and transmute our unresolved trauma. Until then, as Jung so well expressed (“When a situation is not made conscious, it happens outside, as fate”), life will keep throwing at us reiterations of childhood trauma so we can learn to heal.

A third, and most dangerous role in the psychodrama, is the Rescuer, who can play both the other roles and has to confront their own trauma history that has auditioned them into the drama. Nevertheless, myth paints the rescuer as the hero defending a people suffering from an enemy. Government deliberately has seized this role, with the script, “To save humans at risk from the invisible virus, I will keep you safe!”

The mass of us, already full of unresolved trauma ratcheted a hundredfold since March 2020, have responded with fear and fled the realm of common sense, giving the so-called rescuer our absolute trust.  The script and roles were well rehearsed already, since the Covid drama is a play within a larger play. The Climate Change Agenda premises a global threat to humanity, with the WEF and its Green New Deal as savior. An even longer-running hit play using the same three-character script stars a cast of Sinners, an angry and vengeful God, and a Messiah.

Unfortunately, the hero/rescuer–whether our governments, the globalists, or the Christian Church–by playing the game of masks instead of unveiling the dark forces of trauma, only perpetrates more of it, up to and including genocide.

Gabor Maté advises changing the script to healing by taking focus off the trigger, and turning it to the “unexploded bomb” of trauma held inside. Doing so widens our “window of tolerance” to influences of the outside world without getting triggered into fear or anger.

Instead, to heal our own trauma, we can pause to choose our response instead of unconsciously reacting to potential triggers. The antidote is stillness, meditation, spaciousness, slowing down. Music, harmony, dancing and singing all help to lift energies into harmonic resonance with nature. A healthy diet, pure water and fresh air (unmasked) likewise lift our vibration to a state of balance. Smiling, laughter, and humor also contribute to healing.

Wise words from the ages, to keep us zoomed out to our full potential, and zoomed in to what is holding us back within our own psyche. Tessa Lena adds another voice to summarize the challenge and opportunity before us:

‘The broken individual feels the need to develop “rules” for others to establish “predictability” and keep things under control. It’s all neurotic — but then, if he manages to interest others in this curious experiment or succeeds at scaring them, we end up with a world in which Eric Schmidt of Google and Klaus Schwab of the WEF decide what’s “good for us,” as we comply. We end up with a dictatorship of the people who forgot how to dance.

‘I believe that in some existential way, what’s happening right now is a result of that one day in the old village when that one guy succeeded at tricking or scaring everybody else out of their innate sense of self-love and self-trust. It’s that one day, many centuries later. And I feel that perhaps, we can revisit that choice, knowing what we know today.

‘We can decide, today, to trust ourselves and the universe and to stand by our instincts. We can make the move and forgive the confusions of the past and leave them behind. We can reach out to the universe, ask for help and guidance, and pray for healing and love from the heart. We can pray as free participants of the dance, not as scared servants.’

Further research: Quarantine Reading List

*

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.

Nowick Gray is a writer, editor, and researcher from British Columbia, Canada. This article first appeared online in The New Agora. Nowick is the author of a new book of essays, Metapolitical: Practicing Our Human Future.

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

A global supply chain crisis is brewing, leading to a full-spectrum shortage of essential items. This is the result of mass centralization, where policies are dictated and synchronized by the aristocrats of the New Normal. The coming years will be marked by extreme socioeconomic turbulence. 

The world is reportedly facing an “everything shortage” where essential goods are getting harder, farther, and more time-consuming to find. These shortages affect the entire gamut of the social pyramid structure. The typical production to delivery cycle is repeatedly hammered by a macabre musical chair of woes in tune with Murphy’s Law: “Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.”

If the problem is not a lockdown, then it is a dearth of raw materials.

If ports are ready to unload raw materials and finished products, then truckers are unavailable to pick them up. If truckers are available, ports are unable to process freights.

Alternately, the problem could be an acute power or fuel shortage. Coronavirus restrictions worldwide have also led to a shortage of essential labour, ranging from garbage collectors to pilots. Under the pyramidical hierarchy of the New Normal, only the capstone representing the Top 0.1% is truly detached and thriving.

The long-festering supply-demand disequilibrium entered a point of no return when the coronavirus pandemic was declared in March 2020. A mass of freight ships bobbing aimlessly off the coast of China is now joined by a similar armada along US coasts. A container that cost $2,500 before the pandemic now commands a hefty $25,000 for the same load. Imagine the snowballing costs to the consumer?

Everything is now conveniently blamed on Covid, with causations and fearmongering reaching epically absurd proportions.  Australia locked down the entire city of Perth (population 2 million plus) after discovering a single new coronavirus case in late January. Nearly eight months later, another single case resulted in the lockdown of the capital city of Canberra (population 400,000 plus). This insanity is just the tip of the Covid iceberg.

Australia is arguably the most locked-downed nation on earth. More ominously, it is also one of the world’s primary food baskets. After 18 months of socioeconomic disruptions, its agricultural exports are headed for a slump. The situation is worse elsewhere. Food inflation is already at a 10-year high in the United States, with prices in September notching a 32.8% increase on a year-on-year basis.

Scarcities and inflation herald a variety of social woes. An epidemic of organized shoplifting, for instance, has emerged as a $45 billion industry in the United States. This poses an additional whammy to the US retail sector, which is still reeling from the George Floyd riots and coronavirus restrictions. Amazon, au contraire, is doing nicely for itself. This is where goods stolen by day are e-tailed by night.  Lunatic Woke policies in the US also ensure that serial shoplifters are routinely released – often on the same day – to presumably expedite the bankruptcy of established retail outlets, particularly the small and medium-sized ones.

All the Black Swans, bred specifically for the Great Reset, are coming home to roost. Ripple effects from China’s Evergrande real estate debacle, involving debts of $305 billion no less, have impacted Sweden’s electric vehicle sector. Our global dominoes are set to cascade.

A collapse of Evergrande’s magnitude requires a well-executed whole-of-systems response. However, China is facing highly disruptive power outages due to poor foresight and a global coal crunch.  Recent floods in the coal-rich Shangxi province will likely aggravate matters further. A global energy crisis is already spreading from Brazil to India. As Germany may soon learn at great costs to its industries and society, going green without retaining a robust fossil fuel infrastructure is simply myopic. With winter approaching, the need to operationalize Nord Stream 2 becomes more urgent than ever. Behind the scenes, however, bureaucrats in Brussels remain clueless.

There are some energy-related details to ponder in this context. Will EU authorities prioritize winter electric heating over electric cars that are supposedly green and climate-friendly? Smart meters within smart grids are supposed to resolve these cascading binary choices but not so in a world “designed by clowns” and “supervised by monkeys” – to paraphrase a Boeing engineer’s depiction of the recent 737 Max fiasco. That scathing pronouncement seems lost on the aviation sector as vaccination mandates are forcing out a good number of skilled personnel, including pilots. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki deemed these mandates “good for the economy“.

It is quite ironic that pilots must get inoculated in order to ferry the aristocrats of the New Normal who are exempted from such trivialities. If critical staff shortages persist in the airlines industry, accompanied by one or two aviation disasters, the global supply chain may simply fold.

But the biblical-type woes do not end here. Experts and leaders are regurgitating the prospects of a “very dark winter” ahead. The solution predictably is mass vaccination and booster shots. Now, that should solve our global coal crisis, mass floods, growing hunger, real estate bubbles, shoplifting sprees and even climate change ad nauseum.

Bill Gates, the world’s most foremost authority on pandemics and vaccines, opines that the world is not ready for “next pandemic.” The man has prophesied; it therefore must happen. Hopefully, this new outbreak would not be accompanied by pesky curative claims over cheap generics like hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), Ivermectin or that impressively-trialled green chiretta herb in Thailand.

According to Gates, proper preparedness should include the ability to make a vaccine in “100 days” and manufacture enough for the entire world in the “next 100 days after that”. One wonders if Gates knows anything about product development. Vinyl toys, for example, take 4-6 months to progress from design to production phases. Creating and deploying a universal nostrum for a new disease in 100 days is simply preposterous (Covid vaccines are the “miraculous” exceptions). The human body, with too many unknown unknowns, is way more complex than vinyl toys.  Even crappy operating systems take years to develop – that too after scuppering the prospects of worthier alternatives!

If Gates’ science appears in dire need of some patches and updates, a pliant media can help along by flipping nonsense into facts as usual. The blame for emerging global crises – from food inflation to climate change – can be squarely laid on the unvaccinated. Call it the Coronapsychosis Effect.

One may reasonably argue that Gates was referring to a centralized global response to new pandemics. On paper, this may speed up the discovery of a remedy. But mass centralization never quite worked for the communist regimes of yore. It only strengthened the hands of dictators and the nomenklatura. Wealth and power today are similarly centralized in the hands of a few who, in turn, dictate and synchronize policies everywhere. Their only concern is wealth fractionation and the preservation of their class; not the fallouts of their machinations.

Brace yourselves for the next phase of the Great Reset.

*

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

This article was originally published on RT Op-Ed.

Dr. Mathew Maavak is a Malaysian expert on risk foresight and governance.

Featured image is from Unsplash / John Cameron

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The CDC and the FDA claim that we can safely ignore the huge spike in event rates reported to the VAERS system this year (this is the official adverse event reporting system relied on by the FDA and CDC to spot safety signals). In their view, there is “nothing to see” in the death chart below. They claim that the propensity to report (PTR) is much higher this year and that all the events (with the exception of a few) are all simply reporting background events that were not caused by the vaccines. 

There’s just one tiny little problem with that explanation: there is a CDC paper that proves that they are lying. Big time.

I will show below that even if we believed everything they said, it can’t explain all the deaths and severe adverse events. The data simply doesn’t fit their hypothesis. At all.

The reality is the vaccines are extremely dangerous, they kill more than they save for every age range (it’s worse the younger you are), and they should be halted immediately, not green lighted like the FDA committee just did. All vaccine mandates should be rescinded.

The CDC paper

In a nutshell, there is a paper written by five CDC authors, The reporting sensitivity of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for anaphylaxis and for Guillain-Barré syndrome, that was published a year ago in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

The paper claims that serious adverse events in the past have been under-reported by at most a factor of 8.3 (known as the under-reporting factor (URF)).

This means that in the best possible scenario, where there is full reporting (i.e., where the URF=1 and the PTR, defined as the avg URF/current URF, is 8.3), a reporting rate of serious adverse events that is 8.3X higher than the previous reporting rate for that symptom could be safely ignored as simply due to a higher propensity to report the naturally occurring rate of background events.

While theoretically you could have a URF of <1, this is unlikely since the HHS verifies all records before they are put in the database and eliminates duplicates. There are mistakes that happen but they are minor, e..g, we know of 2 gamed records out of the 1.6M VAERS reports. So the minimum URF would be 1 and it would be nearly impossible to achieve from a practical standpoint.

Here’s the problem. This year, with the COVID vaccines, there are a huge number of serious adverse events that are reported at a rate that is more than 8.3X higher than previous years. In fact, nearly every serious event I investigated was elevated from previous years by significantly more than this. I documented this in an important video on VAERS serious adverse event reports that I hope everyone will watch.

Unfortunately, none of the people at the FDA, CDC, or on their respective outside committees has ever watched that video. If they did, they would immediately realize the enormous mistakes that have been made and I’m sure take corrective action.

But cognitive dissonance prevents them from watching the video. I think the only way to force them to watch the video would be to physically strap them in a chair and put clamps on their eyes as was done in the movie “A Clockwork Orange.”

How do you explain the rates of pulmonary embolism?

The most stunning serious adverse event I found was pulmonary embolism (PE).

As I show in the video, the average annual number of reports of PE per year in VAERS for all vaccines was 1.4. So we’d expect to see at most 11.6 PE events this year according to the belief system of the FDA and CDC. Well, one tiny little problem: with the COVID vaccines, there were 1,131 reports, nearly a 100-fold increase over the “best case” scenario. Please watch the video on VAERS serious adverse event reports to see this for yourself.

Also, for those suffering from “cognitive dissonance syndrome” (this is a common affliction of people who think the vaccines are safe), the increase in reports isn’t due to increased rates of vaccination either as we explain in this paper which shows historical vaccination rates among various age groups.

In other words, even if you totally buy the bullshit argument of the FDA and CDC (which they never justified with analysis or data) that the URF=1 this year, it still means that 99% of the reports of pulmonary embolism (PE) are unexplainable. They must be caused by “something” and that something has to be very big and it has to be correlated with the administration of the vaccine because the PE reporting rate was correlated with the vaccine administration.

If these PE events weren’t caused by the vaccine, then what caused them?

Nobody can explain that. Nobody even attempts to explain it. Nobody even wants to talk about it.

But since the mainstream media and fact checkers are completely tone deaf to safety reports, they never ask the question. They never will. It would explode the whole false narrative.

We kill 15 people to maybe save 1. Are we nuts?

Furthermore, if we use the same methodology as used by the CDC in their paper to determine the actual underreporting factor for this year, but we use a much more accurate reference, we find that the best estimate for the minimum URF is 41. For less serious events you’d use a higher number since healthcare workers and consumers are far less likely to report less serious events. So using 41 is always “safe” in that it will not overestimate any event.

This means that we’ve killed well over 150,000 Americans so far, and all of those deaths had to be caused by the vaccine because there is simply no other explanation that fits all the facts. See this paper for the details. The paper also details 7 other ways that the number was validated and none of those methods used the VAERS data at all. This makes it impossible for anyone to credibly attack the analysis. Nobody wants to debate us on this.

And Pfizer’s own Phase 3 study showed that we save only 1 COVID death for every 22,000 people we vaccinate (you have to see Table S4 in the supplement to learn that 2 people died from COVID who were unvaccinated and 1 person died from COVID who got the vaccine, so a net savings of 1 life).

We have fully vaccinated almost 220M Americans which means we may save an estimated 10,000 lives from COVID per the Pfizer study which is the most definitive data we have (since “real scientists” ONLY trust the data in the double-blind randomized controlled trials).

Yet the VAERS data shows we killed over 150,000 Americans from the vaccine to achieve that goal.

In other words, we killed 15 people for every COVID life we might save.

But it’s worse than that because the Pfizer study was done pre-Delta. The Pfizer vaccine was developed for Alpha variant and is less effective against Delta. So our numbers are even more extreme.

This means of course that the FDA, CDC, and their outside committees are all incompetent in their ability to spot safety signals. They couldn’t even spot the death safety signal. It also means that the vaccine mandates are immoral and unethical.

Inconvenient truth: vaccine-induced myocarditis is neither rare or mild

When we apply the proper URF to the myocarditis data, we find that myocarditis goes from a “rare” event to a common event.

Using data from the CDC and applying the correct URF, for 16 year-old boys, the rate of myocarditis is 1 in 317 as we can see from this slide from our All you need to know deck. That’s not rare. That’s a train wreck.

Also, as far as the myocarditis being “mild” that’s bullshit too. According to the cardiologists I talked to such as Peter McCullough, there is no such thing as mild myocarditis. Anytime you have an event that puts a teenager in the hospital, that’s problematic. In fact, as we show in All you need to know, troponin levels can rise to extreme levels and stay elevated for months. Troponin is a marker of heart damage. Unlike a heart attack, the levels are much higher and they stay elevated for much longer. The damage that is done is usually permanent and it may lead to loss of life within 5 years. Of course nobody knows the death rate in 5 years. We’ll find out in 5 years. Our kids are enrolled in the clinical trial of this by getting vaccinated, but we don’t notify the parents of this. And the kids are clueless because the doctors tell them it is safe. They believe the doctors. The doctors believe the CDC. And the CDC was lying. And now the CDC simply doesn’t want to talk to us about it. I get that.

There are thousands of elevated events

It’s not just a few symptoms that are elevated. There are thousands of them. If they don’t kill you, you can be disabled for life, even after you use the right drugs to rid yourself of the damaging effects of the vaccines.

Here are the pills taken daily by a friend of mine (a former top nurse at one of the top medical schools in the US) who has been injured for life from the vaccine and cannot work (she’s a single mom).

Medication and supplements taken before vaccine injury: 0

Compensation received from the US government for her injuries: 0

Censorship has replaced scientific debate

This is embarrassing for everyone: the CDC, FDA, Congress, mainstream media, and the medical community. This is why nobody will debate me and my team of experts in an open debate. Because nobody wants to face the fact that they were wrong.

The public wants a debate. It’s overwhelming. I’ve never seen such a lopsided survey result in my life:

But nobody supporting the false narrative will debate us. These people are not accountable to public opinion. They are all driven by what Biden wants. And Biden wants to inject us. All of us.

TrialSiteNews made this public call for a debate; nobody responded. They even reached out to Pfizer and they refused to debate. We weren’t surprised.

So censorship and ad hominem attacks are the preferred method for disputing what I wrote in this article and my other articles because nobody is able to attack the data or our methodology in a live debate with a neutral moderator.

It’s not just me of course. There are dozens of respected scientists, doctors, and statisticians who agree with me (see slide 82 TFNT #1: COVID vaccines have killed over 200,000 Americans for a partial list).

Summary

The FDA and CDC are caught between a rock and a hard place as I explain in my video on the VAERS statistics. They cannot reveal the true URF and PTR because that would put them in hot water; it would be an admission that they got it totally wrong on the myocarditis data and everything else.

So they have to lie and claim the current URF=1 so that the PTR is maximized at 8.3. But then they have a huge problem because adverse events like death and pulmonary embolism are impossible to explain.

So they are in a no win situation. To play out the game, they avoid being questioned and simply refuse to answer. They are like a magician using misdirection. We are told to focus on all the lives being saved and to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (i.e., all the deaths and disabilities).

For more information on vaccine safety, please check out my comprehensive vaccine safety slide deck, All you need to know. I am pleased to report that it has been used successfully to reverse vaccine mandates. At least some people are listening.

The good news is far more people are speaking out and moving to the anti-vaccine camp. The numbers keep growing every day.

It will be interesting to see how long the medical community can keep up the charade. The longer they resist, the worse it will be when this house of cards comes tumbling down.

*

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

Featured image is from TrialSiteNews

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

With the expulsion of half of Russian’s diplomatic delegation to NATO, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Dimitry Peskov stated that “NATO is not an instrument of cooperation, not an instrument for interaction; it is a bloc that overall is anti-Russian in nature… These actions, of course, do not allow us to pretend there is a possibility of normalizing relations and resuming dialogue with NATO. Instead, these prospects are undermined almost completely.”

Unfortunately, with these and other belligerent actions which are propelling the world ever closer to WWIII, too many onlookers continue to see NATO as a purely American imperial institution without any regard for the actual center of global power that has sought to destroy not only Russia, but the United States itself since long before the Cold War ever began.

While this might appear paradoxical on the surface, the paradox can easily be resolved by recognizing that there have been since 1776, not one, but TWO opposing dynamics operating within America. Where only one is in alignment of the ideals of the Constitution and Declaration of independence, the other is entirely in alignment with the ideals of the British Empire and hereditary institutions from which it supposedly broke away.

One America has been defended by great leaders who are too often identified by their untimely deaths while in office, who consistently advanced anti-colonial visions for a world of sovereign nations, win-win cooperation, and the extension of constitutional rights to all classes and races both within America and abroad. The other America has sought only to enmesh itself with the British Empire’s global regime of finance, exploitation, population control and never-ending wars.

Lord Lothian and the White Man’s Burden

These two Americas frustrated Round Table controller Sir Philip Kerr (later “Lord Lothian”) in 1918 who wrote to his fellow Round Tabler Lionel Curtis explaining the “American problem” with the following words:

”There is a fundamentally different concept in regard to this question between Great Britain … and the United States …. as to the necessity of civilized control over politically backward peoples…. The inhabitants of Africa and parts of Asia have proved unable to govern themselves … because they were quite unable to withstand the demoralizing influences [i.e. their desire for modernization and independence–ed.] to which they were subjected in some civilized countries, so that the intervention of an European power is necessary in order to protect them from those influences. The American view… is quite different… The extent of this work after the war, sometimes known as the white man’s burden, will be so vast that it will never be accomplished at all unless it is shared… Yet America not only has no conception of this aspect of the problem but has been led to believe that the assumption of this kind of responsibility is iniquitous imperialism. They take an attitude towards the problem of world government exactly analogous to the one they [earlier] took toward the problem of the world war…. “If they are slow in learning we shall be condemned to a period … of strained relations between the various parts of the English-speaking world. [We must] get into the heads of Canadians and Americans that a share in the burden of world government is just as great and glorious a responsibility as participation in the war” (1)

At the time of Kerr’s writing, the British Roundtable, led by Lord Milner had just orchestrated a British coup in 1916 ousting Labour’s Herbert Asquith in order to bring Milner’s Round Table group into dominance as a shaper of imperial foreign policy at a pivotal moment in history. This coup allowed this group to define the terms of the Post-war world at Versailles).

These imperialists were obsessed with ending the dangerous spread of anti-colonial feelings from India, Ireland, Africa and other nations who firmly believed their sacrifices in WWI merited their independence. Most dangerous of all was that their sentiments were very much shared by many leading members of the American government who rejected the evil philosophical roots of the “white man’s burden”.

Sir Philip Kerr (who later took on the name Lord Lothian before becoming ambassador to America during WWII) and his Round Table gang did everything they could to control the terms of Versailles in 1919 which involved the creation of the League of Nations as a new global political/military hegemon powerful enough to destroy sovereign nation states forever under a new British-run empire.

American resistance to this agenda was so strong that Lothian, Milner and the other leaders of the Round Table soon established a new organization called the Royal Institute for International Affairs (Chatham House) in 1919 with branches soon set up across what later became the Five Eyes Anglo-Saxon nations. This network would coordinate and adapt 19th century British Imperial policy using new 20th century techniques.

In America, the Round Table decided that the name “American Institute for International Affairs” was a bit too conspicuous and chose instead the name “Council on Foreign Relations” (CFR) in 1921. Canadian, and Australian Institutes for International Affairs were created in 1928 and 1929 accordingly known as the CIIA and AIIA, but for all their efforts, the pro-nation state dynamic within America could not be broken, and the League of Nations soon collapsed along with its ambitions for a global military and banking monopoly (the latter attempt having been officially destroyed by FDR who sabotaged the London Economic Conference of 1933).

The rise of NATO in the wake of WWII and the death of anti-colonialist Franklin Roosevelt can only be understood by keeping this historical dynamic in mind.

NATO’s Birth was August 1947… NOT April 1949

It is popularly believed that NATO was set up on April 4, 1949 as a tool of the American colonialism. The truth is a bit different.

As Cynthia Chung reported in her recent paper “The Enemy Within: A Story of the Purge of American Intelligence”, 1947 was a very bad year for America as a new intelligence agency was created with the birth of the CIA, now purged of all pro-FDR influences who had formerly dominated the OSS. National Security Council paper 75 (NSC-75) was drafted calling for America to defend the possessions of the British Empire under the new Cold War operating system, leading to a new era of Anglo-American assassinations, wars and regime change.

On March 4th, 1947, the Anglo-French Treaty of Dunkirk established a collective defense pact extending itself the next year to include Belgium, France, Luxemourg and the Netherlands under the guise of the Brussels Pact. Both collective defense pacts operated outside of the UN structure but lacked the military teeth needed to give them meaning- all nations of the time having been crippled by the devastation of WWII. Only America had the military might to make this new alliance meaningful as global military force capable of subduing all resistance and usher in world government.

Escott Reid’s NATO Vision of 1947

In a memorandum called “The United States and the Soviet Union” written in August 1947, a highly influential Oxford Rhodes Scholar and radical promoter of global governance named Escott Reid, then Deputy Undersecretary of External Affairs of Canada “recommended that the countries of the North Atlantic band together, under the leadership of the United States, to form ‘a new regional security organization’ to deter Soviet expansion.”

The motive for this memorandum was to escape the Soviet Union’s veto power in the U.N. Security Council, which prevented the British Great Game from moving forward. The goal was to establish an instrument powerful enough to bring about an Anglo-American Empire as desired by Cecil Rhodes and Winston Churchill and which the League of Nations failed to accomplish.

Escott Reid extrapolated upon his thesis for the creation of such an institution at an August 13, 1947 Canadian Institute of Public Affairs (2) Conference at Lake Couchiching when he stated:

“The states of the Western world are not…debarred by the Charter of the United Nations or by Soviet membership in the United Nations from creating new international political institutions to maintain peace. Nothing in the Charter precludes the existence of regional political arrangements or agencies provided that they are consistent with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations, and these regional agencies are entitled to take measures of collective self-defence against armed attack until the Security Council has acted.”

This new anti-Soviet military organization would have the important feature of creating a binding military contract that would go into effect for all members should any individual member go to war. Reid described this intention as he wrote:

“In such an organization each member state could accept a binding obligation to pool the whole of its economic and military resources with those of the other members if any power should be found to have committed aggression against any one of the members.”

It was another year and a half before this structure gained the full support of External Affairs Minister Lester B. Pearson, and British Prime Minister Clement Atlee. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would be formed on April 4, 1949 with its headquarters on 13 Belgrave Square in London.

Escott Reid and Lester B. Pearson: Both Roundtable Oxford Men

Reid had made a name for himself serving as the first Permanent Secretary of the Canadian Institute for International Affairs (CIIA), also known as the Canadian Branch of Chatham House/Roundtable Movement of Canada under the direction of CIIA controller Vincent Massey. Massey was the protégé of racist imperialist Lord Alfred Milner and the controller of the Rhodes Scholar groups of Canada throughout a career that saw him act as Canadian Ambassador to Washington (1926-1930), Liberal Party President (1930-1935), Ambassador to Britain (1935-1945) and Head of State (aka: Governor General of Canada (1952-1959). Reid himself was the founder of the self-professed “Canadian Fabian Society” alongside four other Rhodes scholars known as the eugenics-promoting technocratic League of Social Reconstruction (LSR) in 1932, whose name changed to the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) in 1933 and again later to the National Democratic Party (NDP) in 1961 (3).

Reid spent years working closely with fellow Oxford Massey Scholar Lester B. Pearson, who himself was Vincent Massey’s assistant in London before becoming a controller of the Liberal Party of Canada.

The Racist Agenda Behind the Rhodes Trust

It is vital to remind ourselves that these networks were driven by the design outlined by genocidal diamond magnate Cecil Rhodes, who wrote the purpose for the Scholarship that was to receive his name in his First Will (1877):

“Why should we not form a secret society with but one object – the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole uncivilised world under British rule for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire…”

Later in that will, Rhodes elaborated in greater detail upon the intention which was soon to become official British foreign policy.

“The extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom and of colonization by British subjects of all lands wherein the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labor and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire continent of Africa, the Holy land, the valley of Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the Islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British empire. The consolidation of the whole empire, the inauguration of a system of colonial representation in the Imperial parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed members of the empire”

The “recovery of the United States” should seriously resonate with anyone with doubts over the role of the British Empire’s ambition to undo the international effects of the American Revolution and should also cause honest citizens to reconsider what nationalist Presidents like John F. Kennedy and Charles de Gaulle were actually struggling against when they stood up to the power structures of NATO and the Deep State. This should be kept in mind as one thinks of the British-steered networks that ran the assassinations of Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King in 1968, as well as the effective color revolution that ousted Donald Trump in our modern day.

*

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 Matthew Ehret’s Insights.

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation . Consider helping this process by making a donation to the RTF or becoming a Patreon supporter to the Canadian Patriot Review

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research

Notes

(1) Lothian to Lionel Curtis, Oct. 15, 1918, in Butler, Lord Lothian, pp. 68-70.

(2) The Canadian Institute for Public Affairs (CIPA) was created in 1935 as an affiliate to the Canadian Round Table in order to shape national internal policy while the CIIA focused upon Canada’s foreign policy. Original featured speakers were the CIIA’s Norman Mackenzie, and the eugenicist leader of the newly created CCF Party J.S. Woodsworth. It would be another 20 years before both organizations began to jointly host conferences together. Today, CIPA exists in the form of the Couchiching Conferences and their regular brainwashing seminars have been broadcast across the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) for over 70 years.

(3) Reid’s other Rhodes Scholar co-founders of the LSR were Eugene Forsey, F.R. Scott, and David Lewis. Frank Underhill was a Fabian Society member. Rhodes Scholar F.R. Scott became a leading mentor of a young recruit of the Fabian Society named Pierre Elliot Trudeau upon the latter’s 1949 return from the London School of Economics in order to work in Ottawa’s Privy Council Office. This Trudeau went on to groom himself as a CCF member before being selected to take over the Liberal Party after the ouster of pro-nationalist forces who had led the Liberals from 1935-1958.

*All Reid quotes are taken from Escott Reid, Couchiching and the Birth of NATO by Cameron Campbell, published by the Atlantic Council of Canada.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) so-called COVIDPass will use blood test markers to determine whether a person has taken the COVID injection or not.

The WEF COVID passport proposal is based on a blood sample – not documentation provided by a doctor – tied to a QR code to prove you have been vaccinated.

“Users will have their blood screened at an approved COVIDPass laboratory before being issued with a secure QR health visa code via their phone, which they can present at airline check-ins, borders, or event entrances,” the WEF promo video states.

The video goes on to insist that its COVIDPass doesn’t use “tracing technology” and that using blood test data is “100% reliable” in ensuring that “only non-infectious people” can travel across borders.

But why would it need to, if it uses vaccine markers in a person’s blood to determine vaccination status?

Click here to watch the video.

Owen Shroyer breaks down the World Economic Forum video declaring you will need to give blood samples to travel.

The WEF failed to elaborate exactly on what substance in an individual’s blood would indicate their vaccination status.

“The WEF proposal is based on a blood sample, or a blood test, to prove you have been vaccinated. The only way that is possible is if the vaccine itself carries some form of marker that permanently stays (at a cellular level) in your body which can then be detected in a blood test,” The Conservative Treehouse reported.

“If the vaccine does not leave an identifiable marker or imprint in your blood, then a blood test for vaccinated status would not be possible.”

World Economic Forum: Obviously, we are not part of some globalist plot to control the masses.

Also World Economic Forum: If you could just give us your blood so we can reduce your existence to a QR code, that would be greaaaaaaat. pic.twitter.com/WJMlTh2rSN

— Young Americans for Liberty (@YALiberty) October 15, 2021

The WEF promo also fails to mention that if one refuses to eventually get a Covid passport, their lives will effectively be cut off from society.

In August, the WEF had also entertained a biometric surveillance method that would detect an individual’s unique heartbeat signature to track and trace their movements in the name of public health.

Welcome to the Great Reset.

Watch the video here.

Owen Shroyer guest hosts The Alex Jones Show to break down the hellish reality of enforced vaccine passports as described by a Lithuanian couple living under medical martial law.

*

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 WEF video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

The Israel lobby appears to be readying for a campaign to root out leftwing academics in the UK critical of Israel’s continuing oppression of the Palestinian people – echoing its efforts against the previous leader of Britain’s Labour party, Jeremy Corbyn. 

As with the attacks on Corbyn, the assault on academia is being led by the Jewish Chronicle, a UK weekly newspaper that speaks for the most ardent supporters of Israel among the UK’s Jewish community.

The move follows the lobby’s success this month in pressuring Bristol university to sack one of its professors, David Miller, even after the university’s own investigation – headed by a senior lawyer – concluded that claims of antisemitism against Miller were unfounded.

Miller was formally dismissed on the unexplained basis that he “did not meet the standards of behaviour we expect from our staff and the University”.

The lobby has struggled to disguise its glee that, apparently fearful of bad publicity, Bristol university capitulated to a campaign of unsubstantiated claims Miller “harassed” Jewish students.

A sociologist, Miller had been at the forefront of research into the sources of Islamophobia in the UK. His work includes a detailed examination of the Israel lobby’s role in fomenting racism towards Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians.

2. The CST claim this slide showed ‘mainstream UK Jewish orgs & individuals in a network under "Israel government". In context of a lecture about Islamophobia this echoes conspiracy & dual loyalty tropes’ pic.twitter.com/cHdiRKNcYo

— David Miller (@Tracking_Power) September 13, 2019

Israel has long promoted the idea that it is a bulwark against supposed Islamic savagery and terrorism, in what it and its supporters have presented as a “clash of civilisations”.

More than a century ago, Theodor Herzl, the father of political Zionism, argued in the colonial language of the time that a Jewish state in the Middle East would serve as “a wall of defence for Europe in Asia, an outpost of civilization against barbarism”.

This was a key argument the Zionist movement used to lobby the great powers of the day, chiefly Britain, to help remove the native Palestinian people from much of their homeland so that a self-declared Jewish state of Israel could be established instead.

To this day Israel encourages the view both that it is under permanent existential threat from a supposedly irrational hatred and bigotry from Muslims and that it plays a critical, first-line role defending western values. As a consequence, the Palestinians have found themselves diplomatically isolated.

‘Tip of the iceberg’ 

Signalling the likely direction in which the lobby intends to head next, the Jewish Chronicle published an editorial this month headlined “Miller’s sacking should be the beginning, not the end”. It concluded: “Miller is not some lone voice but representative of a school of thought embedded in almost every part of academia.”

At the same time, under the headline “Miller is gone but he is only tip of the iceberg” its news pages reported that scholars in “74 separate British higher education bodies” had signed a letter of support for Miller earlier in the year, revealing “the extent of the network backing him at universities across the United Kingdom”.

Those signatories included, it noted, “a significant number representing Russell Group establishments, some of the UK’s most prestigious higher education institutions”.

The Chronicle highlighted the fact that 13 of the signatories were from Bristol university, and identified several academics by name.

The barely veiled implication is that there is an antisemitism crisis in British universities, which is being tolerated by senior staff.

The lobby used the same argument with Corbyn, claiming, despite a dearth of evidence, that he and his inner circle were indulging a supposed explosion of antisemitism within the party – with the strong implication that they were encouraging it.

The lobby’s claims were eagerly amplified by the billionaire-owned media and by a rightwing Labour party bureaucracy deeply hostile to Corbyn’s socialism.

Playbook revived 

Over the past three years, the Chronicle has had an astounding number of rulings against it from the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), the newspaper industry’s feeble, self-appointed “press regulator”.

My latest: The Jewish Chronicle has lost four libel cases and broken the editor's code 28 times in three years. Yet it's faced no sanctions from the press 'regulator' because those deceptions lay at the heart of the establishment campaign against Corbyn https://t.co/FCBP61NLRp

— Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) September 2, 2021

Most of those misrepresentations relate to the earlier campaign against Corbyn that the Jewish Chronicle played a central role in advancing. It regularly claimed that there was a plague of antisemitism on Britain’s political left.

In fact, the Chronicle appears to be reviving the playbook it and the rest of the pro-Israel lobby used against Corbyn – an outspoken supporter of Palestinian rights – that saw him and large numbers of Labour members smeared as antisemites.

Famously, the Chronicle and two other Jewish community newspapers shared a front-page editorial in summer 2018 claiming that Corbyn posed an “existential threat” to Jewish life in the UK.

This is the single most astonishing front page we’ve run at @JewishChron in my decade here. It is totally without precedent. Our paper has been published since 1841. @JewishNewsUK and @JewishTelegraph are our rivals – in name, in business, and on stories pic.twitter.com/peRUPRnqIX

— Marcus Dysch (@MarcusDysch) July 25, 2018

The editorial was published in the wake of a general election the previous year in which Corbyn fell short by only a few thousand votes from winning a majority of seats in the British parliament. With the ruling Conservative party mired in permanent crisis at that point, it looked like a rerun election was imminent.

The stakes for the lobby were high. Had he won, Corbyn looked like he might be the first leader of a major European state to recognise Palestinian statehood and impose sanctions on Israel – including a ban on arms sales – of the kind used against apartheid South Africa.

Keir Starmer, Corbyn’s successor, has been waging a war on the party’s leftwing, again using antisemitism as the pretext, cheered on by the Chronicle and others.

The paper’s misrepresentations of the Labour party – which repeatedly fell foul of press regulator IPSO – are now being pressed into service against academia.

The Jewish Chronicle’s two-step manoeuvre in the Miller case is familiar.

First it has suggested that the professor lost his job because the university concluded that his actions were antisemitic – when, in fact, all indications are that its investigation found in Miller’s favour.

And second, the paper has strongly implied that the more than 200 scholars who signed a letter to Bristol expressing concerns about Bristol’s investigation of Miller share his supposedly antisemitic views.

Placating the lobby

Just as the Chronicle sought to create the impression of a plague of antisemitism in the Labour party under Corbyn, despite the lack of any evidence, it now hopes to suggest that antisemitism is rampant in British universities.

In fact, even those who signed the letter do not necessarily share Miller’s views about Israel or its role in fomenting Islamophobia. The letter chiefly defends the principle of academic freedom and Miller’s right to pursue his research wherever it leads him, without fear of losing his job. No one signing it has to agree with all of his findings or everything he has said.

What is truly shocking is that more academics have not come to his defence – especially given the fact that the allegations against him made by the Israel lobby were discounted by Bristol university’s own investigation.

Corbyn and his inner circle chose a similar course of action to Bristol’s, seeking to placate the lobby. But Corbyn’s office found every concession they made to the antisemitism smears only fuelled the lobby’s belief that its intimidation campaign was working and that the net could be widened further.

Soon the lobby was not only claiming that widespread support on the Labour left for the Palestinian struggle against Israel’s decades of belligerent occupation was antisemitic, but that anyone who denied that it was proof of antisemitism was also outing themselves as an antisemite.

As with its attacks on Corbyn, the Chronicle’s claims against Miller are hyperbolic, with the paper reporting uncritically that members of the Union of Jewish Students at Bristol had accused the professor of “harassment, targeting, and vicious diatribe”.

In fact, this supposed “harassment” refers either to a lecture about propaganda by Miller, based on his research, that cited the Israel lobby’s promotion of Islamophobia, or to critical comments he made about Zionism and the Israel lobby in forums outside the classroom.

Miller did not harass anyone. Rather, those who identify as Zionists – for whom Israel is an abiding political priority – have chosen to take offence at his findings. They have not been bullied, intimidated or threatened, as the Chronicle implies. Their political beliefs about Israel have been challenged by Miller’s academic work.

Notably, Miller’s research also shows that conservative movements like the ruling party in the UK have played a central role in promoting Islamophobia, as several key figures in Britain’s Conservative party such as Baroness Sayeeda Warsi have repeatedly warned.

Breaking news –
Another dossier of Islamophobia within @Conservatives consisting of 25 current and former Councillors is presented to my Party today
Disgraceful that denial and lack of an enquiry has meant others are left to collate and present evidence https://t.co/0xfpN7BQOR

— Sayeeda Warsi (@SayeedaWarsi) November 12, 2019

But would Bristol have seriously investigated claims by Conservative party students, for example, that they were being “harassed” by Miller for presenting his research in class or his speaking at political events outside the classroom? Would the university have considered sacking him based on those claims? 

The question does not even need posing. The political nature of the complaints – and their threat to academic freedom – would have been instantly obvious to everyone.

And therein lies the Israel lobby’s special usefulness to the establishment. The lobby’s own highly partisan, politicised campaigns against the left can – perversely but all too often effectively – be disguised as anti-racism or the promotion of human rights.

Mounting scrutiny 

But, as the Chronicle implicitly recognises in its call for the targeting of a much wider circle of British academics, ardent Zionists are facing a much bigger challenge than a single political leader or a single professor.

They feel personally affronted as their political passion project, Israel, comes under mounting scrutiny. Like the Chronicle, Zionists hope to reverse various political developments over the past decade or two that have made it much harder for them to publicly defend Israel.

Those developments include:

• The success of Palestinian civil society’s calls since the mid-2000s for an international boycott of Israel to end its oppression of Palestinians;
• The horrifying images of Israel’s repeated military assaults on a Palestinian population in Gaza besieged by Israel for 15 years, living in what has become effectively an overcrowded, open-air prison;
• Israel’s sabotaging of a two-state solution offered by the Palestinian leadership by illegally building ever more settlements on Palestinian land, while also rejecting the alternative of a single state guaranteeing equal rights for Jews and Palestinians in the region;
• and recent reports, from Israeli and international human rights groups, clearly making the case that Israel qualifies as an apartheid state.

The Chronicle and the ardent Zionists in the UK it speaks for feared that Cobyn represented the moment when this view of Israel broke into the political mainstream. 

And now they fear that, unless drastic action can be taken, scholars like Miller will introduce a more clear-eyed discourse in academia about Israel, exposing the lobby for the anti-Palestinian racists they are.

Financial penalties 

Under threat of financial penalties from Johnson’s rightwing government, dozens of British universities have been pressured to adopt a new definition of antisemitism.

This was the prize the lobby sought against Corbyn. He was forced to accept not just the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s imprecise definition of Jew hatred but also 11 appended examples, most of which openly conflate strenuous criticism of Israel with antisemitism. The lobby has argued that any denial that these examples amount to antisemitism is also a form of antisemitism.

In detailing how Israel is an apartheid state in recent reports, both the New York-based Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem, Israel’s most respected human rights organisation, would have fallen foul of the IHRA’s claim that it is antisemitic to describe Israel as “a racist endeavour”.

Similarly, large numbers of Israeli scholars – and almost all Palestinians and their supporters – would breach the example against requiring of Israel “behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation”.

They question the notion that Israel is a democratic nation. Israeli scholars have instead termed it an “ethnocracy” because it mimics a democratic state while actually according rights and privileges to one ethnic group, Jews, that it denies to another, Palestinians.

Corbyn quickly found himself trapped by the IHRA defintion and its associated examples. Any meaningful support for Palestinians against Israeli oppression – including his past actions, before he became Labour leader – could be twisted into evidence of antisemitism.

And any argument that antisemitism was thereby being weaponised by the lobby could be similarly adduced as proof of antisemitism. It provided perfect conditions for a witch-hunt of the Labour left.

Now, the lobby hopes, the same conditions can banish scholarly criticism of Israel.

One of the early targets for the lobby’s new campaign is likely to be the University and College Union (UCU), a higher education union representing over 120,000 academics and support staff. It has so far held out against the pressure campaign.

Its resistance appears to have galvanised some academic bodies to stand their ground too. Notably, in February the academic board of University College London revolted against the adoption of the IHRA definition by the university’s governing body, calling the wording “politicised and divisive”.

A report by the UCL board in December had warned that the IHRA definition conflated prejudice against Jews with political debate about Israel and Palestine. That, it said, could have “potentially deleterious effects on free speech, such as instigating a culture of fear or self-silencing on teaching or research or classroom discussion of contentious topics”.

That is exactly what the Israel lobby, and its activists in the Union of Jewish Students that targeted Miller, will hope for. With their new war on academia – assisted by a rightwing government – they may be able to inflict as much damage on academic support for Palestinians as they did political support.

*

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 essay first appeared on Jonathan Cook’s blog: https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His books include “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jonathan-cook.net.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Professor David Miller (CAGE/YouTube)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

“Vexilla regis prodeunt Inferni” – Dante Alighieri, The Divine Comedy: The Inferno

Try to look ahead and see if you can see what’s been coming for decades.  Try to climb higher and see the beautiful things that Heaven bears, where we came forth, and once more see the stars and raise a banner of resistance to the King of Hell and all his henchmen. For they are here, and working hard as usual, and indifference will only strengthen their resolve.  Don’t be deceived by these digital demons.  They want to make you think they don’t exist.  They wish to get you to suspend your disbelief and get lost in the endless looping movie they have created to conceal their real machinations.

For we are living in a world of endless propaganda and simulacra where vast numbers of people are hypnotized and can’t determine the difference between the real world of nature, the body, etc. and digital imagery.  Reality has disappeared into screens. Simulation has swallowed the distinction between the real world and its representations.  Meaning has migrated to the margins of consciousness. This process is not yet complete but getting there.

This may at first seem hyperbolic, but it is not.  I wish to explain this as simply as I can, which is not easy, but I will try.  I will attempt to be rational, while knowing rationality and the logic of facts can barely penetrate the logic of digital simulacra within which we presently exist to such a large extent.  Welcome to the New World Order and artificial intelligence which, if we do not soon wake up to their encroaching calamitous consequences, will result in a world where “we will never know” because our brains will have been reduced to mashed potatoes and nothing will make sense. The British documentary filmmaker, Adam Philips, has said in his recent film, Can’t Get You Out of My Head: An Emotional History of the Modern World, that it’s already “pointless to try to understand the meaning of why things happen” and we will never know, but this is a nihilistic claim that leads to resigned hopelessness.  We must get such sentiments “out of our heads.”

We do not, of course, live in the middle ages like Dante.  Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to be beyond our ken.  Our imaginations have withered together with our grasp on reality.  Up/down, good/evil, war/peace – opposites have melded into symbiotic marriages.  Most people are ashamed, as the poet Czeslaw Milosz has said, to ask themselves certain questions that the seething infinity of modern relativity has bequeathed us.  Space and time have lost all dimensions; the experience of the collapse of hierarchical space and time is widespread.  For those who still call themselves religious believers like Dante, “when they fold their hands and lift up their eyes, ‘up’ no longer exists,” Milosz rightly says.  The map and the territory are one as all metaphysics are almost lost.  And with its loss go our ability to see the advancing banner of the king of hell, to grasp the nature of the battle for the soul of the world that is now underway.  Or if you prefer, the struggle for political control.

One thing is certain: This war for control must be fought on both the spiritual and political levels. The centuries’ long rise of technology and capitalism has resulted in the degradation of the human spirit and its lived sense of the sacred.  This must be reversed, as it has fundamentally led to the mechanistic embrace of determinism and the disbelief in freedom. Logical thought is necessary, but not mechanistic thought with the deification of reason.  Scientific insight is essential, but within its limitation.  The spiritual and artistic imagination that transcends materialist, machine thinking is needed now more than ever.  We emphatically need to realize that the subject precedes the object and consciousness the scientific method.  Only by realizing this will we be able to break free from the trap that is propaganda and digital simulacra, whose modi operandi are to dissolve the differences between truth and falsity, the imaginary and the real, facts and fiction, good and evil.   To play satanic circle games, create double-binds, whose intent and result is to imprison and confuse.

It is akin to asking what is the antonym to the word contronym, which is a word having two meanings that contradict each other, such as “cleave,” which means to cut in half or to stick together.  There are many such words.

“What is the opposite of a contronym?”  I asked my thirteen-year-old granddaughter, a great reader and writer raised far away from the madding crowd of flickering and looping electronic images.  To which, after thinking a few minutes, she correctly replied, “The antonym to a contronym is itself, because it has two opposite meanings. It contradicts itself.”

Or as Tweedledee told Alice: “Contrariwise, if it were so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn’t, it ain’t.  That’s logic.”

And that’s the logic used to trap a sleeping public in a collective  hallucination of media and machines.  A grand movie in which all “opposites” are integrated to tranquilize all anxieties and amuse all boredom so that the audience doesn’t realize there is a world outside the Wonderland theater.

A Place to Start

Let me begin with a little history, some fortieth anniversaries that are occurring this year.  In themselves, and even in their temporal juxtapositions, they mean little, but they give us a place to anchor our reflections.  A sense of time and the progression of developments that have led to widespread digital cognitive warfare and twisted simulations.  Widespread unreality rooted in materialist brain research financed by intelligence agencies.  Spectacles of spectacles.  As Guy Debord puts it in The Society of the Spectacle:

Where the real world changes into simple images, the simple images become real beings and effective motivations of hypnotic behavior.

In 1981, Ronald Reagan was sworn in as the U.S. President.  He was a bad actor, of course, which meant he was a good actor (or the reverse of the reverse of the reverse…) in a society that was becoming increasingly theatrical, image based, and dominated by what Daniel Boorstin in his classic book, The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America, had earlier termed “pseudo-events.”  Reagan was the personification of a pseudo-event, a walking illusion, a “benign” Orwellian persona presented to the public to conceal an evil agenda.

He was a masked man, one created by Deep-State forces to convince the public it was “morning in America again,” even as the banner of an avuncular good guy concealed, right from the start with the treacherous “October Surprise” involving the Iranian hostage crisis, an evil opening act to start the charade.  Reagan received overwhelming popular support and served two terms as the acting president.  The audience was enthralled. In crucial ways, his election marked the beginning of our descent into hell.

Halfway through his two terms, Gary Wills, In Reagan’s America: Innocents at Home, introduced Reagan as follows:

The geriatric ‘juvenile lead’ even as President, Ronald Reagan is old and young – an actor, but with only one role. Because he acts himself, we know he is authentic. A professional, he is always the amateur. He is the great American synecdoche, not only a part of our past but a large part of our multiple pasts. This is what makes many of the questions asked about him so pointless. Is he bright, shallow, complex, simple, instinctively shrewd, plain dumb? He is all these things and more. Synecdoche, just the Greek word for ‘sampling,’ and we all take a rich store of associations that have accumulated around the Reagan career and persona. He is just as simple, and just as mysterious, as our collective dreams and memories.

A few weeks after Reagan was sworn in, his newly named CIA Director William Casey (see Robert Parry’s book, Trick or Treason: The 1980 October Surprise Mystery), made a revealing comment at a meeting of the new cabinet appointees. Casey said, as overheard and recorded by Barbara Honegger who was present, “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

Thirdly, in August of 1981, the French sociologist Jean Baudrillard published his seminal book, Simulacra and Simulation, in which he set out his theory of simulation where he claimed that a “hyperreal” simulated world was replacing the real world that once could be represented but not replaced.  He argued that this simulated world was generated by models of a real world that never existed and so people were living in “hyperreality,” or a totally fabricated reality.  This was a radical notion, and his claim at the time that this was already total was no doubt an exaggeration.  But that was then, not now.  Forty years have allowed his nightmarish theory to take on reality.  I will return to this subject later.

Technology and the Trap of the Machine Mass Mind

In his classic work, Propaganda, Jacques Ellul writes that “An analysis of propaganda therefore shows that it succeeds primarily because it corresponds exactly to a need of the masses…just two aspects of this: the need for explanation and the need for values, which both spring largely, but not entirely, from the promulgation of news.”  He wrote that in 1962 when news and world events were rapidly speeding up but were nowhere near as technologically frenzied as they are today.  Then there were radio, many newspapers, and a handful of television stations.  And yet, even in those days, as the sociologist C. Wright Mills said, the general public was confused and disoriented, liable to panic, and that information overwhelmed their capacity to assimilate it.  In The Sociological Imagination he wrote:

The very shaping of history now outpaces the ability of people to orient themselves in accordance with cherished values. And which values? Even when they do not panic, people often sense that older ways of feeling and thinking have collapsed and that newer beginnings are ambiguous to the point of moral stasis. Is it any wonder that   ordinary people feel they cannot cope with the larger worlds with which they are so suddenly confronted? That they cannot understand the meaning of their epoch for their own lives? That – in defense of selfhood – they become morally insensible, trying to remain altogether private individuals? Is it any wonder that they come to be possessed by a sense of the trap?

This trap has been progressively closing ever since.  To say this is false nostalgia for the good old days is intellectual claptrap. The evidence is overwhelming, and honest minds can see it clearly and a bit of self-reflection would reveal the inner wounds this development has caused.  There are various reasons for this: many intentional, others not: political machinations by the power elites, technological, cultural, religious developments, etc., all rooted in a similar way of thinking.  Whereas the wealthy elites have always controlled society, over the recent decades the growth in technological propaganda has increased exponentially. But the machines have been built upon a technical way of thinking that Ellul describes as ‘the totality of methods rationally arrived at and having absolute efficiency in every field of human activity.” This way of thinking is the opposite of the organic, the human.  It is all about means without ends, self-generating means whose sole goal is efficiency.  Everything is now subordinated to technique, especially people.  He says:

From another point of view, however, the machine is deeply symptomatic: it represents the ideal toward which techniques strives.The machine is solely, exclusively technique; it is pure technique, one might say. For, wherever a technical factor exists, it results, almost inevitably, in mechanization: technique transforms everything it touches into a machine.

If only cell phones shocked the hands that touched them!

I think it is beyond dispute that this sense of entrapment and confusion with its concomitant widespread depression has increased dramatically over the decades and we have come to a dark, dark place.  Lost in a dark wood would be an understatement.  In the inferno would perhaps be more appropriate.

Who will be our Virgil to guide us through this hell we are creating and to show us where it is leading?

The massive use of psychotropic drugs for living problems is well known.  The sense of meaninglessness is widespread.  The shredding of social bonds with the journey into a vast digital dementia has resulted in panic and anxiety on a vast scale.  The fear of death and disease permeates the air as religious faith wanes.  People have been turned against each other as an hallucinatory cloak of propaganda has replaced reality with the black magic of digital incantations.

I remember how, in 1975, when I was teaching at a Massachusetts university and, sensing a vast unmet need in my students, I proposed a course called “The Sociology of Life, Death, and Meaning.”  My colleagues balked at the idea and I had to convince them it was worthwhile.  I sensed that the fear of death and a growing loss of meaning was increasing among young people (and the population at large) and it was my responsibility to try to address it.  My colleagues considered the subject not scientific enough, having been seduced by the positivist movement in sociology. When the enrollment for the course reached 220 plus, my point was made. The need was great.  But it was a small window of opportunity for such deep reflections, for by 1980 the Cowboy in the white hat had ridden into Washington and a rock star was enthroned in the Vatican and all was once again well with the world.  Delusory orthodoxy reigned again.  Until….

For the last forty-one years there has been a progressive dissolution of reality into a theatrical electronic spectacle, beginning with the push for computer generated globalization and continuing up to the latest cell phones.  Science, neuroscience, and technology have been deified.  Cognitive warfare has been waged against the public mind.  The intelligence agencies, war departments, and their accomplices throughout the corporations, media, Hollywood, medicine, and the universities have united to effect this end.  Neuroscience and medicine have been weaponized.  The objective being to convince the public that they are machines, their brains are computers, and that their only hope is embrace that “reality.”

After the actor Reagan rode off into the sunset, his Vice-President and former Director of the CIA (therefore a supreme actor), George H. W. Bush, took the reins and declared the decade of the 1990s the decade of brain research, to be heavily financed by the federal government. In 1992, boy wonder William Clinton, straight out of the fetid fields of Arkansas politics, was elected to carry on this work, not just the brain research but the continuous bombing of Iraq and the slaughters around the world, but also the work of dismantling welfare and repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, reuniting commercial and investment banking and opening the door for the rich to get super rich and normal people to get screwed.  So Clinton fulfilled the duties of the good Republican President that he was, and the right-wing played the game of ripping him for being a leftist.  It’s funny except that so many believed this game in which all the players operated within the same frame (and of course still do), the play within the play whose real authors are always invisible to the fixated audience.

What is the antonym to a contronym?

When George W. Bush took over, he  continued the brain research project with massive federal monies by declaring 2000-10 as the Decade of the Behavior Project.

Then under Obama, whose role model was the actor Reagan, and under Trump, whose role model was the guy he played on reality television and whose official role was playing the bad guy to Obama’s good guy, the money for the mapping of the brain and artificial intelligence continued flowing from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Office of Science and Technology Project (OSTP).

Three decades of joint military, intelligence, and neuroscience work on how to understand brains so as to control them through mind control and computer technology might suggest something untoward was afoot, wouldn’t you say?

Create the Problem and Then the “Solution”

If you are still on this twisted path with me, you may feel an increased level of anxiety.  Not that it is new, for you have probably felt it for a long time. We both know that free-floating anxiety, like depression and fear, has been a stable of life in the good old USA for decades. We didn’t create it, and, as C. Wright Mills has said, “Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.”  For our biographies, including anxiety and meaninglessness, take place within social history and social structures, and so we must ask what are the connections.  And are there solutions?

There are drugs, of course, and the caring folks at the pharmaceutical companies who want to see us with Smiley Faces, perky in mind and body, are always glad to provide them for an exorbitant price, one often well hidden in the ledgers of their insurance company partners-in-crime.  But still, there is so much to fear: terrorists, viruses, bad weather, bad breath, my bad, your bad, bad death, etc.

Is there a place upon which to pin this anxiety that floats ?

Professor Mattias Desmet, a clinical psychology professor at the University of Ghent in Belgium, has some interesting thoughts about it, but they don’t necessarily lead to happy conclusions.  I think he is correct in saying that for decades there has been a situation brewing that is the perfect soil for mass formation with a hypnotized public embracing a new totalitarianism, one that has now been made real through COVID 19 with the lockdowns and loss of liberties as we descend with Dante to the lowest depths of the Inferno.

These background developments are the breakdown of social bonds, the loss of meaning making, its accompanying free-floating anxiety, and the absence of ways to relieve that anxiety short of aggression.  You can listen to him here.

These conditions didn’t just “happen” but were created by multiple power elite actors with long range plans.  If that sounds conspiratorial, that’s because it is.  That’s what the powerful do.  They conspire to achieve their goals.  The average person, without the awareness, will, inclination, or ability to do investigative sociological research, often falls prey to their designs, and through today’s electronic digital media is mesmerized into feeling that the media offer solutions to their anxieties.  They provide answers, even when they are propaganda.

As Ellul says, “Propaganda is the true remedy for loneliness.”  It draws all lost souls to its benevolent siren song.  CNN’s smiling Sanjay Gupta sedates many a mind and The New York Times and CBS soothe untold numbers of Mr. and Mrs. Lonelyhearts with sweet nothings straight from the messaging centers of the World Economic Forum and Langley, Virginia. They draw on the need to obey and believe, and provide fables that give people a sense of value and belonging to the group, even though the group is unreal.  These media can quite easily, but usually subtly, turn their audiences’ frenetic, agitated passivity into active aggression towards dissidents, especially when those dissidents have been blamed for endangering the lives of the “good” people.

As has occurred, censorship of dissent is necessary, and this must be done for the common good, even when it is carried out in allegedly democratic societies.  In the name of freedom, freedom must be denied.  Thus Biden’s declaration of war against domestic dissent.

Mattias Desmet it right; we are far down the road to totalitarianism.

Simulation and Simulacra

When I was a boy, I did certain boy things that were popular in my generation.  For a short period I constructed model ships and planes from kits.  It was something to do when I was constrained to the house because of bad weather.  These kits were replicas of famous battle ships or planes and came with decals you could paste on them when you were done. The decals identified these historical vehicles, which were very real or had been.  I knew I was making a miniature double of real objects, just as I knew a map of New York City streets corresponded to the real Bronx streets I roamed.  The map and my models were simulacra, but not the real thing.  The real things were outside somewhere.  And I knew not to walk on the map for my wanderings.

When Baudrillard wrote Simulacra and Simulation, he  was telling us that something fundamental had changed and would change far more in the future. He wrote:

Today abstraction is no longer that of the map, the double, the mirror, or the concept. Simulation is no longer that of the territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal. The territory no longer precedes the map, nor does it survive it. It is nevertheless the map that precedes the territory – precession of simulacra – that engenders the territory….

Translated into plain English (French intellectuals can be difficult to understand), he is saying that in much of modern life, reality has disappeared into its signs or models.  And within these signs, these self-enclosed systems, distinctions can’t be made because these simulacra contain, like contronyms, both their positive and negative poles, so they cancel each other out while holding the believer imprisoned in amber.  Once you are in them, you are trapped because there are no outside references, the simulated system of thought or machine is your universe, the only reality.  There is no dialectical tension because the system has swallowed it.  There is no critical negativity, no place to stand outside to rebel because the simulacrum encompasses the positive and negative in a circulatory process that makes everything equivalent but the “positivity” of the simulacrum itself.  You are inside the whale: “The virtual space of the global is the space of the screen and the network, of immanence and the digital, of a dimensionless space-time.”

So if that plain English (Ha!) doesn’t do it for you, here’s Baudrillard again:

It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real, that is to say of an operation of deterring every real process via its operational double, a programmatic, metastable, perfectly descriptive machine that offers all the signs of the real and short-circuits all its vicissitudes. Never again will the real have a chance to produce itself – such is the vital function of the model in a system of death, or rather of anticipated resurrection, that no longer gives the event of death a chance. [my emphases]

In the case of my model airplanes, there were real planes that my replicas were based on.  I knew that.  Baudrillard was announcing that the world was changing and children in the future would have a difficult time distinguishing between the real and its simulacra.  Not just children but all of us have arrived at that point, thanks to digital technology, where to distinguish between the real and the imaginary is very hard. Thus the purpose of video games: To scramble brains.  Thus the purpose of all the brain research funded by the Pentagon: To control brains via the interface of people with machines. This is a fundamental reason why the ruling elites, under the cover of Covid-19, have been pushing for an online digitized world through which they can amass even greater control over people’s sense of reality.  Are we watching a video of the real world or a video of a model of the real world?  How to tell the difference?

The weather report says that there is a 31% chance of rain tomorrow at 2 P.M., and people take that seriously, even though only a genuine blockhead would not realize that this is not based on reality but on a computer model of reality and a reality that is unreal a second degree over since it has yet to occur.  Yet that everyday example is normal today.  It’s a form of hypnosis.  The map precedes the territory.

But it gets even weirder as a regular perusal of the news confirms.  A very strange warped sense of reality unconnected to digital technology is widespread.  There recently was a news report about the sale of a Mohammed Ali drawing that sold for $425,000.  The drawing could have been done by a child with a marker.  It depicts a stick figure Ali in a boxing ring standing with arms raised in victory over a fallen opponent.  From the fallen boxer’s head a speech bubble rises with these words: “Ref, he did float like a butterfly and sting like a bee.”  It is factually true that Ali knocked many opponents on their asses and raised his arms in victory.

So when he drew his stick drawing he was probably remembering that.  Therefore his drawing, a representation of his memory of reality and imagination, is two degrees removed from the real.  For no opponent uttered those words from his back on a canvas.  They are Ali’s signature words, how he liked to present himself on the world’s stage, part of his act, for he was a quintessential performer, albeit an unusual one with courage and a social conscience.  Obviously his drawing is not art but a crude little sketch.  Whoever spent nearly half a million dollars for it, did so either for an investment (which raises one question concerning reality and illusion) or as a form of magical appropriation, similar to getting a famous person’s signature to “capture” a bit of their immortality (the second question).  Either way it’s more than weird, even though not uncommon.  It is its commonness that makes it emblematic of this present era of copies and simulacra, the mumbo jumbo magic that disappears the real into simulated images.

Take the recent case of the TV actor William Shatner, who played a space ship captain named Captain Kirk on a very popular television series, Star Trek, a show filled with kitsch wisdom loved by hordes of desperadoes. All unreal but taken close to the fanatics’ hearts.  He’s been in the news recently for taking a ride into earth’s sub orbit on a spacecraft owned and operated by Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos. Bezos gave the ninety-year-old actor a comp ride up and away supposedly because he was a big Star Trek fan.

In keeping with the pseudo-spiritual theme of this business venture and PR stunt, the spacecraft was called the New Shepard, presumably to distinguish it from the Old Shepard, whom we must assume is dead as Nietzsche said a few years ago. Sometimes these billionaires are so busy making money that they forget to tune in to the latest news. Bezos was announcing his new religion, a blending of P. T. Barnum and  technology. Anyway, pearls of “spiritual” wisdom, like those uttered on the old TV series, greeted the public following Shatner’s trip.  Ten minutes up and down isn’t three days and nights, but he was up to the task.  A guy playing an actor playing a space ship pilot playing a TV personage on a public relations business stunt flight.  “Unbelievable,” as he said.  Who is copying whom?  Tune in.

Baudrillard offers the example of The Iconoclasts from centuries past :

…whose millennial quarrel is still with us today. This is precisely because they predicted the omnipotence of simulacra, the faculty the simulacra have of effacing God from the conscience of man, and the destructive annihilating truth that they allow to appear – that deep down God never existed, even that God himself was never anything but his own simulacrum – from this came their urge to destroy the images.

We are now awash in epiphanies of representation, as Daniel Boorstin noted in The Image in the 1960s and which everyone can notice as those little rectangular boxes are constantly raised everywhere to capture what their operators might unconsciously think of as a world they no longer think is real, so they better capture it before it fully evaporates.  Such acquisitive image taking bespeaks an unspoken nihilism, secret simulations that signify the death sentence of their referents.

So let’s just say simulacra are traps wherein the real is no longer real but a hyperreal that seems realer than real, while concealing its unreality.

This goes much further than the use of digital technology.  It involves the entire spectrum of techniques of mind control and propaganda.  It includes politics, medicine, economics, Covid-19, the lockdowns and vaccines, etc. Everything.

Let me end with one small example.  A trifle, you’ll agree.  I began by noting the election of the actor Ronald Reagan in 1980.  Then the quote from the CIA Director Casey: “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”

Then came the CIA actor George H. W. Bush, the two-faced Bill Clinton, George W. Bush the son of the CIA man, Obama, Trump, and Biden.  Rather shady characters all, depending usually on your political affiliations.  Suppose, however, that these seven men are an acting troupe in the same play, which is a highly sophisticated simulacrum that plays in loops, and that the object of its architects is to keep the audience engaged in the show and rooting for their favorite character.

Suppose this self-generating spectacle has a name: The Contronym.  And suppose that at the very heart of its ongoing run, one of the lead characters, who had been reared from birth to play a revolutionary role, one that demanded many masks and contradictory faces that could be used to reconcile the personae of the other six actors and perhaps reconcile the Rashomon-like story, suppose that character was Barack Obama, and suppose he was reared in a CIA family and later just “happened” to become President where he became known as “the intelligence president” because of his intimate relationship with the CIA.  And suppose he gave the CIA everything it wanted.

Would you think you were living in a simulacrum?

Or would you say Jeremy Kuzmarov’s report, “A Company Family: The Untold History of Obama and the CIA” was a simulation of the most scurrilous kind?

Or would you feel lost in the wood in the middle of your life with Dante?  Heading down to hell?

“’I was thinking,’ said Alice very politely, ‘which is the best way out of this wood.  It’s getting so dark.  Would you tell me, please?’

But the fat little men [Tweedledee and Tweedledum] only looked at each other and grinned.”

Yet it is no laughing matter.  If we want to get through this hell we are traversing, we had better clearly recognize those who are carrying the Banner of the King of Hell.  Identify them and stop their advance.  It is a real spiritual war we are engaged in, and we either fight for God or the devil.

*

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

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

---

He is the author of Seeking the Truth in a Country of Lies

To order his book click the cover page.

“Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies is a dazzling journey into the heart of many issues — political, philosophical, and personal — that should concern us all.  Ed Curtin has the touch of the poet and the eye of an eagle.” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

“Edward Curtin puts our propaganda-stuffed heads in a guillotine, then in a flash takes us on a redemptive walk in the woods — from inferno to paradiso.  Walk with Ed and his friends — Daniel Berrigan, Albert Camus, George Orwell, and many others — through the darkest, most-firefly-filled woods on this earth.” James W. Douglass, author, JFK and the Unspeakable

“A powerful exposé of the CIA and our secret state… Curtin is a passionate long-time reform advocate; his stories will rouse your heart.” Oliver Stone, filmmaker, writer, and director

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

“It is now apparent that these products in the blood stream are toxic to humans. An immediate halt to the vaccination programme is required while an independent safety analysis is undertaken to investigate the full extent of the harms, which the UK Yellow Card data suggest includes thromboembolism, multi-system inflammatory disease, immune suppression, autoimmunity and anaphylaxis, as well as Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE).” Tess Lawrie, Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Ephesians 6:12

Question– Have the mRNA vaccines been tested on animals?

Answer– Yes, they have.

Question– Were the animal trials successful?

Answer– Yes and no.

Yes, the experiments on mice showed that a low dose of the vaccine induces a robust antibody response to the infection.

But, no, the antibodies were not able to attack the spike protein from a different strain of the virus.

Question– I’m not sure what that means? Do you mean that the vaccine DOES provide some limited protection from the original (Wuhan) virus, but does not necessarily provide protection from the variants?

Answer– That’s right, but it’s a bit more complicated than that because– as the virus changes — the antibodies that helped to fight the original virus can actually enhance the “infectivity” of the variant. In other words, vaccine-generated antibodies can switch-sides and increase the severity of the illness. Simply put, they can make you sicker or kill you. Scientists have known this for a long time. Check out this clip from a 2005 research paper:

“A jab against one strain might worsen infection with others….

In the.. study, Gary Nabel of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.. injected mice with spike protein from a SARS virus taken from a human patient infected in early 2003. They then collected the antibodies the animals produced.

In lab experiments, they showed that these antibodies were unable to attack spike protein from a different strain of SARS, isolated from a patient infected in late 2003….The team next tested whether the antibodies would attack spike proteins from two SARS strains isolated from civets, from which the virus is thought to have originally jumped into humans. In this case, they found hints that the antibodies actually boosted the ability of the virus to infect cells.…

The results show that the virus changes over time, so that a strain that crops up in one outbreak might be quite different from that in a later outbreak. “This virus is not standing still and we need to take this into account,” Nabel says.

This raises the prospect that a vaccine against one strain of SARS virus could prove ineffective against others. Worse, a jab against one strain might even aggravate an infection with SARS virus from civets or another species. “It’s obviously a concern,” Nabel says..
This would not be the first case where exposure to one strain of a virus can worsen infection with another.” (“Caution raised over SARS vaccine”, Nature)

Question– I’m still confused. Can you summarize what they’re saying?

Answer– Sure. They’re saying that scientists have known for nearly two decades that vaccines narrowly aimed at just one protein are bound to fail.They’re saying that the spike protein is highly-adaptable and capable of changing its shape to survive. They’re saying that vaccines aimed at the spike protein will inevitably produce variants that evade vaccine-generated antibodies.They’re saying that by narrowing the vaccine’s focus to the spike protein alone, the drug companies have ensured that previously helpful antibodies will do an about-face, allow the virus to enter healthy cells, replicate at will, and cause sickness or death. They are saying that the current crop of vaccines is in fact perpetuating the pandemic. And–since the science has been clear for the last 16 years– we can add one more observation to the list, that is, that the current approach to mass vaccination is neither haphazard, slapdash or random. It is intentional. The vaccination campaign managers are deliberately ignoring the science in order to sustain a permanent state of crisis. Science is being manipulated to achieve a political objective.

Question– I think you’re exaggerating, but I’d like to get back to the animal trials instead of arguing politics. As you probably know, the reports in the media do not square with your analysis, in fact, all of the articles in the MSM say the animal trials were a rousing success. Here’s a short blurb that I found today that confirms what I’ve been saying:

“…vaccination of nonhuman primates with the mRNA vaccine induced robust SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity and notably, rapid protection in the upper and lower airways….” (Covid-19, NIH.gov)

Question– Are you suggesting the authors are lying?

Answer– No, they are not lying. They’re just not telling you the whole truth, and you need to know the whole truth so you can make an informed decision. The vaccines DO provide some (temporary) protection. We don’t dispute that. They also trigger a strong immune response. We don’t dispute that either. But what difference does it make? Let me explain: Let’s say, you have a really bad head cold so you take a new medication that you think will relieve the pain. And–sure enough– an hour after taking the pills– Presto — your congestion and headache are completely gone. That’s fantastic, right? Wrong, because what you fail to realize is that the medication is laced with slow-acting strychnine that kills you three days later. Do you still think it was a good idea to take the medication?

Of course, not. And the same rule applies to these vaccines which do, in fact, boost your antibodies and provide some fleeting “immunity”. But they can also kill you. Don’t you think that should be factored in to your decision? Keep in mind, people have died 3, 4, 5 weeks after inoculation without any prior warning. Many of them might have even been bursting with antibodies, but they’re still dead. Can you see the problem?

Question– Okay, but there’s still this matter about the animal trials. The media says that the drug companies performed the animal trials and they were successful. Do you disagree with that?

Answer– They were not successful and the “fact checkers” that were hired to discredit vaccine critics like me, have deliberately mischaracterized what happened in the trials. For example, here’s a typical “fact checker” article titled “COVID-19 vaccines did not skip animal trials because of animal deaths” by Reuters. Here’s an excerpt:

“Posts claiming that COVID-19 vaccine producers skipped animal trials due to the animals in those trials dying are false. Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, which have been granted emergency authorization use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States, all conducted animal trials and had no significant safety concerns to report.”

Sounds reassuring, right? But then they say:

“Due to time constraints and the urgency to find a vaccine for COVID-19, Moderna and Pfizer did receive approval to run animal testing and early trials on humans at the same time, as opposed to fully completing animal trials before moving on to human trials. This, however, does not mean animal trials were skipped or that the safety of the vaccines were compromised.”

Let me see if I got this straight: The drug companies were in such a hurry that they conducted their minimalist animal trials at the same time as their human trials (which is unprecedented) and then rushed the results to the FDA so they could be rubber stamped and waved through under the Emergency Use Authority?

Is that how it went down?

Yes, it is.

But if they were rushed through in a couple months, then the “fact checkers” are tacitly admitting that there is no long-term safety data. And there IS no long-term safety data, nor is there any attempt to disprove the research from the earlier trials where the ferrets, mice and other animals died following injection of mRNA vaccines. They don’t deny it, they just ignore it as if sweeping it under the rug will make it all go away. Here’s a clip from the research paper that Reuters refers to in its article:

“We demonstrate that the candidate vaccines… respectively—induce strong antigen-specific immune responses in mice and macaques….Both (vaccines) protected 2–4-year-old macaques from challenge with infectious SARS-CoV-2, and there was reduced detection of viral RNA in immunized macaques as compared to those that received saline.” (Note–We’ve already acknowledged that the vaccines do produce a strong immune response. Here’s more:)

“Neutralizing GMTs declined by day 56 (35 days after dose 2), consistent with the contraction phase; however, they remained well above the GMT of the human sera panel. The duration of the study was not long enough to assess the rate of decline during the plateau phase of the antibody response.” (“BNT162b vaccines protect rhesus macaques from SARS-CoV-2”, Nature)

Can you see what’s going on? The trial was only 56 days-long, in fact, none of the animal trials exceeded 56 days. Think about that for a minute. The reason the animals died in prior trials is because they were exposed to a mutated version of the (wild) virus that eventually killed them. That’s how ADE (antibody-dependent enhancement) works. It doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t happen in 56 days. It takes much longer than that for a mutated version of the virus to emerge and reinfect the host. The drug companies know that. They’re not stupid. So the fact that the animals mounted a strong immune response is completely irrelevant. We KNOW they mounted a strong immune response. We also know they died some months later when a different strain of the virus emerged. Bottom line: The production of antibodies does not mean a drug is safe.

The obvious purpose of the trials was to get the vaccines over the finish-line before anyone figured out what was going on. It’s the same reason why the drug companies “unblinded” their human trials after the vaccines got the green light from the FDA. Shortly after the trials were concluded, the people in the placebo arm were allowed to get vaccinated.

Why would they do that? Why would they vaccinate the people who willingly allowed themselves to be guinea pigs for the sake of public health, only to vaccinate them shortly after, thus, eliminating any chance of finding out what the long-term safety issues might be? It makes no sense, does it?

Take a look at this short clip from the British Medical Journal whose scientists are equally bewildered:

“The (drug) companies say they have an ethical obligation to unblind volunteers so they can receive the vaccine. But some experts are concerned about a “disastrous” loss of critical information if volunteers on a trial’s placebo arm are unblinded…

Although the FDA has granted the vaccines emergency use authorization, to get full license approval two years of follow-up data are needed. The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded.

Consumer representative Sheldon Toubman, a lawyer and FDA advisory panel member, said that Pfizer and BioNTech had not proved that their vaccine prevents severe covid-19. “The FDA says all we can do is suggest protection from severe covid disease; we need to know that it does that,” he said.

He countered claims, based on experience with other vaccines, six weeks of follow-up was long enough to detect safety signals. Six weeks may not be long enough for this entirely new type of “untested” [mRNA] vaccine, Toubman said.

Goodman wants all companies to be held to the same standard and says they should not be allowed to make up their own rules about unblinding. He told The BMJ that, while he was “very optimistic” about the vaccines, “blowing up the trials” by allowing unblinding “will set a de facto standard for all vaccine trials to come.” And that, he said, “is dangerous.”

(“Covid-19: Should vaccine trials be unblinded?” The British Medical Journal)

Do you like his choice of words: “blowing up the trials”? Do you think it is a fair description of what the drug companies did?

Yes, it is.

And what possible motive would the drug companies have to blow up the trials? I can see only two possibilities:

1. They think their vaccine is so terrific, it will save the lives of many of the people in the placebo group.
2. They expect a high percentage of the people in the vaccine group to get either severely sick or die, so they want to hide the evidence of vaccine-linked injury.

Which is it?

You know the answer. Everyone watching this farce knows the answer.

Question– Okay, so let’s cut to the chase: Are the vaccines are safe or not?

No, they are not safe. The way we decide whether a drug is safe or not is by putting it through a rigorous process of testing and clinical trials. After the testing, the data is passed on to physicians, statisticians, chemists, pharmacologists, and other scientists who review the data and make their recommendations or criticisms. That didn’t happen with the Covid vaccines, in fact, all the normal standards and protocols were suspended in the name of “urgency”. But many believe that the “urgency” was manufactured to push through vaccines that would never have been approved on their own merits. All you have to do is look through the vaccine injury data (VAERS) and you’ll see this is the most lethal medical intervention of all time and, yet, the public health experts, the media and the government keep crowing that they’re “safe and effective”. It’s nonsense and the drug companies know it’s nonsense which is why they reject all liability for the people that are going to be killed by these “poison-death shots.”

Do you know what goes on inside your body after you are injected with one of these “gene based” vaccines?

Once the vaccine enters the bloodstream it penetrates the cells that line the blood vessels forcing them to produce spike proteins that protrude into the bloodstream like millions of microscopic thorns. These thorns activate blood platelets which trigger blood clotting followed shortly after by an immune response that destroys the infected cells thus weakening the vascular system while draining the supply of killer lymphocytes. In this way, the vaccine launches a dual attack on the body’s critical infrastructure causing widespread tissue damage throughout the circulatory system while leaving the immune system less able to fend off future infection.

Now if you think you can have a long-and-happy without a functioning circulatory system, then none of this matters. But if you’re bright enough to realize that wreaking havoc on your vascular system is the fast-track to the graveyard, then you’ll probably understand that injecting these “poison-death shots” is a particularly bad idea.

By the way, it’s a real stretch to call these hybrid injections, “vaccines”. They have about as much in common with a traditional vaccine as a python does with a coffee table. Nothing. The “vaccine” moniker was chosen in order to shore-up public confidence, that’s all. It’s part of a marketing strategy. There is no real similarity. The majority of people trust vaccines and see them as a shining example of medical achievement. The drug companies wanted to tap into that trust and use it for their own purposes. That’s why they called it a “vaccine” instead of “gene therapy” which more accurately describes ‘what it does.’ But–like we said– it’s just a marketing strategy.

Have you ever wondered how the drug companies were able to roll out their own-individual vaccines just weeks apart from each other? That’s a pretty good trick, don’t you think; especially since vaccine development typically takes from 10 to 15 years. How do you think they managed that? Here’s an excerpt from an article which provides a little background on the topic:

“The virus behind the outbreak that began in Wuhan, China, was identified on Jan. 7. Less than a week later — on Jan. 13 — researchers at Moderna and the NIH had a proposed sequence for an mRNA vaccine against it, and, as the company wrote in government documents, “we mobilized toward clinical manufacture.” By Feb. 24, the team was shipping vials from a plant in Norwood, Mass., to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in Bethesda, Md., for a planned clinical trial to test its safety.” (“Researchers rush to test coronavirus vaccine in people without knowing how well it works in animals”, Stat)

Got that? “The virus broke out in Wuhan…on Jan. 7, and less than a week later Moderna had a proposed sequence for an mRNA vaccine against it???

Really? Is that the same Moderna that had been playing-around with mRNA for over a decade but was never able to successfully bring a vaccine to market?

Yep, the very same company. Here’s more:

“And by Feb. 24, the team was shipping vials from a plant in Norwood, Mass??”

Wow! Another Covid miracle! You almost get whiplash watching these companies crank out their “wonder drugs” at record-breaking speed.

Keep in mind, there’s a very high probability that the virus was man-made, (In other words, it’s a bioweapon.) and the people who have been implicated in the funding and creation of that bioweapon are also closely aligned with the big drug companies that have produced the antidote in record time that has already netted tens of billions of dollars in profits for a drug for which there was no reliable animal testing, no long-term safety data, and no formal regulatory approval.

So I’ll ask you again: Doesn’t that all sound a bit suspicious?

Is it really that hard to see the outline of a political agenda here? After all, aren’t the drug companies working with the regulatory agencies that are working with the public health officials that are working with the media that are working with the corrupted politicians that are working with the Intel agencies that are working with the meddling globalist billionaires that are working with the giant private equity firms that oversee the entire operation pulling the appropriate strings whenever needed?

It sure looks like it.

And, don’t the tectonic social changes we’ve seen in the last year have more to do with a broader scorched-earth campaign launched by the “parasite class” against the rest of humanity than they do with a fairly-mild virus that kills mainly old and frail people with multiple underlying health conditions?

Right, again. In fact, many have noticed the cracks in the pandemic artifice from the very beginning, just as many have pointed out that the virus-meme is just the mask behind which parasites continue to conduct their global restructuring project. In short, it’s all about politics; bare-knuckle, take-no-prisoners NWO politics.

Answer– You’ve asked a number of questions about the animal trials, but none about the biodistribution and the pharmacokinetics studies that were done at the same time. Why is that? (Note--Pharmacokinetics; “the branch of pharmacology concerned with the movement of drugs within the body.”)

Question– I didn’t know there were any. Did the media report on them?

Answer– No, they didn’t. They completely ignored them, even though they were produced by Pfizer and provide essential information about where the substance in the vaccine goes in the body, in what amounts, and for how long. By knowing how the drug is distributed, it is possible to make educated assumptions about its effect on the organs and other tissue. In other words, these studies are invaluable. The Doctors for Covid Ethics have done extensive research on the studies and written a report titled “The Pfizer mRNA vaccine: pharmacokinetics and toxicity”. Here’s a few excerpts that help to illustrate the dangers of the vaccines:

“As with any drug, a key consideration for the toxicity of the COVID mRNA vaccines is where exactly in the body they end up, and for how long they will stay there. Such questions, which are the subject of pharmacokinetics, are usually thoroughly investigated during drug development. Initial studies on pharmacokinetics and also on toxicity are carried out in animals… this document has rather far-reaching implications: it shows that Pfizer—as well as the authorities that were apprised of these data— must have recognized the grave risks of adverse events after vaccination even before the onset of clinical trials. Nevertheless, Pfizer’s own clinical trials failed to monitor any of the clinical risks that were clearly evident from these data, and the regulatory authorities failed to enforce proper standards of oversight. This dual failure has caused the most grievous harm to the public….

What do Pfizer’s animal data presage for biological effects in humans?

• Rapid appearance of spike protein in the circulation.
• Toxicity to organs with expected high rates of uptake, in particular placenta and
  lactating breast glands
• Penetration of some organs might be higher with the real vaccine than with this
  luciferase model…The rapid entry of the model vaccine into the circulation means that we must expect the spike protein to be expressed within the circulation, particularly by endothelial cells. ( Endothelial- The thin layer of cells lining the blood vessels) We have seen before that this will lead to activation of blood clotting through direct activation of platelets and also, probably more importantly, through immune attack on the endothelial cells….

Summary

Pfizer’s animal data clearly presaged the following risks and dangers:

• blood clotting shortly after vaccination, potentially leading to heart attacks, stroke, and venous thrombosis
• grave harm to female fertility
• grave harm to breastfed infants
• cumulative toxicity after multiple injections

With the exception of female fertility, which can simply not be evaluated within the short period of time for which the vaccines have been in use, all of the above risks have been substantiated since the vaccines have been rolled out—all are manifest in the reports to the various adverse event registries. Those registries also contain a very considerable number of reports on abortions and stillbirths shortly after vaccination, which should have prompted urgent investigation.
….
Of particularly grave concern is the very slow elimination of the toxic cationic lipids. In persons repeatedly injected with mRNA vaccines containing these lipids… this would result in cumulative toxicity. There is a real possibility that cationic lipids will accumulate in the ovaries. The implied grave risk to female fertility demands the most urgent attention of the public and of the health authorities.

Since the so-called clinical trials were carried out with such negligence, the real trials are occurring only now—on a massive scale, and with devastating results. … Calling off this failed experiment is long overdue. Continuing or even mandating the use of this poisonous vaccine, and the apparently imminent issuance of full approval for it are crimes against humanity.” (“The Pfizer mRNA vaccine: pharmacokinetics and toxicity”, The Doctors for Covid Ethics)

Don’t you think people are entitled to know what the government wants to inject into their bodies? Don’t you think they have a right to know how it will effect their immune systems, their vital organs and their overall health? Don’t you think they have the right to decide for themselves which drugs they will take and which they will refuse to take?

Forcing someone to take a drug he does not want, is not just wrong. It’s unAmerican. Which is why people should reject vaccine mandates as a matter of principle. They are an attack on personal liberty, the foundation of our constitutional system. It’s a principle worth dying for.

As for the mass vaccination campaign, it is the most maniacally-genocidal project ever concocted by man. There’s simply no way to calculate the amount of suffering and death we are about to face for trusting people whose policies were obviously shaped by their undiluted hatred of humanity. As German microbiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi said:

“In the end, we’re going to see mass illness and deaths among people who normally would have had wonderful lives ahead of them.”

It is a great tragedy.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Michael Whitney, renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

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

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

An “expert” whose work on cybersecurity has been cited by the NY Times and the Washington Post announced on Twitter that the unvaccinated should be denied life-saving hospital treatment because they are “not fit for life on earth.”

Chris Vickery, who describes himself as a “data breach hunter” also brags about how his “findings have contributed to investigations conducted by the FTC, FBI, SEC, Secret Service, HHS, SSCI, and more.”

During an unhinged Twitter rant, Vickery asserted that a time limit of December 1st should be put on people refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

“Set a date now. After that date, no hospital services for the willingly unvaccinated,” he screeched.

Seriously. Pick a date now. Make it something like December 1st, 2021. Broadcast this fact widely.
Then, after the chosen date, anyone choosing to refuse the covid-19 vaccine can deal with the consequences of that choice alone.

— Chris Vickery (@VickerySec) October 14, 2021

“Then, after the chosen date, anyone choosing to refuse the covid-19 vaccine can deal with the consequences of that choice alone,” added Vickery.

After claiming there was no “legitimate” reason for anyone to refuse the shot, Vickery ended his rant with a demented call for such people to “separate from the surviving world.”

Human society isn't a suicide pact. If you are too dumb to get the covid vaccine, then you are not fit for continued life on Earth.
That's your choice, but the consequences of refusing to get the vaccine is you having to wave a fond farewell and separate from the surviving world.

— Chris Vickery (@VickerySec) October 14, 2021

“Human society isn’t a suicide pact. If you are too dumb to get the covid vaccine, then you are not fit for continued life on Earth.”

“That’s your choice, but the consequences of refusing to get the vaccine is you having to wave a fond farewell and separate from the surviving world.”

Some joked that this was yet another example of the familiar trend of blue checkmarks on Twitter aggressively displaying their virtue while actually calling for mass genocide.

pic.twitter.com/ojFGpOXFzZ

— Auron MacIntyre (@AuronMacintyre) October 15, 2021

Others directly savaged Vickery for his heartless inhumanity.

“When you were a child, did you ever envisage what a terrible person you would be in adulthood?” asked one.

“So much for “healthcare is a human right,” quipped another.

Vickery later bragged about the number of people he had blocked on Twitter in the aftermath of his comments.

Make my day. pic.twitter.com/Dmtk873EMg

— Chris Vickery (@VickerySec) October 14, 2021

How brave of him.

As we previously highlighted, numerous hospitals across America are already denying life-saving organ transplants to unvaccinated patients.

Meanwhile, in the UK, patients deemed to be “racist,” “sexist” or “homophobic” can also be denied treatment under NHS rules.

As we document in the video below, similar rhetoric is being spewed by Keith Olbermann and others who are intent on whipping up ‘New Normal’ cult members into a frenzied, hysterical hatefest targeting those who choose not to take the jab.

*

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

Featured image is from First Things

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

A judge in New York City has blocked a father’s right to see his three-year-old daughter unless he agrees to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

Yes, really.

In early September, Evan Schein, an attorney acting on behalf of the mother in the couple’s divorce case (the family has not been named), raised concerns about the father’s vaccination status, leading high profile judge Judge Matthew Cooper to suspend his visitation rights until he received the jab.

According to Cooper, the father needs to submit to the shot because it has become a prerequisite “to participate meaningfully in everyday society.”

“The dangers of voluntarily remaining unvaccinated during access with a child while the COVID-19 virus remains a threat to children’s health and safety cannot be understated,” said the judge.

“Unfortunately, and to my mind, incomprehensibly, a sizable minority, seizing upon misinformation, conspiracy theories, and muddled notions of ‘individual liberty,’ have refused all entreaties to be vaccinated,” he added.

The father’s only other option is to pay for expensive PCR tests every week in addition to taking a biweekly antigen test within 24 hours of his every other weekend visits.

The ruling was praised by the mother’s attorney, who called it “an incredibly important one that highlights the extraordinary times we are living in and reinforces that a child’s best interests are paramount.”

New York City judge STOPS Long Island father from visiting his three-year-old daughter in Manhattan unless he gets the shot or has weekly COVID-19 tests 
via https://t.co/Ggez6clg1M https://t.co/vjFbA2NZ9e

— Samantha DelVecchio (@SamanthaDelVec1) October 15, 2021

However, Lloyd Rosen, the father’s attorney, warned that the ruling sets a terrible precedent.

“My client is not a conspiracy theorist,” Rosen said. “He has concerns about the vaccine. He’s heard about side effects. He once had a bad reaction to a flu vaccine.”

“This judge must feel that 80 million Americans who aren’t vaccinated are placing their children at imminent risk or harm and, therefore, the courts should intervene and remove those children from their parents,” he added. “This is an absurd position to take.”

The father has previously been infected with COVID-19, meaning he has antibodies that offer him far greater protection than the vaccine, but that isn’t even being taken into account.

As we previously highlighted, patients who are in urgent need of life-saving organ transplants are now being denied treatment due to their refusal to take the vaccine.

As we warned all along, the agenda behind mandatory vaccination schemes is to make life a living hell for refusniks who don’t comply, while maintaining all along that the vaccine isn’t “mandatory.”

We are now hurtling full throttle towards a Chinese-style social credit score system where basic functions of living are denied to those who choose to exercise their bodily autonomy.

*

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

Featured image is from Free West 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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

This week the Biden Administration’s is expected to release its long-awaited review and recommendations regarding the U.S. use of international economic sanctions. It’s hard to imagine an area that more desperately needs rethinking. But the question that Congress and the public need to ask is whether this review will call for the kind of fundamental reform that is needed given the deep ethical and practical issues in the U.S. sanctions regime, or whether it will include only technical and essentially cosmetic changes.

Since the 1990s, sanctions have become perhaps the central coercive tool of U.S. foreign policy, a tool that has seen steady growth in recent years. The Trump Administration set a record pace by designating almost 1000 entities per year for new sanctions. The Biden Administration has continued a rapid pace of designation while so far failing to significantly reverse the Trump Administration’s sanctions binge.

Advocates of sanctions claim they are both effective in pursuing American goals and values, and more humane than outright war. In fact, sanctions have a long record of being ineffective in achieving their stated goals. Extensive sanctions on countries like North Korea, Russia, China, Venezuela, and Cuba have not led to regime change or substantial impacts on behavior. A Peterson Institute analysis of 174 sanctions regimes found that in the long term only 34 percent of these were even partially successful in achieving modest policy changes.

Although sanctions have at best limited effects on getting the ruling autocrats to change their behavior, they often have devastating effects on civilian populations. This raises serious questions as to whether they are in fact a more humane alternative to war. Broad-based sanctions — those that target an entire country or entire critical civilian sector for isolation from the world economy — are especially damaging. Medical experts have called broad-based sanctions a “failed foreign policy” that “can have a devastating impact on public health” and “hurt the most vulnerable in the population first.”

Human Rights Watch found that even before the Covid-19 epidemic so-called “maximum pressure” sanctions on Iran were sharply restricting civilian access to critical health care. More recently a Brookings Institution analysis found that between May and September of 2020 alone, sanctions led to an additional 13,000 Covid deaths in Iran. Sanctions are crippling the ability to rebuild civilian hospitals after years of war in Syria, and comprehensive sanctions have led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths in Venezuela, constituting a kind of collective punishment of the civilian population. In response to the civilian harm created by sanctions across numerous countries, the UN Human Rights Council recently stated that broad unilateral sanctions such as those used by the United States infringe on the basic right to human development and access to critical services.

Despite these manifest issues, sanctions reforms have so far focused not on strategic reconsideration of the overall sanctions framework, but instead on crafting more technical and limited humanitarian exemptions to broad-based sanctions. Another area of change has been the increasing use of so-called “smart sanctions,” which purport to minimize humanitarian impacts by targeting the coercive impact of sanctions on limited sectors of the economy.

While these technical changes might be better than nothing, they appear to have at best a very limited effect on the core problems of the collective punishment of civilians and the ineffectiveness of sanctions. Licenses and exemptions from sanctions for humanitarian aid might seem to permit essential goods to reach civilian populations. But the reality on the ground is often far different. The problem is that the breadth and scope of sanctions lead businesses to be reluctant to engage with sanctioned countries at all for fear of inadvertently triggering U.S. penalties. In addition, exemptions are often difficult to use, requiring extensive bureaucratic paperwork. These issues can be especially damaging by effectively cutting off countries’ access to the international financial and payments system.

Humanitarian organizations have detailed the crippling effects of this problem of “over-compliance” with sanctions in cutting off sanctioned countries from resources of all sorts. The United Nations described the problem well recently, stating that “punitive restrictions on banks and financial institutions … routinely lead to over-compliance out of abundance of institutional caution….it becomes difficult to import even basic food items, health-care equipment and other forms of humanitarian aid into sanctioned countries, despite the existence of applicable exemptions. Fearing penalties, third-country banks refuse to transfer funds, require oft-onerous certification for each transfer, or create additional costs and delays that impede assistance.”

Real reform will require a far-reaching reconsideration of the role of sanctions in U.S. foreign policy. It’s especially important to sharply limit the currently extensive use of broad-based sanctions that create collective punishment for civilian populations. Without fundamental changes to the breadth, scope, and frequency of sanctions use, tinkering with the details of exemptions to sanctions will only have limited effect. In evaluating this week’s report, observers need to ask whether it goes far enough.

*

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: Aarsal, Beqaa Lebanon – 2 18 2021: Refugees in Refuge Camp in E’rsal Waiting for Donations Help at Syrian Lebanese Borders in Winter Snow Storm and Bad Weather Conditions (Hussein Kassir/Shutterstock)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

For Americans watching the shocking re-Nazification of Germany – where once again the ability to even buy food depends on a person’s physiological/medical status – it may be tempting to downplay the re-emergence of a nasty German political virus and scoff that, “it can’t happen here!” But it is happening here.

The Biden Administration is sinking under the weight of its feeble figurehead, who is clearly living in a world of his own creation rather than living on planet reality. As Biden’s approval ratings plummet to near-historic depths, the people who run his administration – some say it’s really led by demon Susan Rice – are not backing off their hyper-authoritarian approach to…well, everything.

In fact they’re doubling down.

Nurse shortage? Tough – get your shot. Billions of containers waiting to be unloaded and trucked to fill empty shelves? Tough – get your shot. Murder alley Chicago facing 50 percent less cops because those who don’t want the vax are being fired? Tough – get your shot. No one to fly the plane? Tough – get your shot. No teachers? Tough – get your shot!

Into this explosion of malevolent incompetence staggers US Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Department Wally Adeyemo – second-highest ranker in the entire Department. The Nigerian-born Adeyemo, who previously served as director of African American outreach for the inspiring John Kerry 2004 presidential campaign and as a senior advisor to corrupt “woke” multi-gazillionaire Larry Fink, should be given credit for at least being honest about the intentions of his bosses in the Biden Administration.

Sometimes they tell the truth by accident.

Interviewed on ABC News on Thursday, Adeyemo was asked about the thousands of container ships anchored offshore in California and elsewhere as US store shelves begin to look like Bulgaria circa 1975 – and even Santa Claus is sweating “supply chain” strangulation as Christmas quickly approaches.

It’s not because Newsom’s California is a Marxist hellhole, where the religious fundamentalism of the Green New Deal fanatics has taken massive numbers of truckers off the road. Nope.

It’s not Biden’s vax mandate which has unleashed a massive outflux of workers from their jobs – quitting or fired – at a time of severe labor shortages. Nope.

The problem is you. You unwashed vermin who refuse to have a cocktail of experimental goop jabbed into your arm.

In the ABC interview Adeyemo admitted what we all know: inflation is beating the hell out of middle America (though Biden’s multi-millionaire chief-of-staff laughed it off as “high class problems“).

“We are seeing high prices for some of the things that people have to buy,” Adeyemo told ABC’s Stephanie Ramos. But it’s not the Administration’s fault. Shelves bare? Treasury’s Number Two tells America it’s all the fault of those who have not yet succumbed to his boss’s demand that you take the jab:

The reality is that the only way we’re going to get to a place where we work through this transition is if everyone in America and everyone around the world gets vaccinated.

There is a word for this and it’s not actually blackmail. It’s terrorism. Until that part of America which has to this point decided that it does not want to take an unproven medical treatment is browbeaten – or worse – into submission to Fauci’s needle, the rest of the country will continue to suffer through empty shelves and a crappy Christmas.

Too strong a word? Here’s how the dictionary defines terrorism:

Threat: You will eat nothing and you will be happy.

Political objective: Get the shot!

It’s terrorism plain and simple and the Biden Administration’s “War on Us” is taking a dangerous turn. The millions who have taken the shot are being baited to attack those who have for whatever reason – including the medically sound acquisition of natural immunity through contracting and defeating the virus – declined to take the medical procedure. In reality both groups should unite against the past two Administrations which have lied and intimidated Americans over the virus from nearly day one. But that would threaten the elites, who rule by divide-and-conquer tactics.

It’s not hyperbole to – after having closely watched the dark cloud of propaganda-induced hysteria descend on what many of us retrospectively incorrectly believed was a more-or-less a freedom-loving American spirit – start worrying about them mobilizing the boxcars and heating up the ovens…

*

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

Featured image is from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Israeli authorities have stopped dozens of Jewish families of the Lev Tahor ultra-Orthodox sect from fleeing to Iran  where they had applied for asylum.

“Israel and the US are working to prevent members of an extremist ultra-Orthodox sect from moving to Iran, amid fears they could be used as a bargaining chip by Tehran,” the Times of Israel newspaper reported, noting that the group; which is anti-Zionist, applied for political asylum in 2018.

The paper said documents presented at a US federal court in 2019 showed that leaders of the Hasidic community requested asylum in Iran and swore allegiance to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

According to the Ynet News site, concerns were building that hundreds of members of the group, mainly based in Guatemala, could be trying to move to Iran after dozens of families were spotted at the airport in Guatemala, apparently on their way to the Kurdistan-Iran border.

The report said their relatives contacted the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Justice Department and asked them to urgently contact their Guatemalan counterparts to prevent the families from leaving.

According to reports, the Guatemalan authorities detained a number of the group’s members who hold American citizenship.

“The Shalit deal will look like child’s play next to this,” the relatives said, referring to the 2011 prisoner deal with Hamas in which Israel released 1,027 Palestinian prisoners in exchange for soldier Gilad Shalit.

*

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: Israeli police officers clash with Ultra Orthodox Jewish men during a protest against the enforcement of coronavirus emergency regulations, in the Ultra Orthodox jewish neighborhood of Mea Shearim, Jerusalem, October 4, 2020 (photo credit: NATI SHOHAT/FLASH90)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

One of the biggest moments in Julian Assange’s trial is slated to happen next month, when the embattled and imprisoned WikiLeaks founder’s final extradition hearing is held in Great Britain. And as host Lee Camp points out before introducing his guest in this clip from “Redacted Tonight,” there have been some stunning developments recently in Assange’s story—namely, the revelation that the U.S. government and a certain three-letter intelligence agency were ginning up possible plans to assassinate Assange.

If ever there were an expert on Julian Assange, it would surely be Camp’s guest, John Shipton—Assange’s father—who calls the assassination plot considered by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other U.S. officials “pretty scandalous,” if not entirely surprising. Shipton also holds forth on the American government’s big quandary if Assange were to be brought onto U.S. soil to face charges, the man who perjured himself to implicate Assange, and why he thinks his son’s work has been a “great success” despite his plight. Have a look at the clip above to watch the whole interview.

*

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: Julian Assange’s father John Shipton outside the court where his son is on trial in London, September 2020. (Twitter)

The COVID-19 “Vaccine” and the Nuremberg Code. Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 17, 2021

Needless to say this is a multi-billion dollar operation for Big Pharma. In a bitter irony, Pfizer which is playing a dominant role in marketing the vaccine at the level of the entire planet, has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice (for more details see below).

The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society

By Dr. Pascal Sacré, October 17, 2021

All current propaganda on the COVID-19 pandemic is based on an assumption that is considered obvious, true and no longer questioned: Positive RT-PCR test means being sick with COVID. This assumption is misleading.

Dystopian “Great Reset”: “Own Nothing and Be Happy”, Being Human in 2030

By Colin Todhunter, October 17, 2021

The Great Reset entails a transformation of society resulting in permanent restrictions on fundamental liberties and mass surveillance as entire sectors are sacrificed to boost the monopoly and hegemony of pharmaceuticals corporations, high-tech/big data giants, Amazon, Google, major global chains, the digital payments sector, biotech concerns, etc.

Does the PCR Test Affect the Pineal Gland? Humans and “Transhumans”. Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger

By Peter Koenig, October 17, 2021

strid Stuckelberger provides insights into the inner works of WHO. She explains how the actions of WHO violate their own regulations. She says that the pandemic is organized internationally in a systemic way. “What is shocking”, she says, “is that they are all saying exactly the same thing, all media, all newspapers, all airports – in all UN countries…”

Video: Pfizer Has a Criminal Record. Is It Relevant?

By US Department of Justice, October 17, 2021

Pfizer Inc which is currently involved in the Worldwide distribution of the mRNA vaccine, was accused in 2009 of “Fraudulent Marketing”. Pfizer in 2009 agreed to “plead guilty to a felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.”

Climate Change Worse than Expected: A Conversation with Guy McPherson

By Michael Welch, October 17, 2021

Professor McPherson, who typically grounds his work in the peer reviewed journal literature, comes on the show this week to review the aspects of the climate the IPCC doesn’t mention. He comes to the conclusion that the threat of rapid acceleration is not coming decades from now, but mere years or even months away.

Hospital Denies Life-Saving Kidney Transplant for Woman Who Had COVID and Won’t Get Vaccine

By Jeremy Loffredo, October 16, 2021

In the latest episode of “The Jimmy Dore Show,” comedian and political commentator Jimmy Dore discussed vaccine mandates and the story of a Denver, Colorado, woman who is being denied a life-saving medical procedure because she’s unvaccinated against COVID.

27,247 Deaths and 2,563,768 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database – Taiwan Records More Deaths from Vaccine than Virus

By Brian Shilhavy, October 16, 2021

The true number of people dying and becoming crippled worldwide following the COVID-19 shots is unknown, since the adverse reaction systems used in most countries are passive systems, and there is tremendous pressure to NOT relate a disability or death to the COVID shots.

Video: The Pandemic is a Global Coup d’état. Reiner Füllmich

By Free West Media and Abraham AbdulKarim, October 16, 2021

Füllmich is a consumer protection trial lawyer invited to talk about his work as one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July 10, 2020, he has been listening to large numbers of international scientists’ and experts’ testimonies, to find answers to questions about the pandemic, being asked by people worldwide.

What Happens When Doctors Buck Government Narrative on COVID?

By Children’s Health Defense, October 16, 2021

In the latest episode of “Doctors and Scientists” on CHD.TV, host Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., interviewed Dr. Alvin Moss on the threats medical professionals and scientists face when they step away from the mainstream narrative.