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).
On September 9th,Joe Biden made the announcement that all employers with more than 100 workers would be required to enforce a national worker vaccine mandate. The White House stated that OSHA would, “develop a rule that will require all employers with 100 or more employees to ensure their workforce is fully vaccinated.”
However, following the announcement we noted OSHA was not taking any steps needed to engage with business interests to trigger the first-step in the organization of a process to initiate a rule-making process.
I’m only talking about the basic guidance aspect. The labor discussions with internal and external customers of the DoL, OSHA, etc. to set a calendar for how to implement “guidance”, just that part. There was nothing, and there is nothing.
Finally today, three weeks later, a stenographer for the regime asked the question. Pay close attention to the White House response: [13:45 Prompted] WATCH:
As noted in the obtuse response, the White House has no idea what the current plan is for OSHA to create this rule that will require a national mandate for private sector workers. The emphasis is on voluntary compliance as an outcome of the decree that a mandate would be forthcoming.
Folks, this looks like a complete con job, pushed by the Biden administration to provide cover for corporations to create a mandate on their own. Meaning the intent of the announcement was to create momentum for increased vaccinations, while the Biden regime never did or does intend to use OSHA as a national enforcement mechanism.
There are three elements: (1) Federal worker mandate; (2) Federal contractor mandate; and the big controversial one, (3) a national worker mandate for companies with over 100 employees.
Focusing on #3, the big one. The only material from the White House on the BIG CONTROVERSIAL national worker mandate is a small paragraph on the WH COVID PLAN section:
That’s it folks. Three weeks later, and that’s the sum total of everything about the biggest economic and workforce disruption in the history of the nation. That one paragraph posted on September 10th.
Why is this important?
Well, the U.S. Department of Labor website has ZERO mentions of this national mandate. ZERO, nothing… nada, zilch. [SEE HERE]
Looking at the OSHA COVID information portal, used by employers and legal execs, will show you the exact same result. Nothing. [SEE HERE]
Notice there’s no date for DoL or OSHA delivery of any employer guidance or details. Nothing.
Think about this. This is the largest nationwide change to employment eligibility requirement in U.S. history. Nothing else is even close… and yet, if you didn’t watch the Biden announcement or read the media discussion about the Biden announcement, you wouldn’t be able to find a single detail about it – anywhere.
This is not normal; not even close to normal… even for the federal government.
If there was a federal intent to actually force American workers to get forcibly vaccinated as a condition of employment, there would be daily updates from a massive inter-agency network of compliance offices, regulatory agencies and private sector business interests giving updates and briefings. And yes, that pertains only to the anticipated guidance part, not to the actual setting of a deadline and working through the implementation phase of the national mandate.
I’m only talking about the basic guidance aspect. The labor discussions with internal and external customers of the DoL, OSHA, etc. to set a calendar for how to implement “guidance”, just that part. There’s nothing.
The absence of even a scintilla of material to indicate the White House or any federal agency is organizing an action plan of how to structure the guidance itself is telling. The silence of the machine tells us it is not turned on. The bureaucracy has not been triggered. The machinery of the federal government has not been instructed to begin any process to execute on the instruction that OSHA will, “develop a rule that will require all employers with 100 or more employees to ensure their workforce is fully vaccinated.” Nothing.
The silence is deafening.
It appears the Department of Labor has no intention of ever even triggering the process to get OSHA to begin evaluating how they could even begin to pull this off…. and again, for emphasis, I’m only talking about the tiny step of delivering initial guidance to employers that would indicate to them that OSHA was developing a rule.
There’s no deadline for OSHA to generate the guidance – and there’s certainly no deadline for the OSHA rule itself, which will come as an outcome of that initial guidance part.
Some have speculated that Joe Biden’s big White House announcement was nothing more than a distraction. There’s no way for them to ever get over the hurdles that would come from immediate employer backlash on the federal mandate; and they have no intent on even trying. Meaning, it was all a big distraction -never intended execute- and always intended to clear the national conversation of all Biden-centric controversies and reset the administration.
That speculation looks exactly correct.
If 80 million Americans are unvaxxed, and even if only a quarter of those are Main Street employed, the entire social and economic system would grind to a halt if 20 million heavily productive people quit working for 100+ employee companies and went to work much smaller operations. Remember, this is the workforce that was called “essential workers” last year. They were essential for a reason.
A grocery chain cannot lose 20 essential people per store, + warehouse and distribution, and still function. A WalMart cannot lose 50 essential workers per store, + warehouse and distribution, and still function. A hospital or hotel cannot lose 20 to 50 essential workers per operation and still function.
Ford? GM? Auto-workers in general? Labor Unions? AFSCME? SEIU? Police, Fire, Emergency First Responders? I cannot see a reasonable scenario where the national worker vaccination mandate is even feasible with an eligible 80+ million unvaccinated holding out.
A week after the announcement CTH said, “I would not be surprised to see nothing more ever said about this “National Employment Vaccine Mandate””, and indeed, until today nothing was ever said about it. When questioned today, the White House says that private companies are already moving forward “on their own” without federal rules in place for enforcement.
That now looks like it was the intended plan all along.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All images in this article are from The Last Refuge unless otherwise stated
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
“It’s completely understandable that people want to get on with their lives, but we will not be going back to the old normal.” – WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus
“Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal…The short response is: never. Nothing will ever return to the ‘broken’ sense of normalcy that prevailed prior to the crisis because the coronavirus pandemic marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory.” – Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum
***
20 More Reasons Why a COVID-19 Pandemic Never Existed
As demonstrated throughout the first article in this series, the so-called pandemic that changed the course of human history is nothing like we’ve been told by “official” sources and mainstream media marionettes.
The real pandemic being perpetrated against humanity is one of unprecedented tyranny, lies, and corruption.
While the world has been set on fire with the flames of vaccine mandates, food and supply shortages, hyperinflation, unemployment, and police state crackdowns, the global cabal sitting atop this wide-reaching catastrophe is steadily implementing plans to reshape and reset the world to their advantage. Aided by the current crop of political dictators, Big Tech tyrants, medical mafiosos, and a whole host of public-private partners, the agenda to rob us of everything (remember, you’ll own nothing and be happy) including the right to refuse medicine is happening at warp speed. They have been planning this for a couple of centuries. We are experiencing the poisonous fruits of their efforts in a real live drill for control of the planet.
Remember, the reason we are in this plight is because of the declared state of emergency issued by President Trump and continued under the Biden regime. Leaders from many other countries also followed the same script. Again, if the “pandemic” can be proven to be fraudulent, then all emergency executive orders and mandates must be immediately revoked!
It is important that this information is shared so that the pandemic illusion can be completely shattered. These additional 20 facts will further invalidate that this emergency ever truly existed.
#21 – Hydroxychloroquine was sidelined to make sure vaccines were the only available treatment for COVID-19.
On March 30, 2020 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the emergency use of Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine to treat COVID-19. On June 15, 2020 the EUA was revoked and the FDA “determined that Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine are unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA.” This revocation took place despite the fact that the NIH knew Hydroxychloroquine was effective in treating coronaviruses as early as 2005.
The National Pulse reported that a document no longer available from the FDA regarding “emergency use authorization” of potential COVID-19 treatments appeared to suggest that Hydroxychloroquine satisfied the criteria for the classification, but would have stood in the way of other lucrative drugs and a vaccine.
The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) even sued the FDA for withholding from the public some 60 million doses of Hydroxychloroquine that were donated by drug manufacturers to treat coronavirus patients.
Please see the following list of studies proving that Hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment for COVID-19 here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
#22 – Props were used to make the “pandemic” look worse than it actually was.
In March 2020, U.S. states and countries around the world began constructing makeshift hospital facilities to accommodate the expected surge of COVID-19 patients. New York anticipated needing an extra 87,000 beds as the Javits Center was converted into a hospital by the Army Corp of Engineers. The U.S.S. Comfort was also deployed to New York City while the U.S.S. Mercy was deployed to Los Angeles. This was all a sham, meant to trick the public into thinking the situation was much more dire than reality. An article in the Navy Times revealed the truth about these makeshift facilities, stating:
By the time of Comfort’s departure, the approximately 1,200-person crew and 1,000-bed hospital had treated just 182 patients, of which approximately 70 percent had COVID-19, according to Capt. Patrick Amersbach, commanding officer of the Comfort’s Medical Treatment Facility.
Underutilization of added medical resources in New York City is not unique to the Comfort. Thousands of hospital beds made available in a converted convention center have gone largely unused after quick assembly by the Army Corps of Engineers.
The Javits Center, which was initially envisioned as a 2,500-bed field hospital for non-COVID-19 patients, converted to coronavirus-only hospital shortly after going operational. Still, the highest number of patients treated at the convention center at one time topped out at close to 500.
Similarly, the U.S.S. Mercy had only treated 77 non-infected patients by the time it departed the port of Los Angeles.
#23 – Big Tech, the White House, the media, and governments worldwide joined to censor information.
Facebook, Twitter, Google, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Reddit, and YouTube issued a joint statement about combating fraud and misinformation about the virus, basically admitting collusion to censor views that dissent from the official narrative. In an interview on CNN, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki justified censorship of opinions not supported by “authoritative sources,” stating “anything that would go against World Health Organization recommendations would be a violation of our policy. And so, removing information is another really important part of our policy.” Countless individuals, organizations, medical professionals, and political figures were censored, suspended, or completely de-platformed for expressing opinions or citing factual information that poked holes in the story spun by entities like the WHO, CDC, FDA, the White House, and United Nations.
Solving a “pandemic” is not like a mathematical equation where there can only be one right answer. Censorship of differing views and factual information is not a scientific principle, but a totalitarian one that actually violates the scientific method.
#24 – Surprise! COVID-19 doesn’t just infect humans.
Animals including tigers, dogs, cats, gorillas, goats, and even fruit and Coca-Cola all tested positive for COVID-19. Since coronaviruses are very common and were “discovered” in the 1960s, doesn’t this reinforce that these tests are pointless for diagnosing illness, but perfect for creating hysteria and the justification for draconian measures?
The only people who need masks are those who are already infected to keep from exposing others. The masks sold at drugstores aren’t even good enough to truly protect anyone, Fauci said.
“If you look at the masks that you buy in a drugstore, the leakage around that doesn’t really do much to protect you,” he said. “People start saying, ‘Should I start wearing a mask?’ Now, in the United States, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to wear a mask.”
In a Dave Rubenstein Show interview in May 2019, Fauci called mask wearing “paranoid” and advised against it as protection against infectious diseases.
An article by Bill Hennessy documented the New England Journal of Medicine’s stance on masks, citing:
We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to COVID-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic COVID-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching COVID-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.
So, why are we ordered to wear masks? Symbolism. From the same article in NEJM:
It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals.
On April 3, 2020 the initial sentiment around universal masking was reversed when President Trump announced that the CDC recommended that citizens wear cloth face masks in public to stop the spread of the virus. States then began issuing mask mandates even for children, and the controversy about their usage has never gone away.
There have been hundreds of face mask studies. One of the best compilations can be found on Life Site News, where they cite 47 studies that confirm masks are ineffective for COVID-19 and 32 additional studies that confirm they have negative health effects. So, the overwhelming scientific consensus confirms what we were told from the very beginning: masks do not work! Wearing a face mask is nothing more than virtue signaling and blind obedience to today’s scientific cult leaders.
#26 – There are several other reasons that could explain the sickness and death supposedly caused by COVID-19.
Nitrogen Dioxide exposure. A research article in Science Direct, originally published in April 2020, concluded that chronic exposure to Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) could have contributed to COVID-19 fatalities in places like Italy, Spain, France, Germany, and “maybe across the whole world.”
Air Pollution.Harvard scientists discovered that a small increase in long-term exposure to air pollution (fine particulate matter – PM5) led to a large increase in the COVID-19 death rate. Wuhan (China), New York City, Lombardy (Italy), and many of the initial coronavirus hotspots also have extremely high levels of air pollution. Could people who were poisoned by air pollution have been misdiagnosed with COVID-19? See also here.
Vitamin B1 deficiency (beriberi) and tuberculosis. A fascinating series of articles by health journalist Bill Sardi document how COVID-19 symptoms such as “racing heart, chronic headache, crushing fatigue and even shortness of breath can only be explained by a deficiency of vitamin B1. No coronavirus, flu bug, or any other infection produces the symptoms observed with COVID-19.” See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. Sardi also posited that COVID-19 diagnoses could also be cases of tuberculosis since many of the symptoms are the same.
Prominent medical researcher Knutt M. Wittkowski criticized the lockdown approach saying, “With all respiratory diseases, the only thing that stops the disease is herd immunity. About 80% of the people need to have had contact with the virus, and the majority of them won’t even have recognized that they were infected, or they had very, very mild symptoms, especially if they are children. So, it’s very important to keep the schools open and kids mingling to spread the virus to get herd immunity as fast as possible…”
Researchers at Well Being Trust and the Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies in Family Medicine and Primary Care estimated that 75,000 people could die from alcohol, drug abuse and suicide, calling them “deaths of despair.”
The application of lockdowns was arbitrary and inconsistent. Why were liquor and cannabis stores allowed to stay open when churches were forced to close? Why were some businesses (mostly big box stores and major corporations) deemed essential while others were shuttered and forced to apply for government handouts just to survive?
If lockdowns worked, the “pandemic” should have ended as early as summer 2020! Much more could be said on this topic, but I think you get the point.
#29 – Quarantining healthy people is tyrannical and goes against all conventional wisdom.
The Great Barrington Declaration, signed by close to 60,000 scientists and medical professionals and over 800,000 lay people, advised that only the sick should be quarantined. The declaration states, “The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.”
Focused Protection has been standard practice for every previous epidemic or pandemic situation. Healthy people should be free to resume normal life and risk exposure. National and regional lockdowns which quarantine the healthy with the sick are nonsensical and have only served to prolong the “pandemic” situation.
#30 – Risk to children is extremely minimal.
A study by Iceland company deCode Genetics revealed that“children under 10 are less likely to get infected than adults and if they get infected, they are less likely to get seriously ill…even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.”
Data from WorldOMeter showed that children aged 0-17 years have a 0.02-0.06% share of world COVID-19 deaths, which is essentially zero.
A New England Journal of Medicine article advocated for schools to reopen for in person learning, stating “From a clinical standpoint, most children 1 to 18 years old experience mild or no illness from COVID-19 and are much less likely than adults to face severe consequences from the infection.”
Scott Atlas, former member of Trump’s coronavirus task force, stated “We know who is at risk. Only 0.2 percent of U.S. deaths have been people younger than 25, and 80 percent have been in people over 65; the average fatality age is 78.
A JAMA Pediatrics study of North American pediatric hospitals flatly stated that “our data indicate that children are at far greater risk of critical illness from influenza than from COVID-19.”
#31 – Though often vilified, marginalized, and censored, other treatments for COVID-19 exist and are proven to be effective, including:
#33 – George Floyd protests proved “COVID-19 prevention measures” had nothing to do with public health.
The protests that erupted over the death of George Floyd violated social distancing and, in many instances, mask wearing rules. The protests were encouraged by leftist politicians and mainstream media. Other events where crowds gathered such as the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota or organized lockdown protests were deemed “super spreader” events and widely condemned by these same leftists. This blatant hypocrisy shows that this is a political pandemic more than anything else.
#34 – Public officials’ hypocrisy in violating their own rules also prove “COVID-19 prevention measures” had nothing to do with public health.
I’ll just list some of their names; you probably know the instance(s).
Bureaucrats have created “rules for thee, but not for me” and love to openly flaunt their self-perceived superiority every chance they get!
#35 – There is strong evidence that the coronavirus “pandemic” was pre-planned.
Besides the widely known Event 201 pandemic exercise, governments have been conducting exercises to prepare for a global pandemic for a long time. I have already documented the many exercises, documents, legal proceedings, and conferences that have taken place (please see The Back Story and The Ramp Up from my COVID Chronicles series). Since all this planning has been taking place for at least 20 years, why did everything go so poorly?
#36 – Governments have tried to inflate illnesses into pandemics when not justified before.
You would think that with the foreknowledge gathered during the various pandemic exercises conducted over the last two decades, something simple like shutting down air travel in the place where the outbreak first occurred would have been one of the first priorities. However, that did not happen. Why is that?
#38 – Constant confusion and misinformation from public health and government officials keep people fearful and bewildered.
Remember the mantra “order out of chaos” because this is the modus operandi of the “global elite.” They have purposefully sowed confusion and chaos regarding the nature of the “virus,” where it originated, how it is transmitted, its lethality, how variants emerge, how the tests work, whether one can develop natural immunity, if masks work and if so, how many need to be worn, and on and on. They continually contradict previous statements that seemed definitive at the time, keeping the naïve public constantly off balance and in a perpetual state of cognitive dissonance. Why anyone still trusts anything coming out of their constantly lying orifices is completely baffling! Nevertheless, many still do trust, and their ignorance and obedience serve to perpetuate the “pandemic” and the slippery slope to complete tyranny!
#39 – The “pandemic” ushered in the rise of authoritarian leadership just as predicted in the 2010 Rockefeller Report (see page 18).
By now it should be obvious that from the outset, the entire goal of this “pandemic” has been to inoculate the entire planet with a “vaccine.” Why else would all other treatments (besides Big Pharma-backed ones like Remdesivir) be banned or vilified? Why else would there be so much pressure to roll up one’s sleeve and take the jab? Why else would there be so much propaganda regarding how “safe and effective” COVID-19 vaccines are, when there is so much evidence to the contrary?
Since the vaccination campaigns began, most countries are still not back to normal (especially in places like Australia and Italy). The goalpost keeps getting moved while authoritarian mandates and controls accelerate. It is just like Rockefeller predicted and Schwab and Ghebreyesus have stated – We will not be returning to normal.
The Joke’s On Us
Unless people wake up and realize that this entire “pandemic” has been an excuse to install global governance and increase authoritarian control, these cabalists may get their wish. Now that you are armed with the facts, it is your duty to spread this information far and wide! RESISTANCE IS MANDATORY if you want to live freely.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
In 1943, the writer and literature professor C.S. Lewis delivered a series of three evening lectures at King’s College, Newcastle. In the third and final part of his lecture series titled “The Abolition of Man,” he spoke of how science can be misused. A literary giant who is known for his pro-Christian texts linked the progress of science to man’s aspiration to dominate nature. Lewis stated, “Man’s conquest of nature, if the dreams of some scientific planners are realized, means the rule of a few hundreds of men over billions upon billions of men.”
Over half a century later, we are seeing “science”, in the hands of the few, being used to reshape the world.
The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the disintegration of the global economy which began unraveling in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. In mid 2020, as the economy had yet to recover, the World Economic Forum (WEF) announced its plan for a “Great Reset” to re-engineer the global economy as the world emerged from the pandemic.
Participants in the initiative include international governmental organizations such as the United Nations and its specialized agency the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as well as leading global corporations.
Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of WEF, called the initiative of the Great Reset “The Fourth Industrial Revolution” that opens up a new chapter for human development. Using science and advanced technology such as artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and genetic engineering, its stated goal is said to create a “fusion of our physical, digital and biological identity.”
Merging humans with the machine
Steps toward the merging of digital technologies and biological systems are already taking place with the idea of the immunity passport – a form of documentation that could prove a person has received the required number of shots of an approved Covid-19 vaccine. On August 27, 2021, the WHO released a guiding document for a digital certificate for COVID-19 vaccination status. Funded by organizations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, it is intended that this digital information system be used to implement a vaccine passport in every country.
A COVID vaccination certificate system has been already rolled out in Israel, some European countries, and in US cities such as New York and San Francisco. Current uses for the vaccine passport include denying those who are unvaccinated access to restaurants, bars, gyms and trains. This program separates people based on health status and creates a system of medical and socio-economic apartheid.
Government issued QR-code health passes could be used to launch a China style authoritarian government program. With the use of big data, face recognition technology and machine learning, China’s social credit system monitors and regulates people’s behavior. It ranks them based on their ‘social credit’, rewarding ‘good’ citizens, while punishing ‘bad’ citizens.
Millions across the world are now protesting against the introduction of a Vax digital ID passport app.
If you don't understand why, please watch this 2min video. 👇
Now, it looks like China’s social scoring technocracy is coming to the West. Under algorithmic governance that enforces obedience and conformity, human beings will become automatons, not being able to make independent decisions about their own actions.
Internet of bodies
The enslavement of humanity in cyberspace is not the end goal. The convergence of biological and digital identity will bring about a radical transformation of human beings. Lewis recognized man’s aspiration to control nature would lead to the abolition of our humanity, and that the timing of this change was not far off:
“The final stage is come when Man by eugenics, by prenatal conditioning, and by an education and propaganda based on a perfect applied psychology, has obtained full control over himself. Human nature will be the last part of nature to surrender to Man. The battle will then be won.”
In the digital age, the advancement of technology is opening up many possibilities for human beings to transform themselves. By experimenting with a range of high-tech innovations, teams behind the Great Reset are now seeking to exploit this uncharted territory.
In July 2020, WEF published the white paper titled, “Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies: New Challenges of Technology Governance.” A 28-page document introduced the concept of the internet of bodies (IoB) as “the network of human bodies and data through connected sensors”. It explained how these sensors can be attached to human bodies through consumer wearable devices or “implanted within or ingested into human bodies to monitor, analyse and even modify human bodies and behavior.”
The “utopia” of WEF’s Fourth Industrial Revolution.#VaccinePassports/Digital ID/Wallet for 24/7 surveillance from cradle to grave: where/what you eat, buy, travel, exercise, medical records, internet search & social media history – all analysed for social scoring.
Those who are working to bring related products to market claim that the application of IoB could change human beings as a natural concept. Seizing the power of this technology, this can be viewed as an attempt to claim ownership of human bodies, to gain access to the thoughts, emotions and biorhythmic data of individuals. Their vision seeks to create a post-human society by transforming “the human body into a new technology platform.”
Politicization of public health
Capitalising on the ongoing pandemic, while people are kept in fear and uncertainty, the end game is being played out for man’s final conquest of nature. Those who aspire to eradicate the human race in its natural state steer the societal narrative in order to ensnare the population in their web of control.
Since it declared a global pandemic on March 11, 2020, the WHO has quickly positioned itself as the preeminent global health authority. With its own process of gathering data, research and evaluation, the organization has spearheaded global public health efforts, advising countries on how to respond to the COVID-19 crisis. They have published guidance as to how to minimize the risk of spreading, or catching the virus, together with its own website ‘myth-buster’, which purports to debunk what they deem to be unsubstantiated information or “medical misinformation” online.
In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a branch of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), working in partnership with the WHO, began to set guidelines and give recommendations. As new rules and restrictions have been put into place, the concept of ‘public health’ has become politicized.
From face mask policies to “lockdown” measures, corporate media framed the issues in a false dichotomy of liberal and conservative talking points. First, major media networks have dismissed anyone questioning the official pandemic narrative as “conspiracy theorists” and accused them of spreading harmful misinformation to the public. Then they indiscriminately labeled them as “Covid deniers,” and branded them as “far right,” or “Trumpers,” and “anti-science.”
Using the rhetoric of ‘protecting the vulnerable’ and elderly populations from the deadly virus, a moral sentiment was provoked. By flooding the media with images of maskless protesters defying a stay at home order and storming into grocery stores, television cable channels have managed to paint those who questioned the official pandemic response as selfish and reckless individuals who only care about their own individual freedom.
Psychological operation
In this politicization of public health, the liberal intelligentsia has tapped into the Democrats’ prolonged sense of victimhood and their deep seated hatred of Donald Trump. Media have successfully exploited the trauma felt by Democrats and Clinton supporters, endured during Trump’s four years in office, and effectively redirected their frustration and anger towards what is now being presented as a new opponent – the irresponsible, virus spreading “Covidiot” who continues to insist on exercising personal liberty.
Hedged into a narrow political spectrum, the political left has been encouraged to perceive conservatives as causing harm and ignoring the greater good. They see the situation as Republican leaders politicizing the pandemic with “FreeDumb” propaganda, as was expressed recently in this article on CounterPunch.
Meanwhile, those who oppose coronavirus restrictions are made to feel that progressives are infringing on the rights of those who do not agree with them. The dissenters develop animosity toward the Democrats who wear masks, in turn engaging in name-calling, such as ‘a bunch of obedient sheep blindly following the orders.’
What we are seeing now is a sophisticated psychological manipulation being conducted on the public.Psychological operations (PSYOPS) are techniques used by military and police forces to convey selected information to influence the perception of adversaries. It works on the values and belief systems of targeted individuals, manipulating emotions and reasoning to reinforce attitudes and behaviors that are favorable to the agendas of operators. This type of weaponized applied behavioral psychology has been used by the U.S. military on the battlefield and political spheres in countries like Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, to demoralize enemy troops, foment civil unrest, and gain support of civilians so as to achieve the U.S. military objectives.
Both Americans and Europeans might be naïve to think that this type of operation will not be carried out against them in a domestic setting, yet coordinated intelligence operations have long been used to influence the public.
Throughout the COVID-19 crisis, psychological warfare has been waged against ordinary people in the U.S. and worldwide. Divide and conquer tactics create a fog of war, using algorithms to target people’s vulnerability and exploit their emotions. In this battle, the issue of vaccines has become a key issue to determine which side of the camps one is in, dividing family, breaking up friendships and marriages alike. These efforts have been reinforced by Silicon Valley tech giants who are actively steering and censoring the global discussion and debate on important public health topics, further manipulating the public and conjuring a fierce political fight on the social media platforms.
Battle for a moral narrative
Governments everywhere have been pushing a pro-vaccine narrative with inadequately supported claims of safety and effectiveness in terms of the product’s ability to stop the infection and spread of Covid-19.
For instance, the clinical trials of the experimental injections have yet to be completed (Moderna’s trials go to 2022, Pfizer’s until 2023) and there have been no studies of medium or long-term consequences (authorities insist there is no time to wait for this data because of the severity of the pandemic crisis) and adverse event risk analysis is woefully incomplete.
Also, recent reports have shown that vaccinated people can still transmit the virus, and it has been reported that the so-called “breakthrough” cases, now overwhelming in the most vaccinated countries, may be caused by vaccination. Furthermore, there is now a growing body of literature showing that natural immunity is superior in strength and longevity to vaccine-induced immunity.
Instead of engaging in fact-based debate to address doctors’ concerns and clarify contradictory reports, the Cable News Network invites in various medical experts who act like spokespeople for Big Pharma.
Insane disinformation propagated by Dr. Leana Wen on national TV. Her and other agencies actions are leading to increasing deaths – she and they are literally citing a FRAUDULENT paper to support their lies as proven in this review https://t.co/PUCPGqTIk2pic.twitter.com/oKMA37X7e9
Concerted efforts of the legacy media have been used to suppress information on early treatment that could be beneficial to the public, paving the way for the perception that a vaccine is the only way to end the pandemic. With a message of “we are all in this together,” we were told we need to accept the government’s mandate “for the public good.”
Discourse that is not founded on medical facts and is wrapped up with the concept of public duty seems to have affected prominent liberal intellectuals like Noam Chomsky, and institutions such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) which recently issued a puzzling statement saying that the vaccine mandates further civil liberty.
Their virtue-signalling has influenced public opinion on the political left. Organized networks of self-righteous social justice activists have been quickly formed online to engage in the shaming and guilt-tripping of fellow citizens who dare to question or comment negatively on official policies, or who refuse to take the vaccine.
For instance, comedian and political commentator Jimmy Dore faced backlash on social media when he shared his own experience of adverse side effects after receiving his second dose of the Moderna Covid vaccine. In an interview with podcaster Joe Rogan, he said that people started to call him an ‘anti-vaxxer,’ and that he was pressured not to share any more information about his reactions.
Demonization of unvaccinated
The moral battle that has been engineered maintains its structure through marginalizing a certain population and assigning them negative attributes. From black, indigenous, and people of color, and other immigrants, governments have often used minority groups as a means of social control and source of blame for a country’s domestic problems. In the wake of 9/11, American Muslims were scapegoated for the terrifying reality of terrorism on U.S. soil. Now, in this Covid crisis, the unvaccinated have become a target for demonization. By using the phrase “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” President Joe Biden has portrayed unvaccinated people as those who pose a threat to public health, stopping society from moving forward.
Placing blame on the unvaccinated has helped spread a new type of discrimination. In some hospitals, doctors have begun to refuse to treat the unvaccinated, making those who are vaccinated a priority when resources are scarce. Vilification of those who have not gotten a shot has increased, such as when The Atlanticpublished an article from former Obama Homeland Security official Juliette Kayyem calling for unvaccinated people to be put on the No Fly List.
This type of discrimination can escalate quickly. Arne Duncan, who served as former President Obama’s Education Secretary for seven years, compared unvaccinated Americans to suicide bombers at the Kabul airport. In his tweet, he noted that anti-mask and anti-vax people “blow themselves up, inflict harm on those around them, and are convinced they are fighting for freedom.”
These wild imaginations have been acted out in other Western countries. In France, a woman who tried to enter a shopping mall without proof of vaccine passport was violently beaten by the security forces.
Paris police beat woman who tried to go shopping at the mall without a vaccine passport.pic.twitter.com/twZiKIpX2P
On the streets of Paris, police are using teargas during their confrontation with the protesters opposing the vaccine passport. Similar scenes can be seen in other countries.
New domestic terrorism
Now, with the rise of the allegedly highly contagious Delta variant, governments are intensifying their fight against the coronavirus. Accompanied by media fear mongering, the drumbeat for ‘the war on Covid-19’ is getting louder.
Earlier this month, on September 9, President Biden announced his intention to expand the executive branch’s power to require all federal workers to get vaccinated, while this mandate does not extend to members of Congress. He also stated his intention to force all private businesses with over 100 employees to get COVID vaccinations or be tested for coronavirus at least once a week.
During his announcement the President heaped even more disdain on the unvaccinated, saying they are “keeping us from turning the corner” and “making people sick, causing unvaccinated people to die.” He then said that the fight against the virus requires defeating those who are reluctant to get a shot, and that he intended to make them roll up their sleeves.
Biden’s forceful Covid-19 vaccine speech came at a time when his administration introduced the government’s new strategy to confront domestic terrorism. Journalist Whitney Webb reported that despite its stated aim of tackling “right-wing white supremacists”, the policy targets anyone who criticizes the government’s authority.
But who are the unvaccinated, now being treated like a dangerous virus that needs to be dispatched? In reality, they are not confined to some fringe element of society. They represent a broad range of professionals including police officers, military members, firefighters, teachers and students. They are physicians, nurses and other ‘essential’ workers who put their lives on the frontline during the pandemic – and are now told to take a jab or lose a job.
Silenced majority
The politicians and media pundits call those who are refusing to take doses “anti-vaxxers.” But many of them are not strictly anti-vaccine. Rather, they are anti government (or corporate) mandating of the vaccine. Most have had other vaccines previously, and vaccinated their children. Many have even taken the Covid vaccine. They are also those who came to a decision that a Covid-19 vaccine is not right for them, whether it is for medical, personal health or religious reasons. They believe in medical freedom and choose natural remedies; to eat wholesome food and work with the body’s innate capacity for healing. They are individuals who are standing up for bodily autonomy with the conviction that the government has no right to inject things that they don’t want into their body.
‼️This is — without a doubt — the best articulation as to the ethical problem posed by mandatory vaccines or vaccine passports.
Dr. Julie Ponesse explains the dilemma in a persuasive manner.
Mass media depict them as right-wing extremists, but they do not belong to either the left or the right. They are a silenced majority, being betrayed and abandoned by elected leaders and now being pushed into political exile.
Despite health officials calling them anti-science, many of them believe in science and hold a view that science requires rigorous studies and open debate. They are those who have acquired natural immunity because they already had the virus. They are people who were injured after the first dose and the doctor advised not to take a second dose. They are people whose immune systems are compromised and who cannot take a shot, even if they want to. They are parents who are concerned that their little children are categorized as disease reservoirs and do not want to accept medical treatment from manufacturers and healthcare providers that are shielded from legal liability.
While the vaccinated represent a largely privileged class in a society, among the majority of unvaccinated are poor and people of color from marginalized communities. Black people have been showing hesitancy because they distrust the government based on historic injustices like the Tuskegee experiment and other past experience of abuse at the hands of the government.
Awakening human heart
The war on Covid is a war on humanity. In this pandemic crisis, we have been made to be afraid of an invisible virus. The fear has frozen our hearts, making us afraid of our own neighbors. With the practice of social distancing, we have been conditioned to see each other as a threat from which we need to protect ourselves. Now, career politicians who have never once cared about public health are telling us that we have to sacrifice our freedom to bring society back to normal. They are now further dividing us into a new class of ‘vaxxed’ or ‘non-vaxxed’ to make us fight against one another.
With the vaccine mandate and digital ID, the movers of the Great Reset aim to open a new chapter for a society without humanity. Under the slogan “Build Back Better,” political leaders and activists around the world engage in a campaign, promising to create a fairer and greener future. Yet, the system that is built on exclusion of some brothers and sisters, separation and hatred can’t create a truly sustainable world that acknowledges the sacredness of all living beings.
In his book, Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis talked about the concept of progress, saying, “If you are on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road.”
Hence, we can best evolve as a species through each of us returning to a path of nature and choosing to abide by the laws of human nature.
The future of civil society requires human beings who freely lay claim to their responsibility as stewards of this planet. Our willingness to confront our fears with courage can awaken our sense of shared humanity. This is the heart of our democracy that accepts diverse opinions and remains open to our radical differences. Through ordinary people, heart to heart in solidarity, a new network is being created that can bring a triumph of the human spirit.
*
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).
Another piece US anti-Ivermectin puzzle may have emerged. In late September, Pfizer announced that it’s launching an accelerated Phase 2/3 trial for a COVID prophylactic pill designed to ward off COVID in those may have come in contact with the disease.
Coincidentally (or not), Pfizer’s drug shares at least one mechanism of action as Ivermectin – an anti-parasitic used in humans for decades, which functions as a protease inhibitor against Covid-19, which researchers speculate “could be the biophysical basis behind its antiviral efficiency.”
Lo and behold, Pfizer’s new drug – which some have jokingly dubbed “Pfizermectin,” is described by the pharmaceutical giant as a “potent protease inhibitor.”
As Zero Hedge readers might recognize, that’s exactly what ivermectin, the prophylactic used for a number of reasons in both humans and animals, does. And unlike Pfizer’s experimental drug, ivermectin already may have saved hundreds of thousands of lives from India to Brazil.
We aren’t the only ones to have put this together, as twitter users have commented on the similarities. The timing – which coincides with the whole “horse dewormer” smear campaign – just seems odd.
The similarity between Pfizer’s upcoming offering and Ivermectin has not gone unnoticed.
In other news, Pfizer is testing Ivermectin, now renamed PF-07321332, to help with Covid. They have done this so they can make this drug more expensive than Ivermectin, despite the fact, they are the same drug…..
After a crafted "horse dewormer" smear campaigns on a 35yr old safe, effective, off-label drug, i.e. Ivermectin, media brazenly started to praise unproven pills for which Pfizer & Merck are pushing EUA following that of experimental vaccines. https://t.co/fhopikcPVP
But Pfizer, Moderna and their executives have already shown the world with their actions that they see COVID as “manna from heaven” – to quote legendary defense attorney Johnny Cochran – a new ‘profit center’ that will keep shareholders in butter brickle, especially since the companies have quietly raised prices on their vaccines.
But since a large portion of the American market has rejected the vaccines, Pfizer needs another medication that can be used to treat them as well (otherwise, the company is missing out on nearly one-third of the American market).
According to Reuters, Pfizer said on Monday it has “started a large study testing its investigational oral antiviral drug for the prevention of COVID-19 infection among those who have been exposed to the virus.”
Pfizer isn’t the only drugmaker hoping to develop a prophylactic treatment for COVID exposure (especially since variants raise the possibility that vaccinations just might not be enough). Merck and Swiss rival Roche have been racing to develop an easy-to-administer antiviral pill of their own – so the clock is ticking for Pfizer.
Reuters explains that the mid-to-late-stage study will test the Pfizer drug’s – known as PF-07321332 ability to prevent COVID symptoms in up to 2,660 healthy adult participants aged 18 and older who live in the same household as an individual with a confirmed symptomatic COVID infection.
The drug, designed to block the activity of a key enzyme needed for the coronavirus to multiply inside the human body, will be administered along with a low dose of ritonavir, an older medication widely used in combination treatments for HIV infection.
At present, Gilead’s much-hyped but not-all-that-effective IV drug remdesivir is the only approved antiviral treatment for COVID in the US. Several antibody cocktails have also been widely tested and trials are ongoing – including Merck and partner Ridgeback Biotherapeutics, which recently launched a late-stage trial for experimental COVID prophylactic, molnupiravir.
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).
Foreign Affairs (FA) magazine, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, has recently published some articles on taking advantage of economic challenges faced by North Korea. On 29 July, FA says, “Change is underway on the Korean Peninsula. FA posits that sanctions have worked for the US, as can be gleaned from the article’s title:
“A Grand Bargain With North Korea: Pyongyang’s Economic Distress Offers a Chance for Peace.”
The title is also disingenuous in the extreme since former US secretary-of-state Colin Powellmade it clear:
“We won’t do nonaggression pacts or treaties, things of that nature.”
FA posits a re-prioritization in North Korean governance whereby the military will now play second fiddle to the economy. This, says FA, “sets the stage for efforts to resuscitate North Korea’s dying economy.”
Why is North Korea’s economy in the predicament that it is? FA, presumably attributes the economic difficulties to military overspending. But FA’s analysis downplays the deleterious effects of sanctions spearheaded by the United States against North Korea. It does admit to this further down in the article, and it also points to the adversity imposed by “COVID-19 restrictions … and a relentless series of natural disasters.” However, why would anyone sanction a country beset by natural disasters and disease? And North Korea, despite whatever skepticism, does not list itself as having any COVID-19 cases.
FA notes,
“Kim’s criticisms of U.S.-South Korean joint military exercises and his country’s firing of cruise missiles and short-range ballistic missiles have also been more notable for their level of self-restraint than for escalating tensions on the peninsula.”
However, North Korea has already demonstrated that it has a nuclear weapon and that it has long-range delivery capability. It is obvious that if any actor were to attack North Korea that the aggressor would be punished. Any reading of this exposes a hypocrisy, on the one hand North Korea is considered “notable for their level of self-restraint” and not “escalating tensions on the peninsula.”
On the other hand, the US and South Korea conducted joint military exercises in late August. Is this self-restraint or is it provocation? Was not the seizure, announced by the US Justice Department in July, of a tanker that transports oil to North Korea a provocation?
FA points at food shortages in North Korea. However, it is important to remember that during US intrusion into the Korean civil war, the US wiped out the economic and agricultural basis of North Korea and killed millions of North Koreans. Following its aggression of North Korea, North Koreans have been forced to endure hardship to remain independent of their attacker. Absent this historical background, one might be fooled by FA’s attempt to create an image of American benevolence when it writes: “Kim [Jong-un] is treading carefully on the military front so as not to foreclose the opportunity for dialogue with the United States, which could serve as a guarantor of his country’s future economic security.”
North Korea does not need an economic guarantor, it needs the US to stop sabotaging North Korea’s economic efforts.
FA preposterously dreams:
For U.S. President Joe Biden and South Korean President Moon Jae-in, Pyongyang’s shift represents an opportunity. They should aim to resolve North Korea’s underlying security concerns—particularly its economic security—in return for progress on denuclearization, the reduction of Pyongyang’s dependence on China, and North Korea’s eventual integration into the U.S.-led liberal international order with the close support of South Korea.
FA posits North Korea handing over its defense and integrating into the “U.S.-led liberal international order” with the close support of South Korea while at the same time poking a stick in the eye of China. North Koreans are extremely aware of their history and how the US separated the Korean people, conducted a scorched earth campaign in the northern part of the peninsula, and they are well aware that China came to fight alongside them to defeat the US. It is risible that anyone would posit that North Korea would relinquish its independence, its juche, and ally, to be led by its aggressor.
FA argues,
“Achieving superior joint military and diplomatic power is what will enable the allies to deter Kim’s threats, allowing for a new approach to North Korea that can pave the way to a lasting peace.”
How will the US achieve this? To threaten North Korea with “superior joint military and diplomatic power”? Peace from the barrel of a gun and deadly sanctions? North Korea succeeded in achieving nuclear capability to punish any military attack against it. In the meantime, North Korean chairman Kim Jong-un can achieve economic development by joining the Chinese-initiated BRI and further opening up to Russia.
FA pushes increased militarization of South Korea, by having South Korea ease access to US military forces in the country. FA complains that South Korean domestic political pressure is a barrier to freer military training in the country.
FA portrays the US-South Korean summit in May where the US committed to providing South Korea with COVID-19 vaccines as sending “a powerful signal to South Koreans that the United States is placing a high priority on the relationship.”
It noted, “Like many Asian countries, Seoul is having troubling sourcing vaccines. But unlike its neighbors, South Korea has so far refused to turn to a ready supplier: China.” The article states, “Part of the problem is that the South Korean government is still eagerly and persistently seeking vaccine supplies from the United States.” China’s Global Timesreported, “After the World Health Organization (WHO) officially approved two Chinese-made COVID-19 vaccines, South Korea became the first country to fully exempt travelers vaccinated with shots of Sinopharm and Sinovac from its original mandatory two-week quarantine” on 1 July. It seems a prudent move to maintain good relations with South Korea’s largest trading partner, China.
FA has further scorn for China. It accused China of “bullying” South Korea over its apoplexy regarding the deployment of the US Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system in 2016 — a system which can be used against China.
The US places military armaments a continent away from US shores — a hop, skip, and jump from China — and FA accuses China of bullying? How would the US feel if such a missile-interceptor system were placed in Cuba by China?
FA promoted an end-of-war declaration that “would not be linked in any way to a peace treaty.” Other steps are demanded before consideration of a peace treaty between the parties. One is a non-starter: the verified destruction of nuclear weapons by North Korea. Of course, only by North Korea, the US will keep its nuclear weapons. As a test of the US’s word, imagine the American reaction if North Korea agreed to denuclearize, as long as the US also destroys its nuclear weapons, as is required by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty’s article 6, which the US signed on to.
*
In a September article, “The Last Chance to Stop North Korea?: U.S. Aid Could Help Revive Nuclear Diplomacy,” FA seems to have had its druthers about the late July article that envisioned coercing North Korea through “superior joint military and diplomatic power” and now supports humanitarian aid as the way to denuclearization.
The subtitle should give pause to most informed readers. First, consider what is meant by “nuclear diplomacy” in this context. It means that a country (especially the northern half of a country) that was devastated by an American scorched earth campaign, one that used bioweapons and chemical weapons — and even threatened attack with nuclear weapons, should disarm itself of a deterrent while the aggressor maintains its nuclear arsenal. Furthermore, just what is US aid? The Democratic Republic of Korea does not need US aid; it needs an end to US-led international sanctions against the country.
Despite noting US participation with South Korea for military exercises, FA writes that “the Biden administration should not take comfort in the relative lack of [North Korean] provocations” recently.
This wording seems particularly one-sided. Are the South Korean and US military maneuvers (including training previously of a decapitation unit) not provocative? Is the stationing of US troops in South Korea not provocative? Consider what the reaction would be if North Korea held military exercises off the American coast?
FA attempts to evoke fear of the North Korean menace:
“… these [North Korean] tests aren’t the only troubling signs. … the reprocessing of plutonium and enriched uranium for an arsenal of bombs now estimated to number between 20 and 40. … The direction is clear: North Korea wants to have a modern force that can engage in nuclear warfighting, that can threaten the United States with missiles that can carry multiple warheads and are impervious to ballistic missile defenses, and that can survive and retaliate credibly against a U.S. preemptive attack.” [italics added]
This appears to be just a risible posturing. How is it that North Korea would threaten the United States? Through the mere development of its military capability? Such logic would apply to every country that seeks to upgrade its military. Are all these countries then threatening the US? Moreover, would it be responsible for a government to allow its defensive capability to lag behind that of a belligerent parked next door? A belligerent that eschews a peace treaty. A belligerent that refuses to adhere to a no-first use of nuclear weapons as North Korea does?
The FA article then complains that the improved military capability “would make it more difficult for the United States to preemptively strike a missile before its launch. These are all capabilities that make North Korea’s nuclear deterrent more survivable and impervious to a U.S. first strike.” A contradiction arises; now the writer has positioned the US as a preemptive threat. So, in essence, the writer defies all logic by preposterously postulating that a country enhancing its survivability and deterrence against a preemptive external attack makes it the threat.
But FA has a solution on “how to stop North Korea before it crosses this threshold”: “getting diplomacy back on track through humanitarian assistance that includes American COVID-19 vaccines and food aid, both of which the country needs.”
Providing US aid would serve American hegemonic aims in that it “would reduce Chinese influence in Pyongyang.” Seems to be rather self-serving aid. Sanction a nation, intercept North Korean shipping at sea, then take advantage of any economic deterioration to pose as a generous benefactor by proffering aid.
To its credit, the September FA article does not suggest a militaristic or sanctions-based approach; instead it suggests a humanitarian approach, but a purportedly humanitarian approach that secures American geo-strategic aims.
*
Does one dare trust the word of the United States? Look no further than what happened to Muammar Gaddafi and Libya when it abandoned its nuclear weapon program, what happened when Saddam Hussein’s Iraq allowed inspections for weapons or mass destruction, or when Syria’s Bashar al-Assad surrendered Syria’s chemical weapons.
As A.B. Abrams expressed with crystal clarity in his excellent book, Immovable Object: North Korea’s 70 Years at War with American Power, that North Koreans are well aware of how American imperialism works, of its military depravity, and its proclivity for disinformation. North Korans have demonstrated resistance, resilience, and self-reliance. It has served them well since the armistice was signed on 27 July 1953. North Korea is an economically sanctioned country, yes, but it is not an economically stunted country. North Korea has achieved so much. It provides tuition-free education right through university, universal health care, preschools, and housing and jobs for all its citizens. It is a country that despite the destruction it suffered from US-led UN warring has achieved military deterrence and social development that Americans can only dream of. It is an independent country neither rich, but neither poor.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be emailed at: kimohp@gmail. Twitter: @kimpetersen. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
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).
672 European financial institutions have financial relationships with 50 businesses that are actively involved with illegal Israeli settlements. These financial institutions provided US$ 114 billion in the form of loans and underwritings and held investments to the amount of US$ 141 billion in shares and bonds of these companies. This is the key finding of a new research report published today by a cross-regional coalition of Palestinian and European NGOs, which looked at financial flows between January 2018 and May 2021..The “Don’t Buy into Occupation” (DBIO) coalition is a joint project between 25 Palestinian, regional and European organisations based in Belgium, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom (UK), including FIDH and its member leagues Al-Haq and the Cairo Institute for Human Rights. The coalition investigates the financial relationships between businesses involved in the illegal Israeli settlement enterprise in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and European Financial Institutions (FIs). [1]Providing economic oxygenIsraeli settlements are illegal under international law and constitute acts which incur individual criminal liability as war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Yet European financial institutions continue to invest billions into companies that are actively involved with the Israeli settlement enterprise.
Research by the DBIO coalition shows that between 2018 and May 2021, 672 European financial institutions, including banks, asset managers, insurance companies, and pension funds, had financial relationships with 50 businesses that are actively involved with Israeli settlements. [2] US$ 114 billion was provided in the form of loans and underwritings. As of May 2021, European investors also held US$ 141 billion in shares and bonds of these companies.
These businesses and financial institutions play a critical role in facilitating the economic viability growth of the Israeli settlement enterprise.
“The involvement of these corporations with the settlements – through investments, banking loans, resource extraction, infrastructure contracts and equipment and product supply agreements – provides them with the indispensable economic oxygen they require to grow and thrive.” – Michael Lynk, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967 (Via Twitter)
Corporate responsibility
These businesses, creditors and investors have a responsibility to ensure that they are not involved in violations of international law and are not complicit in international crimes, and to address any adverse human rights impacts arising from their business activities and financial relationships.
Companies are expected to have a rapid response and to consider responsible disengagement. International financial institutions, including banks and pension funds, have a responsibility to use their leverage to ensure their investee companies act responsibly and in line with international law standards, and to divest from those who are unable or unwilling to do so.
Recently, several financial institutions and companies have taken up their responsibility by divesting from business enterprises linked to Israeli settlements. The two most recent and important examples are those of Kommunal Landspensjonskasse (KLP) and the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG). KLP is Norway’s largest pensions company, who in July 2021, divested from 16 companies linked to Israel’s settlement enterprise. In a similar vein, GPFG announced in September 2021 that it will exclude three companies that are actively involved with Israeli settlements. The 19 companies excluded by KLP and GPFG were listed in the UN database of businesses involved in certain activities relating to Israeli settlements in the OPT, mandated by the Human Rights Council in 2016, and published in February 2020.
*
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).
We bring to the attention of our readers, this outstanding analysis by Yohan Tengra of the Awake India Movement.
Thanks to Brian Shillhavy of Health Impact News for having brought this article to our attention
*
Introduction
Who is India’s Anthony Fauci? The mainstream media does not even know the names of the members who sit in India’s National task force, but in this article I, Yohan Tengra, have exposed not just the names of those who are sitting in this task force, but also how they are financially connected to the pharmaceutical industry and vaccine mafia.
This task force has been responsible for the aggressive push to lockdown, mandatory mask requirements, forced testing of asymptomatics, dropping ivermectin and hcq from the national protocol, suppressing vaccine adverse events, and a lot more!
Along with the task force, I have also exposed how India’s prominent public health personalities, who regularly appear in the media and TV, like Srinath Reddy, NK Arora, VK Paul, Gagandeep Kang, Vijayraghavan, Balram Bhargava, Randeep Guleria, are connected to the Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Wellcome Trust, USAID, the World Bank, and other aspects of the global deep state.
Other topics covered in this piece:
– How task force members get the science on Covid-19 totally wrong, which proves that their conflicts influence their recommendations
– India’s illegal HPV vaccine trials, ICMRs role in it, and how a similar incident repeated with the Covaxin Phase 3 trials
– How Gates foundations baby PHFI gets funding from the vaccine mafia, and holds deep influence in controlling India’s health policies
– How this research is the basis on which a legal notice has been sent to the Health Minister, calling for prosecution and removal of all the people who are exposed to have conflicts of interest
– When the accused have been confronted about conflicts of interest in the past, how have they responded?
– How the accused have lied on record about not having conflicts of interest
This piece is the culmination of my research into India’s medical deep state that I’ve been conducting since the last 2 years. Journalists reading this, who regularly bring these cast of characters on to discuss the medical aspects of the covid-19 pandemic must confront them with hard questions and facts which are explored in this article.
Disclaimer
If you are new to the arena of researching global conspiracies, and don’t understand what the New World Order/Great Reset/ Agenda 2030 Sustainable development really is, and/or don’t understand the players/forces behind it and how they work, I’d recommend you first view/read the material I’ve posted below, before proceeding with the article, so that you can get full value out of it.
1) Documentary series & articles exposing Bill Gates and his role in hijacking the public health system, among other areas:
2) Documentary series which explores the forces behind the New World Order (like the Rockefellers which you will see referenced below a lot), their eugenics origins and agenda of wanting to reduce the number of “inferior” people in the world, Agenda 2030 Sustainable development, the Climate Change Scam, and other related subjects: https://www.corbettreport.com/bigoil/
3) Exposing the role of organizations like USAID in advancing the globalist agenda –
9) How the Rockefeller Foundation, USAID, Ford Foundation, and others were behind pushing covert eugenics operations in India, in the name of family planning and population control – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlPAL7sHU8w
PHFI, a public private partnership started by Ex Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Rajat Gupta, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation & Srinath Reddy, has received millions of dollars of funding from pharmaceutical companies, vaccine manufacturers, & dubious philanthropic organizations, which use philanthropy as a front to push hidden agendas which profit vested interests. It was started with initial funding of 65cr given by the Gates Foundation, and 65cr given by the Indian Government, along with a later grant of 35 crores.
This so called PPP has received funding over the years from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Rockefeller Foundation, World Bank, PATH, Diamond Jubilee Trust of the Queen of England, USAID, Wellcome Trust, Abbott, Mckinsey, Eli Lily, Glaxosmithkline, Bayer, NIH, & Google!
Despite receiving nearly 100 crores from taxpayer money, & having top government bureaucrats sitting on the PHFI governing board, PHFI did not submit itself to the RTI Act, 2005 for the first 6 years of its existence. When it was taken up to the Central Information Commission by a person named Kishan Lal in 2012, the CIC Chief Shailesh Gandhi ruled that it was a public authority under the RTI Act, and hence it must submit itself to the RTI act.
When Journalist Kapil Bajaj filed an RTI to know the composition of the PHFI board when it was created (2006), the President of PHFI, Srinath Reddy, actually sent him an evidently forged document, which is a punishable offense under the RTI Act. The document is dated 2006, but the designations of some of the members on the board are clearly written many years after 2006. You can find a copy of this document here.
In the year 2013-2014, PHFI lost 82 crores to a bank FD scam, which included the taxpayer money it received from the Government of India, and the organization also found itself ensnared in another controversy when a complaint was made against it to the CBI for lobbying and conflict of interest in getting one of its courses accredited from Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute. Despite having lost so much of our taxpayer money, it has still not submitted itself to a CAG audit, and did not take action against those under whos watch the funds were embezzled.
A summary of this can be found in an article written by journalist Kapil Bajaj here.
PHFI has claimed since inception that top Government bureaucrats have sat on its board, including Secretaries of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Director Generals of ICMR, and Director General of Health Services, MOHFW. However, whenever RTI’s have been sent by activists to these Government Departments, they always mention that no permission or order has been issued to allow these government servants to sit on the PHFI board.
It is not clear as to whether Government bureaucrats sitting in the PHFI board are getting paid by PHFI (RTI’s have been filed to uncover this), but the President, Srinath Reddy, who used to work in AIIMS before he became PHFI president, is reportedly drawing in a salary of 1 crore per annum from the PHFI! If it is revealed in the future that Government bureaucrats on the PHFI board are getting salaries from the funders of PHFI (i.e. pharmaceutical companies, vaccine manufacturers, & fraud philanthropists like Gates, Rockefellers,etc) then that would amount to a serious conflict of interest of such government representatives.
PHFI was mainly created with the motive to start public health universities in India, create a public health cadre in India, and suggest health related policies to the Government. PHFI has created many Indian Institutes of Public Health (IIPH’s) all over the country. Land from many states has been allotted to PHFI and grants from various state governments have also been given, but after PHFI lost so much money to the FD scam, it has not been able to build many of the universities that it was originally supposed to, and a lot of its universities are currently running on rented premises.
Many government members as well as heads of billionaire business houses, fake philanthropic bodies & pharmaceutical companies have sat on the PHFI Governing Body in the past, and some continue to sit on the Governing body of PHFI. Those who are sitting in the PHFI board as of March 2020 have been highlighted below in bold letters. Members who are sitting on the PHFI Governing Body as well as Executive committee for the year ending March 2021 have still not been published on the website, despite many months having passed. List of members is referenced below:
– K Srinath Reddy (President of PHFI since 2006)
– S Ramadorai (Former Vice Chairman ,TCS )
– Mr Lav Agarwal, Joint Secretary of MOHFW
– JVR Prasada Rao (UN Secretary General Special Envoy for AIDS)
– Balram Bhargava (DG – ICMR)
– Prof Dr. Sunil Kumar (DGHS, MOHFW)
– David Fleming (Ex Director of Global Health Strategies at the Gates Foundation)
– Rajat Gupta (Former Partner, Mckinsey & Co., sat on the boards of Gates Foundation & Rockefeller Foundation in the past)
– Dr Sanjay Tyagi (Ex Director General of Health Services, MOHFW)
– Dr. Soumya Swaminathan (Ex Director General, ICMR)
– Prof K Vijayraghavan (Ex Secretary, Department of Biotechnology)
– Prasanna Hota (Ex Secretary MOHFW)
– Nirmal Ganguly (Ex DG, ICMR)
– Ranjit Pandit (Ex Senior Director, Mckinsey)
– K Sujatha Rao (Former Secretary, MOHFW)
– RK Srivastava (Ex DGHS, MOHFW)
– Y Venugopal Reddy (Former Governor of RBI)
– Vishwa Katoch (Ex Director General ICMR)
– TKA Nair (Former Advisor to PMO)
– RA Mashelkar (Chairman Reliance Innovation Council, CSIR Chief)
– Rati Godrej (Industrialist)
– Mr KRS Jamwal (Executive Director of TATA Industries)
– Harpal Singh (Fortis)
– Uday Khemka (SUN Group)
– Amartya Sen (Married into the Rothschild Family)
– Dr. Montek Singh Ahluwallia (Former Deputy Chair of Planning Commission)
– Timothy Evans (Ex Director for Health, Nutrition, & Population, World Bank)
– Shiv Nadar (HCL)
– Mr Bhanu Pratap Sharma (Ex Secretary, MOHFW)
– Dr Jagdish Prasad (Ex DGHS, MOHFW)
– Ashok Alexander (Former Director BMGF)
– Narayan Murthy (Infosys, member of Gates’ Giving Pledge)
– Rohini Nilekani (Member of Gates’ Giving Pledge, partner with Gates & Rockefeller Foundation in many projects)
– A K Shivakumar (UNICEF)
– Gary Darmstatd (Ex Director of Gates Foundation)
– Anand Mahindra (Mahindra Group)
– Mukesh Ambani (Reliance)
– Prashant Vasu (Mckinsey)
– David Lynn (Director, Wellcome Trust)
– Mr Gautam Kumra (Director at Mckinsey)
– PK Pradhan (Ex secretary MOHFW)
Members from PHFI which have been influencing all Covid-19 & Covid-19 vaccine related policies in India
Prof. K Srinath Reddy President, President of PHFI
PM Narendra Modi & PHFI President Srinath Reddy Greeting Each Other
He continues to provide technical expertise during Covid-19. Prof. Reddy is a member of the following national and international committees:
1) National COVID Technical Taskforce convened by ICMR. See this.
2) Founding Board Member of IHME (Institute of Health Metrics & Evaluation), alongside Tedros Ghebreyesus(IHME – an organization to which the Gates Foundation gave a massive founding grant, and huge subsequent funding) See this
3) Professional Organization Representative in NTAGI. See this
4) Honorary Advisor on Health to the Governments of Odisha and Andhra Pradesh with Cabinet Rank in both states.
5) Member of Leadership Council of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, see this
6) Chair/Member of Several WHO Panels 7) Physician to 2 prime ministers of India
– Chaired High Level Expert Group on Universal Health Coverage, setup by Planning Commission & funded by Rockefeller foundation, see this
8) Queen Elizabeth Medal Recipient
9) Part of Post-COVID strategy paper for the health system, by the National Security Council Secretariat.
10)Part of the Executive Group of the Steering Committee of WHOs SOLIDARITY Trial, see this
11) Member, Group of Experts for COVID-19 Response under the CM of Punjab
12) Technical Expert, Government of Haryana, see this
13) Speaker at events hosted by Nudge & the Rockefeller Foundation, see this
14) Member of Lancet Covid-19 Commission’s India Regional Task Force, who’s founding donor is the Rockefeller Foundation, see this
15) His father was a politician from the Congress Party
Subhash Salunke, Director of IIPH Bhubhaneshwar (Indian Institute of Public Health started by PHFI) and Senior Advisor, PHFI
1) Technical COVID Support to Government of Odisha
2) Technical support to Government of Maharashtra
3) The technical team at the Indian Institute of Public Health, Bhubaneswar is assisting efforts of the Government of Odisha
Prof Sanjay Zodpey, Director of IIPH Delhi
1) Prof. Sanjay Zodpey, is a part of the National Task Force for COVID-19 at ICMR of the Epidemiology and Surveillance research group. 2) He is the Technical Advisor for COVID-19 related activities for Nagpur Division. He is suggesting appropriate measures to be taken to contain the pandemic in the Division.
3) He is a member of the working group which is working on execution of specific tasks related to population based studies and prophylaxis studies to generate evidences of AYUSH interventions in dealing with the COVID 19 crisis, which will be initiated by Ministry of AYUSH and will be implemented by RCs, academic institutes and other partners in different parts of the country.
Prof GVS Murthy, Director of IIPH Hyderabad
1) Technical Support to the Government of Telangana
Dr Jayaram, Registrar at IIPH Hyderabad
1) Technical Support to the Government of Telangana. The technical team at the Indian Institute of Public Health, Hyderabad is assisting efforts of the Government of Odisha. The students are activitely engaged and have been recruited as epidemiologists at the district level.
Dr. Dileep Malavankar, Director of IIPH Gujarat
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, then chief minister of Gujarat, at the bhoomi pooja of PHFI’s Indian Institute of Public Health-Gandhinagar campus in 2007.
1) The technical team at IIPHG led by Dr Dileep Mavalankar is supporting efforts of the Government of Gujarat.
Dr Sandra Albert, Director of IIPH Shillong
1) Member of the Working group on Epidemiology Survey and Documentation constituted by the Interdisciplinary AYUSH Research and Development Task Force on Covid-19. Notification No. A.17020/1/2020-E.1 of Ministry of AYUSH
2) Prof Sandra Albert is a member of the State Level Medical Expert Committee constituted by the Government of Meghalaya
3) Technical team members at IIPH Shillong Dr Rajiv Sarkar, Badondor Shylla and Uniqueky Mawrie are members of the technical support group of the State response team for COVID-19, Government of Meghalaya.
Dr Giridhara Babu, Head – Life Course Epidemiology, PHFI, IIPH – Bangalore Campus
1) Member, Lancet Covid -19 Commission India Task Force
2) Member Karnataka State Government State Vision Group
3) Co-Chair, BBMP Task force on COVID-19 Public Health Response, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Bengaluru.
4) National level: Member of Epidemiology, Surveillance, & Research group constituted by ICMR National Task Force for COVID-I9
5) Member, Karnataka State Government Technial Analysis Committe: COVID19
6) Member, Karnataka State Government Expert Committee for COVID19
7) Member, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Expert Committee for COVID19
8) Consultation to state Governments of Andhra Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab & Telengana
9) Member of Lancet Covid-19 Commission’s India Regional Task Force, who’s founding donor is the Rockefeller Foundation, see this
My video with Kapil Bajaj exposing PHFI in great detail: English Hindi
Illegal HPV Vaccine Trials – History Repeats?
Many years ago, a parliamentary standing committee in India produced a scathing report regarding illegal trials which were conducted by the NGO PATH, that were funded by the Gates Foundation. There were serious lapses in the trial which amounted to a gross violation of the human rights of the subjects involved.
Back then, it accused the ICMR of gross misconduct and conflict of interest. Here is an excerpt from the report :
“It was unwise on the part of ICMR to go in the PPP mode with PATH, as such an involvement gives rise to grave Conflict of Interest. The Committee takes a serious view of the role of ICMR in the entire episode and is constrained to observe that ICMR should have been more responsible in the matter. The Committee strongly recommends that the Ministry may review the activities of ICMR functionaries involved in PATH project.
The Committee from its examination has found that DHR/ICMR have completely failed to perform their mandated role and responsibility as the apex body for medical research in the Country. Rather, in their over-enthusiasm to act as a willing facilitator to the machinations of PATH they have even transgressed into the domain of other bodies/ agencies which deserves the strongest condemnation and strictest action against them”
The Supreme Court of India also ruled in 2018 that this parliamentary committee report could be used as evidence in court. See this
Years later, today PATH and the Gates Foundation are still freely operating in the country, and going around funding various public and private projects. No action was taken against the ICMR employees who got into a PPP with PATH, as recommended by the standing committee.
What the standing committee failed to notice at the time is that the ICMR and other Government departments, got into a so called PPP with the pharmaceutical companies, industrialists & fraudulent philanthropic organizations that use philanthrophy as a front to push their hidden agendas. This arrangement is known as PHFI.
Back then, the conflict of interest of ICMR was only limited to the trials that were being conducted. Today, the conflict of interest of the ICMR is enormous, as ICMR Director Balaram Bhargava, and past Directors such as Soumya Swaminathan and Vishwa Mohan Katoch sat on the board of PHFI along with leaders from pharmaceutical companies, the Gates Foundation, industrialists, etc. On behalf of these vested interests, the ICMR is controlling the entire response to the Covid-19 pandemic today, as it setup the task force which directly recommends the Central Government about what measures to take in response to the pandemic.
This issue has come up in the past as well, and was reported in the Indian mainstream media. You can read up on that here.
The ICMR also got into a deal with Bharat Biotech, and gets 5% royalty on the sale of the vaccine. The ICMR has inked other deals along with the Gates Foundation as well. These conflicts of interest need to be cut-off, as they are not just influencing the outcome of a clinical trial, but the fine detail of all 135 crore peoples lives today! ICMR guidelines are followed like a religious book all over our country today.
Years later, it seems like history repeats! This time with the phase 3 trial of Covaxin in Bhopal.
Multiple news reports have also highlighted the irregularities in the clinical trial phase of the Covaxin in India, particularly in Bhopal. In an article titled “India’s COVID-19 Vaccine Trial Participants Claim They Were Misled” published on an online portal IndiaSpend
on 12.02.2021, it is reported that individuals were lured to participate in the trial after paying Rs. 750. Death of one person who took the vaccine was also reported. The persons who took the vaccine said that they were not informed that they were part of the clinical trial. The report states asunder:
“A truck came to this locality in December and announced on a loudspeaker that anyone who wanted the COVID-19 vaccine and wanted Rs 750 for taking the vaccine, could go to the nearby People’s University Hospital and take it. I needed the money,” said Parihar. Nearly a dozen people interviewed by IndiaSpend in Gareeb Nagar and Oriya Basti in north Bhopal recounted this same sequence of events.”
“After reports of irregularities in the trials, this reporter visited Bhopal to investigate the allegations made by people living in low-income areas of the city. Many said they did not know they were part of a clinical trial and instead believed they had been given the actual COVID-19 vaccine. For most, the money was the reason they had agreed to take the jab. Many of them said they were illiterate and could not read the forms they had signed.Residents also alleged that they had not been informed about the potential side-effects, or that they could be compensated for serious fallouts such as death or disability. Although Bharat Biotech has issued a press statement claiming that all reported adverse events have been duly recorded, many in the trial did not have mobile phones on which their health conditions could be inquired about. They said they had not been contacted by any other means, either.”
It seems like ICMR has a habit of working with parties that love to break the rules of clinical trials in India and hence violate the rights of the participants who are involved. The parliamentary committee called for strict action against ICMR more than a decade ago, and since no action was taken then, this incident has repeated today. When will justice be served?
Famous Names in India’s Public Health Space
There are other people who are not directly working for PHFI, and don’t sit in the main ICMR Covid-19 task force either, but are influencing Government policies & media messaging on Covid 19 in a big way, and are connected to Bill Gates, Rockefeller Foundation, vaccine & pharmaceutical companies, etc. These include :
1) Dr. Narendra Kumar Arora
– Teaching Faculty at PHFI since 2014
– Member of National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization
– Chairperson, Operational Research Group of National Covid-19 Task Force
– Chairperson of Scientific Advisory Committee of qHPV program between India’s Dept of Biotechnology & Gates Foundation
– WHO Strategic Group Member
– Part of SAGE Group
– Adviser to Bill Gates’ Projects on Immunization
– Member, GACVS
– Adviser to National AEFI Committee in 2017
– Chairperson of National AEFI Committee from 2008-2017
– Member of Scientific Advisory Board, ICMR (2007)
– Rockefeller INCLEN fellowship, 1993
– Contributor to WHO’s Covid19 Vaccine Safety Surveillance Manual
– His research is directly sponsored by the Gates Foundation, see this
– Contributor to India State level Disease Burden Initiative, funded by Gates Foundation, see this
– Involved in the drafting of the revised AEFI causality assessment guidelines, which make it impossible to attribute deaths and new serious adverse events to vaccines. See this
2) Dr. Cherry Gagandeep Kang – Professor at CMC Vellore (Which receives a lot of grants from the Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation, etc) See this, this and this
– Head of Wellcome Trust Research Lab at CMC, see this
– Member of Global Health Scientific Advisory Committee in the Gates Foundation, see this
– Vice chair of the board of CEPI (body created & funded by Bill Gates, World Economic Forum, Wellcome Trust, etc), see this
– First Indian to be elected as fellow of the Royal Society, see this
– Chair, WHO SEAR Regional Immunization Technical Advisory, see this
– Most if not all of her research directly funded by the Gates Foundation, Check funding section here
– Conducted a panel discussion with Dr. Santosh Matthew, Country lead for Public Policy and Finance at the Gates Foundation India, see this
– Involved in the drafting of the revised AEFI causality assessment guidelines, which make it impossible to attribute deaths and new serious adverse events to vaccines. see this
3) K Vijayraghavan
– Principal Scientific Advisor to Government of India :
Gates said Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is also a “partner with the government, particularly with the department of biotechnology, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) and the office of the principal scientific advisor provide advice and help about getting these tools going”. See this
– Member of Covid-19 Task Force Vaccine setup to encourage R&D for vaccine manufacturers. see this
– Chairperson of CEPI’s interim board (Organization Created & Funded by Bill Gates, Wellcome Trust, World economic forum, etc) see this
ITSU was Setup by PHFI in 2012 by a 6.9 million $ grant from Gates Foundation.The Gates Foundation had funded an activity called ‘evidence to policy’ at the Immunisation Technical Support Unit (ITSU), which in turn acted as secretariat of another key body called the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (NTAGI). This was a crucial panel that examines scientific evidence on the effectiveness of new vaccines and recommends their inclusion in the national vaccination programmes.
The Senior Management Team of the ITSU’s key areas of focus consist of the AEFI Secretariat, Implementation of India’s Immunization Program, & the Communications Strategy of the Covid-19 Vaccine Communication Program. Other Partners in deciding the communication strategy of the Covid-19 vaccine program include UNICEF & the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
The funding of the BMGF to the ITSU Secretariat was withdrawn after controversy over influence of vaccine manufacturers in India’s Universal Immunization Programme, but funding to other parts of the ITSU by the BMGF still continues, according to WHO Chief Scientist Soumya Swaminathan.
PHFI’s FCRA license was also removed by the Ministry of Home Affairs for sometime due to various reasons, including misappropriation of funds, not disclosing FDs, remitting funds abroad, etc.
After this, then PHFI Chairman Narayan Murthy wrote a letter to the PM, Narendra Modi, asking him to restore PHFI’s license as the withdrawal was putting many of the public health programs which PHFI started at risk. Interesting thing to note is that in the article where Murthy’s letter is referenced, the author also reports that the license was cancelled based on input from Intelligence Bureau.
“The Union health ministry is also said to have taken up the matter with Gauba. His predecessor, Rajiv Mehrishi, who was part of the decision to crack down on PHFI, had refused a review after both the Intelligence Bureau and the foreigners division of the home ministry said they had made a watertight case against PHFI. Intelligence Bureau officers said they would not buckle under pressure, for the charges hold ground.“
In his letter, Murthy reminds Narendra Modi of his early support to PHFI : “With the generous support extended by you as the chief minister of Gujarat in 2007, PHFI established the Indian Institute of Public Health-Gandhinagar, aided by the land and financial assistance provided by the Gujarat government. With your blessings, we have now set up a permanent campus at Gandhinagar next to IIT-Gandhinagar. This beautiful campus on the banks of Sabarmati was inaugurated by Gujarat Chief Minister Vijaybhai Rupani in 2016 at the site chosen by you for the bhoomi pooja.”
Srinath Reddy, the President of PHFI had also written to Modi on June 30 2017, calling himself a “foot solider” who was appealing to “his commander in chief to save him from the friendly fire which is misdirected”. “We request you to protect PHFI as it is gravely endangered, and guide it in its future journey with your clear directions,” he wrote. “We were hoping the matter will be resolved soon, especially since the Union health minister and health secretary conveyed their trust and support for the relevance and values of PHFI’s work in public health.”
Also during this period, a journalist interviewed Gates Foundation India’s Director Nachiket Mor. When he was asked to clarify allegations surrounding Gates Foundations role in influencing India’s Immunization Programme, he said :
“The question to ask whoever is making these allegations is, why is there so much insecurity about your own competence? Ultimately, Indians are taking decisions in India’s best interests. If anybody alleges that they are acting under the influence of foreigners, I’d ask them to take a good look in the mirror. Consider some of the people driving these decisions in India. Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, Dr. MK Bhan, Dr. Vijayaraghavan — these are fantastic people. By making such an allegation, you are saying you don’t think these people are competent.”
So basically he wants us to think that the scientists who are being funded by or have great relations with the Gates foundation, are fantastic people! And if we doubt them, then we are doubting our own competence – that will be a cruel joke to you if you make it to the end of this article. After the above taking place, the license was restored later with the rider that PHFI would have to take prior approval from the ministry before receiving funds, among other checks.
Members of Senior Management Team of ITSU include :
1) Pritu Dhalaria , Director of ITSU. Ex Director of PATH’s Immunization Portfolio, Ex-Member of NTAGI, worked at PATH, WHO & Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in the past.
2) Apurva Rastogi, Project Manager at ITSU, Ex Researcher at PHFI
3) Kishore Kumar Bajaj, Senior Operations Manager at ITSU. Has worked at PHFI & PATH in the past.
4) Dr. GK Soni , Team Lead of program implementation at ITSU. Has worked at PHFI in the past
According to PHFI’s own website :
Improving Immunisation Coverage rate among children
Through Immunisation Technical Support Unit (ITSU), PHFI is helping MoHFW in the expansion of immunisation coverage, improvement of quality, and introduction of new vaccines. PHFI has extended support to ‘Mission Indradhanush’ for targeted increase from 65% to 90% rate of coverage of full immunization among children.
Everything to do with the adverse events of the Covid-19 vaccines is handled by the ITSU, right from the drafting of the guidelines which decide which death will be considered to be caused by a vaccine and which will not, to coordinating between various AEFI committees, collecting and organizing data for the groups, etc. Talk about conflict of interest? https://itsu.org.in/aefi/
After the PHFI & Gates Foundation controversy resulted in Gates foundations direct funding of ITSU’s secretariat being withdrawn, the scientists who have been referenced in this report that have grave conflicts of interest were quick to give statements in the media covering up for the vaccine industry.
Excerpt from the article :
“Conflict of interest generally refers to when someone participating in a decision-making process seeks to have a decision made that enhances their best interests in some way, usually a financial benefit,” says K. Vijayraghavan, scientist and secretary, Department of Biotechnology, health ministry.
“At the NTAGI subcommittee, we ask all members to declare their conflicts of interest and this is done. The policy we follow is similar to that of WHO.”
The Big Money, Big Pharma, Big Corruption plot just doesn’t work, adds Dr Soumya Swaminathan, secretary, Department of Health Research, health ministry.
To begin with, the NTAGI is not a ‘body’, but a committee of some of the best scientists, public health experts and civil servants in the country, who take decisions in their independent capacity.
The BMGF may have “big money”, but it is not represented in the NTAGI. And as the largest vaccine manufacturers in the world, India itself is ‘big pharma’. “If our strategy can be influenced, what does it say about our expertise, intelligence or integrity?” asks Dr Soumya.
And, Gates, as an international donor, is key in fulfilling that requirement. “Conspiracy theories, without any evidence, can greatly harm the immunisation programme,” adds Dr K. Srinath Reddy, president of the Public Health Foundation of India in Delhi.
Journalist Kapil Bajaj had sent a list of questions to Ex PHFI Chairman, Narayan Murthy, one of them was regarding how PHFI intends to resolve the conflicts of interest which exist within its governing body. This was Narayan Murthy’s response :
” I do not see any conflict of interest. This institution is about training, research and policy to improve public health delivery in India. The institution has highly-respected and accomplished people to guide it to achieve its objectives. The individuals on the board have demonstrated leadership in excellence. Some have expertise in public health delivery, some have managed non-profits, some have been excellent academicians, some have been top quality government bureaucrats, and, in addition, some have contributed to the endowment for the institution. These people spend their precious time to make this institution a world-class institution. The students who pass out from this institution can join any institution they like and there is no way they will be influenced to join any company founded or financed by any of the board members. For example, just because I am the chairman of IIITB, no student from there was ever influenced by me to join Infosys. Similarly, all over the world, high quality educational institutions invite well-known people to be on their board to leverage their expertise. On the issue of policy research, this institute only recommends policies and it is for the governments to accept or reject it. Further, I have been involved in lots of policy making bodies in my field in India and never once have I put the interest of my company ahead of the country. “
– Part of Union Govts Core Team for Covid 19 Pandemic Response.
– Chairs Empowered Group on Medical Infrastructure & Covid Management Plan
– Chairs National Expert Group on Vaccine Administration for Covid-19
– Reports to PM Modi directly
– Worked as Member of High Level Expert Group on Universal Health Coverage, setup by Planning Commission & funded by Rockefeller Foundation, under the chairmanship of PHFI President Srinath Reddy. This would lay the groundwork for what eventually became the Ayushman Bharat Scheme. (http://uhc-india.org/reports/executive_summary.pdf)
– Board Member of the Partnership for Maternal, New born & childhood health, who’s funders and other board members include the Gates Foundation, USAID, World Bank, WHO,Pfizer, Novartis, Johnson&Johnson, GAVI https://pmnch.who.int/about-pmnch
– Expressed full support for behavior change campaign started by Gates Foundation focused on mask wearing by all & social distancing. The mask-wearing campaign is designed by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in partnership with McCann Worldgroup. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleseDetail.aspx?PRID=1634328
– Balram Bhargava started the School of International Biodesign, with the help of Stanford Uni and IIT. According to him : ““We have had funding from various agencies, including national governments and international agencies, the Gates Foundation, the Grand Challenges Canada and the Pfizer Foundation, not to mention private investment from angel investors and others” https://news.rcpsg.ac.uk/engagement/professor-balram-bhargava-awarded-the-presidents-medal/
– Sits on the Board of the International vaccine institute https://www.ivi.int/who-we-are/leadership/board-of-trustees/ which accelerates vaccine research and development worldwide, and is funded by the Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, CEPI, etc.”
– Part of panel discussion hosted by infamous NGO PATH & Rockefeller Foundation on Sarscov2 surveillance in India https://finddx.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_Lkc4oC30TbCBWsqBcPtSVw
6) Dr. Randeep Guleria
L-R : Balram Bhargava, Randeep Guleria, Srinath Reddy, VP PHFI, & VK Paul
– Used to be Co-chair of the India AIDS Initiative that was started by the Gates Foundation, along with fellow co-chair Rajat Gupta, and Director of Gates Foundation India, Ashok Alexander. https://www.gatesfoundation.org/ideas/media-center/press-releases/2003/10/india-aids-initiative India AIDS Initiative (aka Avahan) was funded to the tune of 200 million dollars over the years!
– Secretary of Health and Family welfare from 2002-2004
– Member of Transitional Working Group, which decided the Operational Mechanism for the Global Fund to Fight AIDS TB & Malaria, who’s chairman used to be fraud Rajat Gupta, & the body itself was started by a donor grant from Bill Gates.
– Gave the Welcome Note at Kerala Health – Making SDG a reality conference, who’s partners inclued World Bank and the WHO. https://keralahealthconference.in/
– Part of the NGO PATH’s webinar on Covid 19 testing in India (the same NGO that conducted illegal vaccine trials in India in the past and still no action has been taken against it https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_NMMJnj6CTcKGfAEro0HfkQ
– Dr. Murhekar also worked with the World Health Organization (WHO) Western Pacific Regional Office as a consultant and professional staff member in Papua New Guinea and the Philippines.
– Part of the NGO PATH’s webinar on Covid 19 testing in India (the same NGO that conducted illegal vaccine trials in India in the past and still no action has been taken against it) https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_NMMJnj6CTcKGfAEro0HfkQ
21) Dr Subhash Salunke
– Senior Adviser to the President of PHFI
– His 30 years’ experience in the Public Health Department spans from Position of Deputy Director to Director General in the Health Services of Maharashtra State
– His stint with the WHO SEARO spanned from being Regional Advisor in 2005 to Assistant Regional Director in 2009, including three years as WHO-Representative to Indonesia
– He was actively involved in formulating projects like “Health System Development” for Maharashtra State that was supported by the World Bank.
– He has shown leadership in designing the HIV/AIDS Control special programme (AVERT) with the assistance of USAID for Maharashtra State
– He was the recipient of an NIH Fogarty fellowship for his PhD in epidemiology under the AIDS International Training and Research Program at the University of California Los Angeles from 2004-2011. https://www.tephinet.org/tarun-bhatnagar
– Contributes as a member of the national team developing Standard Treatment Workflows for the National Healthcare Program AB-PMJAY (background to which is referenced earlier)
Many of the members listed above, lied about not having any conflict of interest in the NTAGI committee meeting
NTAGI (National Technical advisory Group on Immunization) is the expert group in India which approves vaccines that eventually make their way into India’s vaccine schedule. This group is also convening on the Covid-19 vaccines and going through data on their efficacy as well as adverse events.
That in a letter dated 20.01.2021 the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare of Government of India Immunization Division regarding Minutes of the meeting National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) held on 10th December, 2020 had mentioned about declaration by members regarding their conflict of interest.
It reads thus; “All participating NTAGI members and invited attendees had duly filled and signed the confidentially agreement, and declared conflict of interest (if any), and shared these with the NTAGI Secretariat. No conflict of interest was noted.”
The falsity of above declaration is clear from the very fact that the following members are having conflict of interest:
1. Dr. Sunil Kumar Director General of Health Service
2. Dr. Gagandeep Kang Professor, CMC Vellore
3. Dr. K. Srinath Reddy President, Public Health Foundation of India 4. Dr. Samiran Panda Scientist ‘G’ ICMR, New Delhi
5. Dr. Nivedita Gupta Scientist ‘F’ ICMR, New Delhi
6. Dr. N. K. Arora Chair COVID – 19 Working Group, Executive Director, INCLEN International
7. Dr. Balram Bhargava Secretary, Department on Health Research & DG-ICMR
Given all of this, how can the ICMR be involved in the task force, or setting up of the task force? It has a past of colluding with PATH and present of inking many deals with the Gates foundation. Many of ICMRs researchers and scientists are getting funding from the pharmaceutical companies and international “philanthropic” bodies.
ICMR is also involved in funding the trials of both Covaxin as well as Covishield. The ICMR, previously in reply to an RTI query from a news magazine, said the estimated cost incurred by ICMR towards development of Covaxin was `35 crore. However, sources said the figure put out by ICMR was a conservative estimate and the actual cost – when calculated properly in terms of NIV’s human resources, intellectual investment, time and establishment costs – would be much more. It gets 5% percent royaltiesfrom the sale of Bharat Biotech vaccines.
Journalists have been trying to uncover what has been going on inside the task force. Some have tried to pin blame or put responsibility on its members for the decisions taken by the Modi Government, or the lackthereof, but because they could not manage to find the list of the task force members, they could not pin individual responsibility on anyone. However now you, the reader, can go through these articles, and then put them into context with everything that we’ve discussed above. Important excerpts from these articles are highlighted below: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/coronavirus-transmission-covid-19-task-force-national-lockdown-7298468/
“Some members of the Covid-19 task force, a technical expert body that advises the Central Government, are “pushing hard” for a national lockdown, The Sunday Express has learnt. The task force includes experts from premier health institutions, including AIIMS and ICMR, and has met many times during the recent surge. The deliberations of these experts are of significance since the chairperson of the task force, V K Paul, reports to Prime Minister Narendra Modi.”
“The Covid-19 task force is trying to say this very aggressively for the last few weeks. That we should tell the people at the top that we should have a lockdown,” a member said. “A nationwide lockdown rather than what we are doing now, in bits and pieces across states, because of the simple fact that it is spreading all over,” a member said.”
“The fact that India does not know the names of the 21 members of its National Task Force for COVID-19 is emblematic of the colossal failure of both the task force—whose only job seems to be to endorse the decisions of its political masters—and the government to prepare for or take steps to mitigate the inevitable second wave of the pandemic. Should such a task force not be taken to task for its laxity and negligence?”
“WHO is the Indian equivalent of Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the President of the United States? One would be hard-pressed to answer this question.”
“In keeping with the government’s penchant for not sharing information, the names of the other members of the NTF have not been made public. If at all there is any government body, if not an individual like Fauci, to advise the government on the pandemic, it would be the NTF.”
“Right from the beginning of the pandemic, the NTF has been found grossly wanting in discharging its responsibilities with the scientific integrity required of such a panel. That the higher executive arm of the government wanted it to say only the things it wanted to hear became clear in March 2020 when the government announced the countrywide lockdown. It was done without consulting the NTF even as its members apparently held contrary views given that at that time the caseload in India was only around 500 and a more calibrated region-wise response based on epidemiological data would have been more prudent, but none of them spoke out. The NTF’s silence on the matter would imply that it implicitly endorsed the decision.”
“The NTF’s scientific integrity was also called into question when it did not voice dissent over the unethical Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) given to Covaxin in January in the so-called “clinical trial mode” even as the Phase 3 trials of the vaccine were ongoing and there was not even interim data on its efficacy. And after the vaccine campaign got under way in January, the NTF also does not seem to have advised the Health Ministry to be transparent with regard to the data on adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) or implications thereof on the ongoing vaccination drive.”
“What is highly at once surprising and disconcerting is the fact that, as The Caravan magazine has revealed, even as a second wave loomed large and as the number of cases was surging, the NTF did not meet at all in February or March.”
“However, the Health Ministry’s document, on which all treatment protocols in hospitals across the country are based, was not updated until April 2021. If only the NTF had ensured that an updated document was sent out early on, all the chaos, clamour and the mad scramble for remdesivir, the smuggling, hoarding and black-marketing of the drug and the all-round desperation of hospitals and hospitalised patients could have been prevented. Belatedly, on April 21, three doctors, including Randeep Guleria, Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, had to clarify that remdesivir had very limited therapeutic potential for patients. Only after this, on April 22, did the Health Ministry update its treatment protocol, which now (“based on limited evidence”) advises use of remdesivir in special circumstances in moderate to severe cases (requiring supplementary oxygen) within 10 days of onset of symptoms.”
How Members with Conflict of Interest also get the Science Wrong
One might be innocent enough to think that these ties which the above listed members have wouldn’t interfere with their decisions and recommendations on public health matters, assuming that the members would have the integrity to put people over money and influence. But such people would be terribly wrong in making such assumptions, as can be seen by the outlandish and scientifically incorrect positions taken by many task force members in the public.
After 1.5 years of the pandemic having passed, these facts have been clearly established :
– Lockdowns are not effective, and have many negative consequences
– Asymptomatic people don’t spread disease
– Natural immunity is many times better than vaccine-conferred immunity
– Vaccinations won’t end the pandemic or prevent future waves, as many countries that have reached over 80 percent vaccination rates are continuing to go for more lockdowns/restrictions and boosters.
– The Covid-19 vaccines are not safe as many serious adverse events and deaths have taken place post- vaccination, and their efficacy is based on weak evidence.
– Masks are not effective in stopping virus transmission, and have many negative health consequences.
– The RT-PCR and RAT tests have a high rate of false positives, and the RT-PCR test is not the Gold Standard for diagnosing infectious diseases.
– India has reached herd immunity and can go back to normal, as the last nationwide sero-survey has showed that around 70% people have developed antibodies either after natural infection, or vaccination.
– Effective and safe prevention options as well as cures exist for Covid-19, like Vitamin D, 3 step flu diet, Ivermectin, HCQ+Zinc, MATH+ Protocol, etc.
Now lets see how most of our fellow task force members and other “experts” go against these facts, and continue to promote the agenda of vested interests and the pharmaceutical companies.
Legal Notice Sent to Our Health Minister, Mansukh Mandaviya
Based on the above evidence, and other scientific research that we have been collecting, Advocate Nilesh Ojha & Dipali Ojha, who head the Indian Bar Association, have sent a legal notice to our health minister, asking him to remove all the members who have conflict of interest from the Covid-19 task force, and all other bodies which influence policy making in the health space in India. He has also asked for prosecution of those who have these conflicts, under various sections of the IPC & Indian Law. If no action is taken on this legal notice, Adv. Nilesh Ojha will file a case in the Supreme Court.
The capture of our pubic health agencies by fake philanthropists like Bill Gates, the Rockefellers & their frontmen, and the pharmaceutical/vaccine mafia started in India along time ago, in the year 2006. Since then, incidents like illegal HPV vaccine trial coming to light have put pressure on the perpetrators of the crimes (namely PATH and the Gates Foundation), but due to their tremendous infiltration and capture by these forces of the mainstream media, public health “experts”, government bureaucrats, etc the criminals are still able to conduct themselves in India without any barriers.
It is time to make these task force members and celebrity scientists feel the heat for all their decisions and recommendations that have destroyed the lives of millions of people, pushed millions into abject poverty, and decimated the fundamental right to travel, operate a business, speak freely, breathe & bodily autonomy of all Indians! Tag them personally on twitter, highlight each connection that is made here to the public, send legal notices, file court cases, etc. If you encounter them in person, record a video of them and confront them with these questions. Do whatever is necessary to make this plandemic end, as all the evidence to make it end has been provided to you in this document.
The Covid-19 plandemic is a well planned orchestrated medical fraud, executed by the same vested interests referenced in detail in this article, to usher in a technocratic orwellian global dictatorship, which will be accompanied by a resource grab executed by the elites. As Klaus Schwab, CEO of the World Economic Forum says : “You will own nothing, and you will be happy”. This criminal capture and sabotage of our public health agencies is what has enabled this, as the mafia wants to push mandatory testing, masks, vaccines and lockdowns on the world in order to pursue their New World Order/ Great Reset Agenda, and since they control almost everyone in key positions of power (as shown above), they have been able to do so very easily.
But now that all of this has been put in one place for you, you and Indians at large are hopefully able to see the puppeteering behind the scenes, atleast in the public health sector. Its high time we have throw out and imprison all these corrupt hijacked officials who are putting our health and livelihoods in grave danger, on behalf of the puppet masters who pull their strings. It is time to choose, between freedom or fascism, and act on the facts that we have learnt in this expose, so that we can stop the globalists from achieving their end goal, and are able to cement our goal forever – freedom and respect for the inalienable god given and constitutionally protected rights of every human being.
*
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: VK Paul, Member of NITI Aayog along with Bill Gates
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).
“That is the secret of happiness and virtue–liking what you’ve got to do. All conditioning aims at that: making people like their unescapable social destiny.” – Aldous Huxley, Brave New World [1]
The technological achievement conceived once upon a time as pulp science fiction stories in the 1950s and 60s is now becoming everyday life realities in the early 2020s.
SpaceX rockets putting in place Starlink satellites have already launched 1,800 into orbit. And the company plans to launch 12,000 more. Amazon and OneWeb similarly plans to send up thousands of satellites, all intended to be part of a network providing high speed internet service for remote and rural communities. [2]
Last July, the multi-billionaire investor, magnate and author Richard Branson flew himself and a crew into the edge of space on board a commercial spaceflight signaling a giant leap for civilian space exploration. Billionaire buds Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are following in heels of Branson into this new wild frontier. [3]
The 5G mission, part of the new generation of internet technology, is said to launch connectivity to such a degree as to make autonomous self-driving cars, remote surgery and ‘smart cities’ possible. And the new brand of Artificial Intelligence is advancing to the point that virtual tutors using facial recognition technology could discern a student’s emotional state, determine who in the class is struggling and direct human instructors how to best attend to their individual needs.
These and other breakthroughs of science may elevate us to the kind of optimistic future imagined by the writers of Star Trek or The Jetsons. Or it could hyper-relay us down the chute to tomorrows more like Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World or George Orwell’s 1984.
The horrors of climate change were almost certainly remote from the minds of people whose embracing the fossil fuel industry in the early days. Will this hi-tech innovation primarily benefit the masses, or a tiny fraction of technophilic elites? This question will be at the forefront on this week’s investigation of the Global Research News Hour.
Our first guest, Bruce Gagnon, focuses his attention on the militarization of space, and how the billionaire gold rush in space and the 5G deployments actually assist in this endeavor. He will also briefly talk about the Keep Space for Peace Week events taking place this coming Saturday October 2. (See details here.)
Our next guest, Patrick Wood, expands the conversation around 5G. He will also talk about social credit, AI, and the fleet of individuals known as technocrats who may achieve absolute power once their goal is achieved.
Bruce Gagnon has a 3 decade long history of involvement in the peace movement and active resistance to the militarization of and use of nuclear weapons in outer space. A member of the group Veterans for Peace, he co-founded the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space in 1992 in which he serves as secretary/Coordinator. He has contributed to a number of publications including CounterPunch, Z Magazine, Space News, National Catholic Reporter, Global Research, Asia Times, Le Monde Diplomatique, and Canadian Dimension. He also has a blog and has produced educational videos all of which appear at his group’s site space4peace.org.
Patrick Wood is a leading and critical expert on Sustainable Development, Green Economy, Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda and historic Technocracy. He is the author of Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation (2015) and co-author of Trilaterals Over Washington, Volumes I and II (1978-1980) with the late Antony C. Sutton. He is also a leading expert on the elitist Trilateral Commission. He is a frequent speaker and guest on radio shows across the U.S.
CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.
WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.
Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.
CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am.
Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.
Historians, media pundits and politicians have managed to postulate, and impose it into the history annals, encyclopedias and school books that the Second World War was started in September 1939 by Nazi Germany’s invasion [1] and prompt defeat[2] of Poland.
This version is definitely appealing to several generations of Western leaders in their ongoing anti-Russian paranoia, insinuating an implicit guilt – or at least a degree of complicity – by the Soviet Union, which, in compliance with its treaty with the Germans[3], a few weeks later[4] proceeded to advance to the agreed upon common border with the Third Reich, thus recovering the lands of the Russian Empire that were lost 20 years prior to that during the tumultuous years of WWI, the Russian Revolution and the Civil war.
The fact that Japan, a key participant in the war had started its military campaigns in 1937 and through 1938 had conquered parts of China, Manchuria, and fought the Soviet Union, is typically discarded, either because the conflicts have been fought 1:1 or because this was Asia[5]. We could argue either way but for now let’s close our eyes to that and focus on Europe, center stage of homo sapiens thus far greatest man-made disaster, which we denote as WWII, wherein at least 70 million people from no less than 30 nationalities lost their lives.
Until recently I have been satisfied by above version as I, too, did not know better. Until the moment publications have surfaced about the actual course of events triggering hostilities, including simultaneous[6] armed conflicts and land invasion followed by occupation, between several states[7]. Regardless who wanted to cover for whom, my conclusion was that:
World War II started in October of 1938 by Germany, with the support of Poland and Hungary attacking, invading, and eventually annihilating the sovereign republic of Czechoslovakia!
The Munich Agreement is signed[14] by Chamberlain, Daladier, Mussolini and Hitler, which stipulates that the European Powers agree to break up Czechoslovakia of which Sudetenland is to be annexed by Germany starting on Oct. 1st and to be completed by Oct. 10th; within 3 months Czechoslovakia is to give up its lands on which claims are laid by Poland and Hungary
Here is the sequence of events
A) Preparatory phase
1934 = Mutually assured Non-Aggression Pact Germany-Poland is signed for 10 year period.
1935 = During a visit to Warsaw H. Goering, appointed by Hitler to lead and groom a warming German-Polish relationship, proposes to his hosts to join in a “probable” future expansion to the East promising them a part of Soviet Ukraine as a war trophy /1/.
1938 = March 13th: Austria ceases to exist, and without any objections whatsoever the Austrians become citizens of the Third Reich– a post factum plebiscite is carried out as well.
1938 = March 17th: Encouraged by the success of its ally, Poland presents Lithuania with an ultimatum, demanding that it (i) enacts a change in its constitution wherein Vilnius, occupied by the Poles since 1922, is still mentioned as its capital city, and (ii) gives up that territory. Unless within 24 hours the Lithuanians accept these demands, Poland threatens to attack Kaunas and occupy the remainder of the tiny country.
1938 = Sept. 19th: The Polish Government expresses its agreement with Hitler’s opinion that Czechoslovakia is an artificial creature. Poland also expresses support to Hungary’s claims in its territorial dispute with Czechoslovakia.
1938 = Sept. 20th: Hitler gives official guarantees to Jozef Lipski, Polish Ambassador in Berlin, that in a “probable” Polish-Czechoslovakian military conflict over Czech Teshin region[8] Germany will support the Polish side. Full agreement is reached about coordinated German-Polish military action against Czechoslovakia.
1938 = Sept. 21st:
Large border conflict is provoked in the early morning hours at the German-Czech border.
Poland presents Czechoslovakia with a note demanding solution of the problem with Polish national minority in Czech Teshin, Silesia.
1938 = Sept. 22nd: Polish Government issues an express announcement by which it denounces Polish-Czechoslovakian Treaty about the national minorities. Later that same day Poland presents Czechoslovakia with an ultimatum about annexation of its territories hosting Polish inhabitants.[9]
1938 = Sept. 25th: Various attacks take place in the Teshin region:
At Konska, near Trshinec, the Poles attack (by gunfire and grenades) the barracks of the Czechoslovakian border garrison, as a result of which two buildings are burnt out; after a couple of hours gunfight the attackers withdraw back to Polish inland.
Polish band attacks by gunfire and grenades the railway station of Frystat.
1938 = Sept. 27th: Poland issues a second demand for “return” of Teshin region. During that night the whole of the Teshin region is pierced by the sound of gunfire, including that by machine guns. The official Polish news agency reports that the most bloody confrontations took place in the vicinity of Bohumin, Teshin and Jablunkov, in Bystrica, Konska, Skrshechon. Armed groups of “rebels”[10] repeatedly attack Czechoslovak army’s gun and ammunition depots and Polish airplane routinely violate Czechoslovak air space. The real news is scarcely reported abroad, except for “Pravda” in the Soviet Union /2/11.
1938 = Sept. 29th:
1. The infamous Munich conference begins, in rather peculiar manner: the high representatives of the four Central European Powers deliberate, in the presence of other nations’ observers, but the party whose fate is being discussed and decided upon – and by whose authorization this whole thing proceeds is not questioned at all – is not allowed in; it awaits the news about the verdict in a separate room…
2. Polish diplomats in Paris and London insist on equal approach to the “solution” of Sudeten- and Tesh-in-“problems.” Separately, Polish and German officers conclude agreement on the demarcation line between their respective armies, in case of invasion.
3. German and Polish newspapers report touching scenes of “comrades in arms”-type brotherhood in meetings between Nazis and Polish fascists.[12]
4. A Czechoslovakian border post near Grgava is attacked by a 20 member gang armed with automatic weapons. The attack fails, attackers are repelled and flee to Poland, except a captured wounded man, testifying that the group included many Germans living in Poland…
B. The phase of real actions:[13]
1938 = Sept. 30th:
1. By 01:00h the Munich Agreement is signed[14] by Chamberlain, Daladier, Mussolini and Hitler (see image below), which stipulates that the European Powers agree to break up Czechoslovakia of which Sudetenland is to be annexed by Germany starting on Oct. 1st and to be completed by Oct. 10th; within 3 months Czechoslovakia is to give up its lands on which claims are laid by Poland and Hungary, and to submit to their demands for annexation; all in exchange for guaranteed peaceful coexistence from then on /3, 4/. At 02:45h the representatives of Czechoslovakia Masaryk and Mostny are given to sign the contract of cession of Sudetenland to Germany. Formal notification to the Czech authorities in Prague is given at 06:20h /5/.
2. Polish government issues an ultimatum to the Czechoslovak government with the demand to evacuate within 24 hours its military troops and police units from the disputed Teshin area.
1938 = Oct. 1st:
1. German occupation of Sudetenland begins.
2. Polish occupation of the Czechoslovak Teshin Silesia begins /6-8/.
1938 = Oct. 5th: Regular Hungarian troops cross the border and attack Czechoslovak positions near Jesenske but are forced to withdraw leaving several casualties and prisoners.
1938 = Oct. 6th: Hungarian paramilitary infiltrate Carpathian Ruthenia with the task of sabotage and terror acts to provoke armed conflict.
1938 = Oct. 7th: Hungarian troops attempt to cross Danube near Shturovo, and fail again.
1938 = Oct. 8th: Hungarian paramilitary blow up a bridge over Borozhava River in Ruthenia.
1938 = Oct. 10th:
1. German occupation of Sudetenland completed /9/.
2. Hungarian troops damage railway facilities and murder a railway officer in Borozhava.
1938 = Nov. 2nd:
1. Vienna arbitration: Germany and Italy arbitrate between Czechoslovakia and Hungary; the result is award to Hungary of Czechoslovak lands.
2. Immediate invasion by Hungarian army and occupation of Czechoslovak territories /10, 11/.
1938 = Dec. 1st: Hungary annexes further Czechoslovak lands.
1939 = March 13th: Hungarian army begins occupation of Carpathian Ukraine (Ruthenia).
1939 = March 14th-15th: German army occupies the rest of Czechoslovakia. Very low level of resistance by local troops exhibited occasionally, yet the operation is not entirely bloodless /12/.
1939 = March 16th:
1. Slovakia is created as a German client state.The remainder of once independent Czechoslovakia is split into two German Protectorates: Bohemia and Moravia. (see map below)
2. Hungarian army attacks and captures Khust in Carpathian Ukraine /13/. (see map below)
C. Phase I of World War II completed: Czechoslovakian land is conquered, the state annihilated, its gold reserves transferred into the coffers of Nazi Germany, leader of the never-spelled-out-in-the-open “coalition of the willing trio”
***
Question time:
Every schooled person has heard the story of how Neville Chamberlain was ridiculed for his piece of white paper waived at the airport, of which paper he claimed that it has bought peace (for the British, if anyone) yet a year later upon the invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany, the UK declared war on Germany.[16]
Prime Minister Chamberlain, upon his return to England on September 30, 1938, holding aloft the Munich agreement bearing his own and Adolf Hitler’s signatures.
But being aware of the Munich conference does not absolve us from the obligation to think straight: What happened next? What does it mean that three neighbors send troops to attack and occupy their neighbor’s lands, take possession of its assets, subdue its population, call parts of its territory theirs?
Why nobody calls military occupation of a country that has neither called in foreign troops nor agreed with invasion through its borders a war? Aren’t coercion, provocation, serving ultimatums and the like tools of war[17]? Why nobody calls a war a war?
I’d leave you to ponder over these questions, and will just answer a few more myself: Can leaders of the most powerful country in the world have the prerogative to judge, to dictate, to meddle in other countries’ affairs? No!
Can we call Nazi Germany a pariah state for conducting a dozen of European states to join it in its war for USSR’s resources?
Yes, we can!
Can we call USA a pariah state for conducing even more states from around the world to join it in its countless aggressive, unjustified, illegal wars ever since 1991 18? Yes, without a shred of doubt!
Can we call Nazi Germany a pariah state for their genocidal racism (against Russians – claiming they are all members of an Untermensch society – and other Slavs, such as Poles and Czechs; against Jews and Gypsies, etc.)? Yes!
Can we call Israel a pariah state for their genocidal racism (against Palestinians: their own cousins, and autochthonous owners of the major part of the land called Palestine for more than 2000 years), and for their aggressive wars against their neighbors, at least during the last 40 years? Yes!…
Happy Anniversary! And please remember the lessons of history – and learn them, if you haven’t yet!
Too many humans have died in senseless wars, only because their “leaders” have not learned the history lessons.
Today the problem is compounded by: (i) lack of knowledge; (ii) wrong perception of the world (and respectively “the enemy”), due to near perfect brainwashing; (iii) enormous pressure by the financial capital (stirred by the ubiquitous “deep state”); (iv) growing pressure by the MIC; (v) incessantly escalating economic pressure as an intrinsic feature of the prevailing socio-political arrangement, whereby “free market” economy is the norm /17/.
Above considerations call for periodic inquisitive examination and reassessment of all “given truths”, and that means asking questions, first quietly to ourselves, and then to the outside world, loud.
Back to basics: Why 1939 and not 1938?
I don’t think we need to go too far to search for an answer:
On September 29th-30th, 1938 a conference was held in Munich, which resulted in signing a document whereby the four major European states, Germany, Great Britain, Italy and France agreed that Germany should obtain from Czechoslovakia the region of Sudetenland.
Now, did the four doctors ask the patient whether or not he agrees that a couple of limbs should be amputated from his body? No, the representatives of Czechoslovakia were not even in the conference room during the discussion: they were made to wait in one of the next chambers of the infamous building, just to be handed the verdict[19] after the leaders of the quartet had all signed the document[20]. Who has authorized the perpetrators to such diktat?
Nobody: they had simply assumed the prerogative to dictate. Germany and Italy because of their respective Nazi- and Fascist ideology, while France and UK for the most idiotic pretext of them all: to avoid another world war[21] (despite the commitments made earlier to the Czechs and Slovaks to defend their state’s sovereignty, if need be).
The British and French leaders’ idiocy became a common reason for their ridicule by just everybody ever since, given only a year later they were at war anyway. And was it not for the defeat of the Wehrmacht by the Soviet troops, France of today would still be centered at Vichy, while the British Empire would certainly have shrunk significantly, having had sequestered everything save for Albion[22].
In conclusion, the main perpetrators, Germany, Poland and Hungary, had three accomplices, in this international crime: Italy, Great Britain and France.
The first three started WWII in October of 1938 with the conscious assistance by the other trio.
The political correctness and the games of politicking by the winners may have imposed onto historians, journalists, writers and intellectuals the version all of us who belong to the during- and postwar-generations have been taught at school, but it ain’t the whole truth!
And this can not and should not con-tinue any longer as those of us who do not like to live in a world based on lies or partial truths are silently becoming the majority. And silent we can not and should not remain. Here is one voice, for those who care:
We need the truth! If not, mankind will soon degenerate…
*
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.
Sources
Платошкин Н.Н., Оккупация Польшей территории Чехословакии в 1938 году, http://history.milportal.ru/2017/01/okkupaciya-polshej-territorii-chexoslovakii-v-1938-godu/
Безудержная наглость польских фашистов; Правда, 27.09.1938, N267, (7592), стр. 1
Agreement concluded at Munich, September 29, 1938, between Germany, Great Britain, France and Italy, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/munich1.asp
Сергей Пискунов, Чехословацкий кризис 1938 г., http://hrono.ru/sobyt/1900sob/1938cseh.php
The Charge d’Affaires Czechoslovakia to the Czechoslovak Minister of Foreign Affairs, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/mun01.asp
Kershaw, Ian (2001). Hitler, 1936–1945: Nemesis. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0-393-04994-7
Shirer, William L. (1990) [1960]. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-671-72868-7
Польская оккупация Чехословакии – 1938 год., https://nornegest.livejournal.com/516572.html, https://gorod.tomsk.ru/index-1366472876.php, https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/1034443.html
Германская оккупация Чехословакии 1939 г., http://hrono.ru/sobyt/1900war/1939cseh.php
Адмирал Миклош Хорти во главе парада венгерских войск в оккупированном городе Кошице, http://waralbum.ru/54050/
von Wegener, Alfred. “The Origins of This War: a German View”. Foreign Affairs (July 1940)
Алексей Рудевич, 7 фактов об оккупации Чехословакии, http://russian7.ru/2014/03/7-faktov-ob-okkupacii-chexoslavakii/
Танки венгерских оккупационных войск входят на улицы чехословацкого города Хуст, htp://waralbum.ru/57574/
Speech by the Prime Minister at Birmingham on March 17, 1939, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/blbk09.asp
Speech by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the House of Lords on March 20, 1939, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/ blbk10.asp
Smedley D. Butler, https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html; see also http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/bacon2.html
James A. Lucas, Study: U.S. regime has killed 20-30 million people since World War Two, CounterCurrents.org, Tue, 24 Apr 2007, 06:35 CDT, http://www.sott.net/article/273517-Study-US-regime-has-killed-20-30-million-people-since-World-War-Two
Few people realize that in fact WWII was a natural continuation of WWI, the war that – despite years of fighting and millions of casualties – has created many more problems than it has solved.
Clearly Hitler was not interested in taking even a part of the island as his plans called essentially for conquering the vast expanses to the East and settling Germans – pure Aryans, that is, according to Nazi theories – there; in addition, the Rudolf Hess adventure early in the game suggests that some British money might have been invested in his venture, too, and certainly in the main project…
Notes
on September 1st
on October 6th
concluded after refusal by France and Great Britain of USSR’s offer to enter into a tripartite alliance
on September 17th, to be exact
Italy’s invasion of Ethiopia in 1935 falls into the same category of considerations
or almost
for the Americans that would be “nations”
reasonably well developed industrial part of Silesia
On that very day the recruitment of “Teshin corps of volunteers” went on the open. The completed military “volunteer” forma-tions (“militia,” by the present day standards and terminology) to the Czechoslovakian borders to commit provocative incursions and incidents.
that would be today’s “freedom fighters”
At the same time what we call today “fake news” abounds at the hands of the public opinion controllers in the three “free”, “democratic” Central European governments that happen to encircle in a surrounding – strangulating, really – embrace their common neighbor, aiming to – and succeeding, eventually – asphyxiate it. Long live fake news: lucrative business for some, while facilitating a path leading on a downward spiral to inevitable catastrophe! Something new under the Sun lately?
for one time, this is no fake news
constituting international crime par excellence, per our humble opinion
to be punctual, it does carry the date of Sept. 29th (I assume this was done deliberately so that it would leave the impression enough time was given to the Czech officials to arrive in Berlin without much delay for the meeting convened in the evening on the 30th, on which the fate of their state was to be announced to them.)
which is very skillfully labeled “borders guaranteed against unprovoked aggression,” by the champions of bullying and provoca-tion themselves
One can not avoid to be very strongly sympathetic indeed to his /14/ and his colleagues’ /15/ arguments in defense of their ac-tions to preserve peace in Europe at any price. However, the question comes immediately: “Are these people just naive, or is this simply marking the end of an era of traditional politics whereby the landscape was populated mostly by leaders and apparatchiksalike engaged in it by avocation, with the main drive being their traditional, typically Christian, value system, and related beliefs or ideologies? Is their visibly agonizing extinction in the face of the upcoming new wave of evil-minded fanatics and their subservient mediocre yet pragmatic bureaucrats signaling the arrival – after the inevitable military clash and the ensuing ideological vacuum – of the new, “professional” pol-itician: the Orwellian Nomenklaturchik /16/?”
One would question the usefulness of international organizations such as the League of Nations and the UNO, in terms of pre-venting conflicts or at least diffusing existing ones before they turn into real wars. The world has seen that they have been mostly useless, except when – having turned into attractive hub for corrupt-minded international Nomenklaturchiks – playing in the hands of the side commissioning the conflict they become a servile marionette which tips the scale to the selected loser thereby causing worsening effect.
This is not at all to claim that before 1991 the US was behaving as a dovish state: I simply would not like to get bewildered the average reader who in general hardly would have kept track of events going more than 25 years back. For a more comprehensive look at US war effort and the attitude of the military as well as the general public, see in /18, 19/.
at 02:15 h on Sept. 30th
at 01:00 h on Sept. 30th
Few people realize that in fact WWII was a natural continuation of WWI, the war that – despite years of fighting and millions of casualties – has created many more problems than it has solved.
Clearly Hitler was not interested in taking even a part of the island as his plans called essentially for conquering the vast expanses to the East and settling Germans – pure Aryans, that is, according to Nazi theories – there; in addition, the Rudolf Hess adventure early in the game suggests that some British money might have been invested in his venture, too, and certainly in the main project…
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The following text by Chiron Return provides an incisive and carefully documented analysis of the history and early chronology (May 2019- May 2020) of the crisis which is affecting all mankind.
This research also points to relevant events which happened before the official announcements by China and the WHO in January 2020
Our thanks to the authors and research team at Chironreturn.org
***
Note on Sources: The authors and researchers have relied upon primary source documents whenever possible. These include official government documents and official statistics, scientific papers, original corporate documents, and direct accounts or statements by officials preserved in video. Where we are relying on secondary sources (newspaper and magazine articles, website articles, news reports, etc.), we have done our best (when necessary) to cross-verify or check against primary sources. If any reader has better sourcing, or sees an issue with a source or factual reference, please contact us at [email protected].
June 2019 — In its Annual Economic Report, the Swiss-based Bank of International Settlements (BIS), the ‘Central Bank of all central banks’, sets the international alarm bells ringing. The document highlights “overheating […] in the leveraged loan market,” where “credit standards have been deteriorating” and “collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) have surged – reminiscent of the steep rise in collateralized debt obligations [CDOs] that amplified the subprime crisis [in 2008].” Simply stated, the belly of the financial industry is once again full of junk. Entries attributed to [vighi] track certain global and globalist economic movements between June and September 2019.
June 13, 2019 — Gov. Andrew Cuomo signs a law ending religious exemption for vaccines in New York State. NPR reports, “The Democratic-controlled Legislature approved the measure, which also eliminates other nonmedical exemptions for schoolchildren across the state.”
“We are facing an unprecedented public health crisis,” said Sen. Brad Hoylman, the legislation’s sponsor. How exactly does he know this six months before it begins? “The atrocious peddlers of junk science and fraudulent medicine who we know as anti-vaxxers have spent years sowing unwarranted doubt and fear, but it is time for legislators to confront them head-on.” What has this got to do with the religious exemption?
August 7, 2019 — Kary Mullis, the 1993 Nobel Prize-winning inventor of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) device, dies of cancer and cirrhosis. The immediate cause was pneumonia. To our knowledge, gained from personal and not public sources, there are no mysterious circumstances surrounding his death. See article. See New York Times obituary.
In this book chapter, Mullis describes his invention of the device back in the 1980s. The invention was the property of his employer Cetus, who sold the patents for the device to Hoffman-La Roche in 1991 for approximately $300,000,000, the highest sale for a patent at the time.
Mullis had spent much of his later life challenging presumptions about the use of the PCR as a medical diagnostic tool, and also explaining that the HIV = AIDS theory has never been demonstrated through scientific research and has many strikes against it. The PCR is best known to the public as the “viral load” test that could not determine infection much less measure virus or predict the onset of symptoms. See long version of interview with Gary Null. Or see short version.
Mullis asserted many times that the PCR is not a diagnostic tool, it is a research tool. In other words, its use is for pure science, not to diagnose a case of disease or an infection.
While there are many reasons for this, the medical industry was on notice that when the device was used as a diagnostic tool for a disease, it could get 100% false positives. Among other times, this occurred in 2006, when the PCR created the illusion of an epidemic, and a massive crisis, at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical School in New Hampshire.
We have not been able to ascertain which of the many problems with the PCR led to 100% false positives in the Dartmouth-Hitchcock incident; there are many possibilities, including assay design, the cycle-threshold issue, the reverse transcriptase problem, the primer-dimer problem, or some other issue. Regardless, the warning was not followed when the PCR was put to use “diagnosing” infection with SARS-CoV-2, and the problems persisted. In late august 2020, the Times reported that the Covid assay — on which every diagnosis and the case count are based — was getting 90% false positives. See April entries re. Jon Rappoport and Celia Farber’s coverage of the PCR.
[To understand more about how the device is designed to work, please see Four Steps of PCR, a concise explanation of the process. Includes video.]
August 9, 2019 — Bank of International Settlements (BIS) issues a working paper calling for “unconventional monetary policy measures” to “insulate the real economy from further deterioration in financial conditions.” The paper indicates that, by offering “direct credit to the economy” during a crisis, central bank lending “can replace commercial banks in providing loans to firms.” [vighi]
August 15, 2019 — BlackRock Inc., the world’s most powerful investment fund (managing around $7 trillion in stock and bond funds), issues a white paper titled Dealing with the Next Downturn. Essentially, the paper instructs the U.S. Federal Reserve to inject liquidity directly into the financial system to prevent “a dramatic downturn.” Again, the message is unequivocal: “An unprecedented response is needed when monetary policy is exhausted and fiscal policy alone is not enough. That response will likely involve ‘going direct’”: “finding ways to get central bank money directly in the hands of public and private sector spenders” while avoiding “hyperinflation. Examples include the Weimar Republic in the 1920s as well as Argentina and Zimbabwe more recently.” [vighi]
August 22-24, 2019 — G7 central bankers meet in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, to discuss BlackRock’s paper along with urgent measures to prevent the looming meltdown. In the prescient words of James Bullard, President of the St Louis Federal Reserve: “We just have to stop thinking that next year things are going to be normal.” [vighi]
September 15-16 2019 — The economic downturn is officially inaugurated by a sudden spike in the repo rates (from 2% to 10.5%). ‘Repo’ is shorthand for ‘repurchase agreement’, a contract where investment funds lend money against collateral assets (normally Treasury securities). At the time of the exchange, financial operators (banks) undertake to buy back the assets at a higher price, typically overnight. In brief, repos are short-term collateralized loans. They are the main source of funding for traders in most markets, especially the derivatives galaxy. A lack of liquidity in the repo market can have a devastating domino effect on all major financial sectors. [vighi]
September 17, 2019 — The Fed begins the emergency monetary programme, pumping hundreds of billions of dollars per week into Wall Street, effectively executing BlackRock’s “going direct” plan. (Unsurprisingly, in March 2020 the Fed will hire BlackRock to manage the bailout package in response to the ‘COVID-19 crisis’). [vighi]
September 19, 2019 — Donald Trump signs Executive Order 13887, establishing a National Influenza Vaccine Task Force whose aim is to develop a “5-year national plan (Plan) to promote the use of more agile and scalable vaccine manufacturing technologies and to accelerate development of vaccines that protect against many or all influenza viruses.” This is to counteract “an influenza pandemic”, which, “unlike seasonal influenza […] has the potential to spread rapidly around the globe, infect higher numbers of people, and cause high rates of illness and death in populations that lack prior immunity.” As someone guessed, the pandemic was imminent, while in Europe too preparations were underway (see here and here). [vighi] [Please see this video from Sept. 20, 2019, where someone in the public predicts that a pandemic is imminent.]
September 29, 2019 — Prof. Yu Chuanhua of Wuhan University told the Health Times that records he reviewed showed two cases in mid-November, and one suspected case on September 29, 2019. At about the same time as Chuanhua’s interview, the Chinese CDC issued an order forbidding sharing of information about the COVID-19 epidemic without approval by CDC China. Shortly thereafter Prof. Chuanhua re-contacted the Health Times to say the November cases could not be confirmed. [CSHL]
October 18, 2019 — Event 201 is staged in New York City. This is a “pandemic exercise” — a kind of high-level moot dramatization played out by bankers, NGOs, the media, scholars, public officials, public and private sector biggies, the works. They enact a drill for the world’s first ever global coronavirus pandemic (such was unprecedented at the time). The fake pandemic involves zoonotic transmission, which means from animal to human. The charade includes shutdowns of the internet to prevent the spread of disinformation, and news reports from a fictional network based on CNN cooked up for the game. Its three sponsors are among the top-tier leaders of the Covid scenario as it played out just eleven weeks later. No part of the exercise involves taking care of sick people or providing information how to do so.
Here is how Event 201 describes itself: “The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.” See this link as well.
November 2019 — Three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that adds weight to the origins of the Covid-19 virus. [wsj, reported in May]
November 13, 2019 — Impeachment hearings begin before the House Intelligence Committee.
December 2019
December 1, 2019 — Symptom onset date of first patient identified with Covid- 19, claimed to have been caused by an allegedly zoonotic coronavirus. This claimed virus was said to have emerged in China, and was soon known as 2019-nCoV.
None of the index patient’s family members developed fever or any respiratory symptoms. No epidemiological link was found between first patient and later cases (of the family cluster). None of the family members had contacts with Wuhan markets or animals, no history of contact with animals, visits to markets including the Huanan seafood wholesale market in Wuhan, or eating game in restaurants. [crowe 16] The man had not been to Huanan seafood wholesale market. His family was unaffected, and no epidemiological link was found between him and the other laboratory-confirmed cases as of January 2. [wiki][lancet]. Bookmark all that! See Dec. 2.
On this day, China’s new Vaccine Administration Law goes into effect. The stated purpose of this law is to ban black market vaccines. It has the effect of up-ending the biologic industry in China. “The vaccine law introduces a mandatory liability insurance system to ensure victims are compensated more efficiently. Whereas compensation was previously paid to victims by the government, the new system will require vaccine producers and insurance companies to pay.”
December 2, 2019 — [citizen.co.za] Chinese ambassador to South Africa, Chen Xiaodong, said, “The local government in China got the first Covid report on December 2, 2019. They got test samples of the first Covid patients on the 30th.”
Note: On Dec. 2, there is said to be one person unremarkably sick in the hospital with then-unknown, unnamed “Covid” — in all of China — a pandemic is not supposed to be a thought on anyone’s mind at this time. He already has respiratory issues, so there’s nothing at all special about him being in the hospital. Why are top government officials, or any government officials, concerned about this one patient on this date? — efc
December 2-3, 2019 — World Health Organization holds a Global Vaccine Safety Summit in Geneva. “At the Summit, WHO will present the Global Vaccine Safety Blueprint 2.0 strategy 2021-2030 to key stakeholders and collect their input for the final version, due for publication in the new year.”
December 4, 2019 — Hearings begin before the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff.
December 6, 2019 — [The Kissinger Center] convened a bilateral meeting from December 6 to December 7 of the America and the Future of World Order Project (AFWO) Study Group and a delegation from the Chinese People’s Institute of Foreign Affairs to discuss the American and Chinese views of world order. No reference to Covid, virus, pandemic noted.
December 8, 2019 — According to the NIH timeline, which has only scant details of events in December, “The number of new patients voluntarily presenting themselves to hospital continued to increase (Bryner, 2020). Hospitals report new one to five cases with similar symptoms on average each day. [How many hospitals and where?] However, this being a new virus, some sources quoted December 8 as the first day where the first patient in the city of Wuhan sought medical help for pneumonia-like symptoms. At this time, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC, 2020c). contended that many dimensions, which were known today, like the need for social distancing, human-to-human infections, lack of vaccine or cure, and many such issues, were unknown, and the precautionary measures taken then were routinely delivered. Also, during these early stages of the onset of the virus, there was no clear evidence of how many people were affected. For this reason, information from Chinese authorities (Wuhan City Health Committee, 2020) and those of the WHO (WHO, 2020a) stated that the December 8, 2019, marked the onset of the first 41 cases that were tested and which were later confirmed positive with COVID-19, then known as 2019-nCoV.”
December 10, 2019 — Symptoms of three more allegedly laboratory-confirmed cases began on this date. These patients are known because they became hospitalized and thus sampled. Two of these three had no direct exposure to the Hunan Seafood Wholesale Market, while the other did. [wiki] How there were “laboratory confirmed cases” on December 10 is unclear, and there are no notes on the lab or the assay.
December 11, 2019 — Scientists at University College London’s Genetics Institute found almost 200 recurrent genetic mutations of the new coronavirus — SARS-CoV- 2 — which the UCL researchers said showed how it is adapting to its human hosts as it spreads. “Phylogenetic estimates support that the COVID-2 pandemic started sometime around Oct. 6, 2019 to Dec. 11, 2019, which corresponds to the time of the host jump into humans,” the research team, co-led by Francois Balloux, wrote in a study published in the journal Infection, Genetics and Evolution. [wef].
December 12, 2019 — The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission claims this date to be the earliest original onset date of the 59 patients with unexplained viral pneumonia. The latest onset date claimed by the Commission was Dec.29, 2019. [bobby] [nih timeline] How is it viral and also unexplained?
The House Judiciary Committee on Dec. 12 spent more than 14 hours in a highly partisan and at times emotional debate deliberating over two articles of impeachment, accusing Trump of abusing the power of his office and with obstructing Congress. The following day, the panel approved each article on a party-line 23-17 vote, making Trump just the fourth president in American history to face impeachment by the House.
December 15, 2019 — In Wuhan, the 5th and 6th “laboratory-confirmed cases” say they first felt symptoms on this date. Both patients had exposure to the Huanan Market. [wiki] What laboratory and what confirmation?
December 16, 2019 — The first documented COVID-19 hospital admissions worldwide were linked to this date in Wuhan. This was reported in February 2020. [wiki]. More than 700 historians sign a letter to the House of Representatives urging members to impeach Pres. Donald Trump as a “clear and present danger to the Constitution.” See news report. See original letter.
December 21, 2019 — Four lower respiratory tract samples, including bronchoalveolar-lavage fluid (BALF), were collected from patients with pneumonia of unknown cause who were identified in Wuhan and who had been present at the Huanan Seafood Market close to the time of their clinical presentation. [bobby]
December 22, 2019 — Carcinogenic hexavalent petroleum — affectionately called green slime — leaks onto a highway in Madison Heights, Michigan, a Detroit suburb.
December 23, 2019 — Joint Public Health Emergencies Incident drill at the port- cruise ship. [chinese time-coordinates-event, screen shot, eric, prob ben or bobby]
December 24, 2019 — Chinese lab worker Little Dog claims in his Medium article that the first patient samples were taken on this day.
December 26, 2019 — According to CDC timeline sourced to WHO — Over 8,000 people worldwide became sick with SARS and more than 700 died during 2003 outbreak. The sequence from the patient in Wuhan is strikingly similar to the virus that caused SARS and the lab goes on to inform the Wuhan Central Hospital doctors and the city’s CDC. (If it’s strikingly similar, how is this a “novel virus”?)
December 27, 2019 — Blood sample from a man in France tested rt-PCR positive for COVID-19. This led doctors to postulate that the virus was circulating earlier in France. They did not consider the possibility that it was a false positive, especially because the man had not recently travelled, nor is known to have come in contact with someone form Wuhan which according to COVID-19 dogma, was the only location of the virus at that time. [crowe 42] How did the virus get in the blood of a patient?
December 29, 2019 — According to the NIH timeline, as hospitals continued to receive more patients with unknown ‘pneumonia-like symptoms’, fear of the outbreak is already spreading, especially among the social media (WeChat) use within China, more so Wuhan (Secon, 2020). Li et al. (2020) explained that during the period beginning December 1, 2019, the recurrence of the words “SARS” and “shortness of breath” in the social media started to increase, and by December 29, it had peaked. Meanwhile, in the hospitals, doctors were observed to concede that there might be a new virus of unknown etymology in Wuhan, presenting symptoms of acute respiratory syndrome. The reporting is affirmed by availability of the first four cases officially confirmed.
The four cases were linked to the Huanan (Southern China) Seafood Wholesale Market, believed to have been the source of the virus. [This is later disproven]. While only four cases had been pointed, by this date, Bryner (2020) reports that already, over 180 people in Wuhan had been infected, but since doctors had not earmarked them as suspected cases noting that there were no suspicion of this“unknown” disease. The 180 cases were only identified after doctors cross-verified records. The suspicion after reporting the four cases was that they were not suffering from SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome), which was still in surveillance since it broke in 2003. With the possibility of an unknown outbreak, at this time, the concern was to establish the transmissibility, severity, and other issues that may be related to this new virus (Adhikari et al., 2020). [nih]
Monday, December 30, 2019 — Dr. Li Wenliang, ophthalmologist, age 34, sends message to fellow medics. He says there are seven cases of SARS at Wuhan Central Hospital, all connected to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market [Wiki chronology].
Tuesday, December 31, 2019 — WHO China national office was informed of 27 [STAT] cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubai [CD, Ras]. Only fifteen turn out to test positive for the sequence that becomes the “novel coronavirus.” Many details in [Avian Flu Diary AVFLU]. China says seven cases seriously ill. National Health Commission experts arrive in Wuhan [possibly Jan. 1]. According to Qu Shiquian, a vendor at Huanan Market, Chinese authorities are said to disinfect the Huanan Market. Stallholders are told to wear masks [Wiki chronology].
“On 31 December 2019, WfHO was informed of cases of #pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, #China. A total of 44 cases have been reported: 11 patients are severely ill, while the remaining 33 are in stable condition.” [pw] Note, there are 233 “health centers” in Wuhan, presumably meaning hospitals. [naturef]
Official notice quoted in Avian Flu Diary [AVFLU].
Update / December 31, 2019, 2:45 PM
The Wuhan Municipal Health and Health Committee issued a notification on the pneumonia epidemic. The preliminary analysis of the cases was viral pneumonia. All cases have been isolated for treatment, no obvious human-to-human transmission has been found, and no medical staff infection has been found.
According to the “Beijing News” report, Wuhan Health and Health Commission has released news that 27 cases have been found, seven of which are in serious condition, and the remaining cases are stable and controllable. Two patients are expected to be discharged in the near future.
The clinical manifestations of the cases were mainly fever, a few patients had difficulty breathing, and chest radiographs showed bilateral lung infiltrative lesions.
Note: At no time during the month of December or any time thereafter is there a record, in any country, of a toxicological team being dispatched to investigate sources of the presumed outbreak other than biological. We have not seen any reference to a tox team being sent to the Huanan fish market; only biological samples were taken, which all tested negative. Tox investigation is supposed to be standard procedure for an outbreak, as ruling out potential chemical causes is a necessary step in validating the presumption of a biological pathogen.
January 2020
Wednesday, January 1, 2020 — Per the NIH timeline, “Until this date, the number of those reported to have shown the signs of the disease in question still remains unknown, but consensus builds around the number of cases to be 41.”
WHO requested information on the reported cluster of atypical pneumonia cases in Wuhan from the Chinese authorities. WHO activated its Incident Management Support Team (IMST), as part of its emergency response framework, which ensures coordination of activities and response across the three levels of WHO (Headquarters, Regional, Country) for public health emergencies [WHO]. What is the criteria for activation of this team? Chinese CDC reports that its Experts Team reached Wuhan to investigate “unusual phenomena” associated with a viral infection [CCDC].
Huanan wet market is closed by authorities in China for “cleaning” and “investigation.” In May 2020, George Gao, the director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, said animal samples collected from the seafood market had tested negative for the virus, indicating that the market was the site of an early superspreading event, but it was not the site of the initial outbreak.
Thursday, January 2, 2020 — The WHO Representative in China wrote to the National Health Commission, offering WHO support and repeating the request for further information on the cluster of cases. WHO Informed Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN) partners about the cluster of pneumonia cases in the People’s Republic of China. GOARN partners include major public health agencies, laboratories, sister UN agencies, international organizations and NGOs [WHO].
According to a study published in The Lancet, By Jan 2, 2020, 41 admitted hospital patients had been identified as having laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection. Most of the infected patients were men (30 [73%] of 41); less than half had underlying diseases (13 [32%]), including diabetes (eight [20%]), hypertension (six [15%]), and cardiovascular disease (six [15%]). Median age was 49·0 years (IQR 41·0–58·0). 27 (66%) of 41 patients had been exposed to Huanan seafood market. One family cluster was found. Common symptoms at onset of illness were fever (40 [98%] of 41 patients), cough (31 [76%]), and myalgia or fatigue (18 [44%]); less common symptoms were sputum production (11 [28%] of 39), headache (three [8%] of 38), haemoptysis (two [5%] of 39), and diarrhoea (one [3%] of 38). [nih, lancet]. Note: some of this is contradicted by Rasnick; there are many inconsistencies in the reports of exactly how many were sick, when. Rasnick says that a total of 15 of about 44 people said to be sick with the virus tested positive for the allegedly offending sequence.
By Jan 2, 2020, 41 admitted hospital patients had been identified as having laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection in Wuhan, China. [NCBI] Which lab, which assay, which hospitls?
Friday, January 3, 2020 — Chinese officials provided information to WHO on the cluster of cases of ‘viral pneumonia of unknown cause’ identified in Wuhan. Chinese CDC later claims that on this day, “the first full genome of 2019-nCoV was born.” [ccdc]
Saturday, January 4, 2020 — Chinese CDC says that “the first 2019-nCoV specific rRT-PCR was developed.” WHO tweeted that there was a cluster of pneumonia cases — with no deaths — in Wuhan, and that investigations to identify the cause were underway [WHO]. This is the “social media” post referenced by Drosten that got him going assembling an assay for a coronavirus that within days becomes the official WHO test. STATNews reports that on January 3, China increases case count to 44 and is tracking 121 contacts of them. STATNews reports that the infections “are linked to a large seafood market where it is believes some exotic animals are also sold for consumption.” [STAT]
January 5, 2020 — GenBank submits origin of sequence what is claimed to be Human SARS Coronavirus-2 (Covid-19), given the accession number MN908947. This is for review by Wu, et al.
This sequence is cited in the Corman-Drosten in Eurosurveillance as the source of in silico (theoretical) primers for their PCR assay (sometimes called the German test, or Charité for the institution where the design was done; which are the same design as the WTO assay). However, Corman in the C-D paper, says he has also used the sequence from the original SARS-CoV (from 2003) as the basis of his PCR primers (not a novel virus) and may be citing MN908947 to give the impression of a novel virus. China gives no information about the actual origins of this sequence: what patient, exactly what the symptoms were, or what the outcome was. [DailyMail]
And this identification appears in a CDC document explaining certain facts about its PCR design, as the source of the primers for a “mimicked human specimen” based on MN980947 with much other manipulation of the sequence. In other words, what are called tests for SARS-CoV-2 are really using SARS-CoV (the original) and MN908947 as the sources of its RNA primers. The former is now harmless and the latter cannot infect anyone as it is a manipulated computer sequence that does not exist in nature. The reason for using it is because nobody has an actual sample of SARS-CoV-2: no government that has been asked, using open records laws, can produce evidence of having such a sample.
Further, there is no purified isolate gathered from many patients, and no set of experiments conducted to determine that MN908947 is in fact the disease-causing agent to the exclusion of all else.
Note: The sequence MM908947 is central to the covid scenario. In essence it is “covid” though very little has been written about it. I did find this article.
Continuing January 5, According to The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission— As of 8:00 on this date, the city reported 59 patients with unexplained viral pneumonia diagnosed, including 7 severely ill patients, and the vital signs of the remaining patients were generally stable. [bobby]
WHO published its first Disease Outbreak News on the alleged new virus, containing a risk assessment and advice, and reporting on what China had told the organization about the status of patients and the public health response on the cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan. [pw] They say on Twitter, “On 31 December 2019, WHO was informed of cases of #pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan City, #China. A total of 44 cases have been reported: 11 patients are severely ill, while the remaining 33 are in stable condition.” Nobody has died as of this date.
January 7, 2020 — Novel coronavirus termed “2019-n-CoV” was announced by China as the causative agent of the 44 cases of pneumonia even though viral- specific nucleic acids were found on only 15 patients. China says that “corona-like virus particles was observed by electron microscopy.” [ccdc] [rasnick]
“After rigorous probes, tests, analysis, and other medical practices, the Chinese authorities made a global announcement (Huang et al., 2020) that they have successfully identified the virus as a novel coronavirus, similar to the one associated with SARS and the middle east respiratory syndrome (MARS). Prior to this ground breaking discovery, the officials had 2 days earlier, on January 5, ruled out that the virus they were dealing with was either SARS or MARS, hence concluding that it was indeed a new type of virus. Upon its successful identification, it was tentatively named as ‘2019-nCoV’. The identification came after Chinese scientists successfully isolated the virus from one of the patients quarantined in a hospital in Wuhan (Huang et al., 2020). According to an article by Singhal (2020), the identified virus had greater than 95% (>95%) homology with the bat coronavirus and was also greater than 70% similarity with the virus responsible for causing SARS (SARS-CoV).”
None of these tests involved the necessary steps of “isolation, purification characterization and full sequencing” of intact, wild, live virion from multiple patient samples, nor fulfillment of Koch’s or Rivers’ postulates, nor the meeting of the Gold Standard for the use of the PCR. No such steps or experiments are mentioned anywhere. Rather, the steps taken involve the “reassembly” of what are claimed to be viral nucleotides from presumed patient samples. [Little Dog] These are then published without chain of custody or patient notes (such as symptoms or outcome). Additionally, though the virus is said to be the result of zoonotic transfer, no original host or intermediate animals are ever identified.
China’s paramount leader and CCP general secretary Xi Jinping claimed he had learned of the epidemic on this date and issued a request for information on activities to contain the spread of the disease. However, the original public announcement of this on January 7, 2020 meeting did not mention the epidemic, and Xi’s claim was unsupported by the evidence, according to an article published on February 15th, 2020 by Xi Jinping himself. [wiki]
January 8, 2020 — The article: “Pneumonia of unknown etiology in Wuhan, China: potential for international spread via commercial air travel” submitted January 8 and subsequently published January 14 in the Journal of Travel Medicine. By Isaac I. Bogoch, Alexander Watts, Andrea Thomas-Bachli, Carmen Huber, Moritz U.G. Kraemer and Kamran Khan. “There is currently an outbreak of pneumonia of unknown etiology in Wuhan, China. Although there are still several unanswered questions about this infection, we evaluate the potential for international dissemination of this disease via commercial air travel should the outbreak continue.” [pw] [similar article from JTTM here.]
January 9, 2020 — WHO reported that Chinese authorities have determined that the outbreak is caused by a novel coronavirus. WHO convened the first of many teleconferences with global expert networks, beginning with the Clinical Network.
Patient 2 died on this date (China). No biopsy specimens were obtained. [bobby].
From the NIH timeline: On January 9, 2020, Chinese officials reported to the WHO that they have finally identified the virus, and subsequently, the WHO made the official announcement (WHO, 2020e) of the same to the world. [nih]
January 10, 2020 — Viral genome sequence was released by China and given GenBank MN908947 [c-d]. This is a partial, in silico sequence of the N gene [db]. WHO issued a comprehensive package of technical guidance online with advice to all countries on how to detect, test and manage potential cases, based on what was known about the virus at the time. This guidance was shared with WHO’s regional emergency directors to share with WHO representatives in countries [who]. Also see this 2018 paper relating to 2003 SARS. Dr Li Wenligng, Chinese eye doctor, is said to have started coughing. He says his parents also took ill and were taken to the hospital. Tests negative several times. What about his parents?
Official media announcement is picked up by ScienceMag.org.
— BetaCoV/Wuhan/IVDC-HB-05/2019 ID: EPI_ISL_402121 by Zhu et al. – submitted to GISAID [benjamin]
— BetaCoV/Wuhan/IVDC-HB-01/2019 ID: EPI_ISL_402119 by Zhu et al. – submitted to GISAID [Benjamin]
“From Jan 10, 2020, we enrolled a family of six patients who travelled to Wuhan from Shenzhen between December 29, 2019 and January 4, 2020. Of six family members who travelled to Wuhan, five were identified as infected with the novel coronavirus.” David Crowe writes, “Two grandparents) patients 1 and 2), the daughter and son-in law) patients 3 and 4), a 10-year old grandson and a 7- year old granddaughter (patients 5 and 6) flew to Wuhan on 12/29/19. On the first day, the grandmother (1) and her daughter (3) visited a baby boy with pneumonia, known as Relative 1, in a hospital in Wuhan (the hospital is not named, but the implication is the child had this new disease). They mingled with four other local relatives, of which two had also spent extensive time in the hospital. *Notably the infant’s symptoms resolved one or two days after the visit, and he returned home.” [crowe 16]
A Shanghai laboratory had sequenced the virus’ genome. German scientists (meaning Corman and Drosten) produced the first polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay based on this sequence, and others including SARS-CoV-I, a week later. This is called the “German test” or the “Charité” test, which is one and the same as the WTO test design.
[virology] A viral genome sequence was released for immediate public health support via the community online resource. [Wuhan-HU-1, GenBank accession number MN908947, see entries above]
January 11, 2020 — WHO tweeted that it had received the genetic sequences for the novel coronavirus from the People’s Republic of China and expected these to soon be made publicly available. Chinese media reported the first death from the novel coronavirus [who tweet].
From Wiki timeline: A viral genome sequence was shared to GENBANK and Virological.org by Professor Zhang Yongzhen of the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre through the auspices of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which was before the government’s official disclosure of the same to WHO, occurring the day after the National Health Commission released several viral sequences to GISAID.
— BetaCoV/Wuhan/WIV04/2019 ID:EPI_ISL_402124 by Zhou et al. – submitted to GISAID. This is a sequence of unknown origin published by China. [benjamin]
— BetaCoV/Wuhan/IPBCAMS-WH-01/2019 ID: EPI_ISL_402123 by Ren et al. – submitted to GISAID. This is a sequence of unknown origin published by China. [benjamin]
— BetaCoV/Wuhan/IVDC-HB-04/2020 ID: EPI_ISL_402120 by Zhu et al. – submitted to GISAID. This is a sequence of unknown origin published by China. [benjamin]
— MN908947.1 – published on www.virological.org [benjamin]. This is a sequence of unknown origin published by China.
On January 11, the Chinese health officials report that a 61-year-old man who had been admitted in one of the hospitals in Wuhan had died. From the report (Ravelo and Jerving, 2020), the man had other underlying health conditions such as chronic liver disease and abdominal tumors, but the cause of his death was attributed to 2019-nCoV. By the time of his death, he was reported to have suffered from issues such as respiratory failure and severe pneumonia, septic shock, and multiple organ failure. He was also observed to have suffered from severe acid-based metabolism disorder and cirrhosis. His hospital treatment included antiinfection, ventilator- assisted breathing, life support, and other treatments, but with no positive results. His death was marked as the first known death from this new virus. [nih]
In regard to new cases, health officials did not record any other case except the 44 cases that had been received up to January 3. They also expressed that according to an epidemiological survey (WHO, 2020e), there was no clear evidence that the disease could be transmitted from human to human. However, they affirmed that all the cases in hospital were of people who had been exposed to the Wuhan Seafood market. [nih]
On this day, the first 2019-nCoV virus genome sequence was deposited in the GENBNK (the NIH database that where all public genetic sequences are stored) and shared with virologist.org (an online hub for prepublication of data, where the public can freely access for public health–related activities and research) and also uploaded to the platform “Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data” (GISAID) (ECDC, 2020b), through a collaboration of a number of organizations including the Shanghai Public Health Clinic Centre, the Central Hospital of Wuhan, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, and Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention among others. All this happened before the information on discovery of the genome sequence was officially shared with the WHO. However, the details were to be shared with the WHO the following day together with other viral sequences that were to be shared with GISAID (Holmes, 2020). In parallel, Chinese Health officials were considering to temporarily close down the Chinese laboratory that was the first to share the coronavirus genome with the world. The laboratory was closed on the following day (January 12) (Pinghui, 2020). [nih]
WHO received further detailed information from the National Health Commission China that the outbreak is associated with exposures in one seafood market in Wuhan City. (note information was also received on the 12th).
January 12, 2020 — Saturn conjunct Pluto in Capricorn.
— MN908947.1 – made public on GenBank. This is a sequence of unknown origin published by China.
From Wiki timeline: In China, more than 700 close contacts of the 41 confirmed cases, including more than 400 healthcare workers, had been monitored, with no new cases reported in China since 5 January.[42][38][52][69] Respiratory wards in Wuhan hospitals began reaching capacity around 12 January, with some people being denied care.[70] The WHO published initial guidance on travel advice, testing in the laboratory and medical investigation.[52] The WHO said that “The [Chinese] government reports that there is no clear evidence that the virus passes easily from person to person”.[71]
January 13, 2020 — WHO convened the first teleconference with the diagnostics and laboratories global expert network. [Are there notes on this?] The Ministry of Public Health in Thailand reported an imported case of lab-confirmed novel coronavirus from Wuhan, the first recorded case outside of the People’s Republic of China. WHO publishes first protocol for a RT-PCR assay by a WHO partner laboratory to diagnose the novel coronavirus [WHO].
Ministry of Public Health, Thailand reported the first imported case of lab-confirmed novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) from Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
January 14, 2020 — MN908947.2 – replaces MN908947.1 on GenBank [benjamin]
WHO held a press briefing during which it stated that, based on experience with respiratory pathogens, the potential for human-to-human transmission in the 41 confirmed cases in the People’s Republic of China existed: “it is certainly possible that there is limited human-to-human transmission.” WHO tweeted that preliminary investigations by the Chinese authorities had found “no clear evidence of human-to- human transmission.” [wiki]
In its risk assessment, WHO said additional investigation was “needed to ascertain the presence of human-to-human transmission, modes of transmission, common source of exposure and the presence of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases that are undetected” [WHO]. From Wikipedia timeline: WHO sent a tweet which said “preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in Wuhan, China.”[77] According to Reuters in Geneva, WHO said there may have been limited human-to-human transmission of a new coronavirus in China within families, and it is possible there could be a wider outbreak.[78][wiki]
WHO’s technical lead, Maria Van Kerkhove, noted in a press briefing there may have been limited human-to-human transmission of the coronavirus (in the 41 “confirmed cases”), mainly through family members, and that there was a risk of a possible wider outbreak. The lead also said that human-to-human transmission would not be surprising given our experience with SARS, MERS and other respiratory pathogens. [pw]
January 15, 2020 — The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, Japan (MHLW) reported an imported case of laboratory-confirmed 2019-novel coronavirus from Wuhan, Hubei, Province, China [bobby]
The NHC unveiled the first version of guidelines on diagnosis and treatment for pneumonia caused by novel coronavirus along with the guidelines on prevention and control measures. [bobby]
January 16, 2020 — The Pan American Health Organization/WHO Regional office for the Americas (PAHO/AMRO) issued its first epidemiological alert on the novel coronavirus. The alert included recommendations covering international travelers, infection prevention and control measures and laboratory testing.
About the new cases, provincial and municipal experts based on the patient’s clinical manifestations, epidemiological history, and the results detected using the newly issued diagnostic kits issued by the country, newly identified 4 cases of pneumonia infected by the new coronavirus. [bobby]
January 17, 2020 — MN908947.3 – replaces MN908947.2 on Genbank [benjamin]
Four cases were cured and discharged, 17 new cases were added, and there were no deaths. [bobby]
The WHO publishes its PCR protocols, based on the Corman-Drosten test.
January 18, 2020 — Five cases were cured and discharged, 59 new cases were added, and 1 case dead. [bobby]
In the United States, retrospective NAT of archived respiratory samples in the Seattle region have suggested introduction of SARS-CoV-2 virus into the Seattle, Washington, area between Jan. 18 and Feb. 9. [article source]
January 19, 2020 — On January 19, 2020, a 35-year-old man presented to an urgent care clinic in Snohomish County, Washington, with a 4-day history of cough and subjective fever. On checking into the clinic, the patient put on a mask in the waiting room. After waiting approximately 20 minutes, he was taken into an examination room and underwent evaluation by a provider. He disclosed that he had returned to Washington State on January 15 after traveling to visit family in Wuhan, China. The patient stated that he had seen a health alert from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) about the novel coronavirus outbreak in China and, because of his symptoms and recent travel, decided to see a health care provider. [nejm]
CDC officials initially said the spark that started the U.S. outbreak arrived during a three-week window from mid-January to early February. Officially, the first U.S. infection was a traveler— a Washington state man who returned from Wuhan on January 15th and sought help at a clinic on this date. [apnews.com]
January 20, 2020 — WHO conducted field visit to Wuhan China to learn about the responses to 2019 novel coronavirus. The mission was part of the ongoing close collaboration between WHO and Chinese national, provincial and Wuhan health authorities in responding to 2019-nCoV. WHO publishes its first guidance on how to handle patients believed to be infected.
National IHR Focal Point (NFP) for Republic of Korea reported the first case of novel coronavirus in the Republic of Korea [bobby]
A total of 201 cases of pneumonia in China have been confirmed; 282 “confirmed” cases of 2019-n-Cov have been reported from four countries including China (278 cases), Thailand (2 cases), Japan (1 case) and the Republic of Korea (1 case). [bobby]
January 21, 2020 — The United States of America (USA) reported its “first confirmed case” of the novel coronavirus. This was the first case in the WHO Region of the Americas [WHO]. The only available assay at this time is Corman-Drosten, distributed by WHO. See Jan. 19 above.
Corman-Drosten paper submitted to Eurosurveillance.
According to BBC News [4] and Google Statistics [5] there were 6 deaths world-wide on January 21st 2020 – the day when the manuscript was submitted. Why did the authors assume a challenge for public health laboratories while there was no substantial evidence at that time to indicate that the outbreak was more widespread than initially thought? [retraction paper]
WHO experts from its China and Western Pacific regional offices conducted a brief field visit to Wuhan *(also noted under January 20th)? [pw]
The Chinese government has released the primers and probes used in the rT-PCR test kit. [bobby]
January 21-24 2020 — The World Economic Forum’s annual meeting takes place in Davos, Switzerland, where both the economy and vaccinations are discussed. WEF was a cosponsor of Event 201.
January 22, 2020 — Wuhan bans sale and breeding of wild animals [cbs]. Gee, it’s about time.
WHO mission to China issued a statement saying that there was evidence of human-to-human transmission in Wuhan but more investigation was needed to understand the full extent.
WHO director-general convened an Emergency Committee (EC) under the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005) to assess whether the outbreak constituted a public health emergency of international concern. The independent members from around the world could not reach a consensus based on the evidence available at the time.
They asked to be reconvened within 10 days after receiving more information. “We have it totally under control.” — President Trump, in an interview, on Jan. 22.
January 23, 2020 — Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR by Victor Corman, Christian Drosten, et al, is published by Eurosurveillance with just 24 hours peer review. The paper is the scientific basis for the existence and pathogenicity of the 2019-nCoV virus, as well as providing the fatally flawed PCT test design adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO).
The paper is finally refuted in November by an international consortium of scientists and researchers, who expose 10 fatal flaws in the assay design. These include the inability to detect whether a sample is from a human, defective primer design, issues with the cycle threshold, conflict of interest, lack of peer review, and many others. The 22 authors demand that the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted byEurosurveillance. The publication secretly convenes a committee to address the retraction demand, which Dr. Steve Bustin revealed in a Planet Waves FM interview in early 2021.
On this date, Wuhan, a city of more than 11 million [9.5 million?], was cut and locked down off by the Chinese authorities. Wuhan’s transit shutdown.
January 24, 2020 — The Lancet publishes a paper by Huang et al revealing that 13 of the original 41 cases had no contact with the Huanan wet market in Wuhan, making the “wet market origin” story implausible or impossible.
An article in Science characterizes the findings: ‘The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). In the earliest case, the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report. “No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases,” they state. Their data also show that, in total, 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace. “That’s a big number, 13, with no link,” says Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University.’
Zhu-Gao paper is published by New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). “China novel coronavirus research and investigating team” including George Gao, head of Chinese CDC (Howard University educated). Gau is on the Global Monitoring Preparedness Board, connected to Fauci et al. He is also the Chinese guy on Event 201. They also define sequence as less than 90%, 2019-nCoV, the “likely causative agent” is probably this virus [Benjamin.] However, they admit that it does not fulfill Koch’s Postulates.
Illinois health officials announced the first confirmed case the novel coronavirus infection in the state of Illinois, also the second confirmed case in the United States. The case was a woman in her 60s who had returned from a December 25 – January 13 visit to Wuhan, China, the place of origin of the outbreak, where she had frequently visited a hospitalized relative and other relatives with respiratory illnesses.[13] On January 30, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed that the first known human-to-human transmission in the U.S. of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (then known as 2019-nCoV) had occurred in Chicago. According to the CDC, the woman who was the first Illinois case had transmitted the virus to her husband, who was confirmed as the second Illinois case and the sixth U.S. case after testing positive. He was isolated at the same hospital as his wife.[15]
David Crowe writes,
“A paper in Lancet (not the one referenced above) made a big deal about the presumed first case of person-to person contact in the USA, from a woman who had visited Wuhan in December 2019, to her husband, who stayed in the United Sates. She got sick after returning, and later both her and her husband, who had not travelled to Wuhan, tested positive for COVID-19. Whether he had symptoms or not was impossible to tell because he had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, so had cough and difficulty breathing all the time. What is more interesting is that authorities identified 372 contacts of this couple, and “were able to assess exposure risk and actively monitor symptoms for 347.”
Not one of these people had an emergency room visit with respiratory symptoms within 14 days of contact with the couple. 43 did have some symptoms that could have been COVID- 19, and became “Persons Under Investigation.” 26 had exposures to the couple classified as “medium risk or greater.” But despite the presence of symptoms, contact with the couple, and close monitoring, not one tested positive for COVID- 19. [crowe 16]
The CDC says that it has developed a sophisticated diagnostic test and has sought F.D.A. permission to send it to public labs around the country. CDC Press tele briefing [pw]
January 25, 2020 — Chinese Medical Journal receives submission of Ren paper. Ren paper claims that a novel coronavirus is associated with patient pneumonias but admits that it remains to be seen whether it causes the symptoms. [benjamin]
Less than 90% for reserved RDRP sequence and recommends that it should be classified as a new sequence. Some of the people, including the main author, are part of [cabal described at the top of the Ren paper]. Little Dog Team — published screen shots of social media accounts when they reported to friends of possible SARS-like outbreak.
Christian Drosten tweets: “Now that we know #nCoV2019 really resembles #SARS (see #Lancet yesterday), here is my reading tip for the weekend: https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/717919/epidemiology-severe-acute-respiratory- syndrome-2003-hong-kong-epidemic-analysis…. This is the essence of how #HongKong stopped it. Look at Figure 5.” The designer of the WHO PCR assay admits that the allegedly “new virus” is not a novel virus.
From the NIH timeline for this day: “Researchers were able to observe a lot of interesting information from the model, which ran from the start of the outbreak until 25th January. Specifically, the researchers estimated that as of 25th January, 40 cases of 2019-NCoV had been exported from China. At the same time, the team estimated that the number of 2019-nCoV cases in China may have been much higher than reported for the whole of January, up to about 20,000 cases of 2019- nCoV in the country as of 25th January 25 (the number reported at the time was nearly 2000). Researchers also estimated that hundreds of people in Wuhan were infected in early December. The model is, however, limited by many factors, as explained by the team on their blog post. They are primarily due to the numbers being used are conservative estimates, the transmission of 2019-nCoV, such as the R0 value and incubation period, being uncertain, asymptomatic infections are not covered and only air travel was included.” [nih]
On Virological.org, Kristian Anderson says that there are 28 full-length genomes and one partial genome claimed to be from 2019-nCoV available on the GISAID platform. Many of the earlier entries were posted by the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and were deleted. Anderson proposes that the earliest common ancestor of the 28 alleged sequences was in October 2019. How were these genomes created without purified, isolated virus, and how did anyone initially know what to look for? [pw]
January 26, 2020 — Editor of the People’s Daily, the official newspaper of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), tweeted a claim that the first building of the Huoshenshan Hospital had been completed in only 16 hours. The Daily Beast reported the next day the building shown in the picture accompanying the west was actually a marketing photo of a modular container building sold by the Henan K-Home Steel Structure Company, not an actual hospital. [wiki]
January 27, 2020 — CDC issued narrow guidance on which patients qualified for a test — only those with recent travel to Wuhan or those who had come into contact with an infected person. [pw]
[DailyMail] GenBank: MN996532.1 submits Bat —RaTG13. It was noted a warning that on October 13, 2020 this sequence was replaced by MN996532.2 [bobby] These are sequences of unknown origin provided by China.
January 28, 2020 — Chairman of the Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University and two Chinese nationals were charged with aiding the People’s Republic of China. There are a diversity of criminal charges for selling scientific secrets and lying to a federal investigation, tax evasion and other crimes, among other issues. One of the Chinese nationals, Zaosong Zheng, was charged with stealing 21 vials of biological research and attempting to smuggle them out of the U.S. and aboard a flight to China. Our reporters did their best to unravel this at the time and could not find a direct Covid connection. We cannot rule in, or rule out, that this incident is connected to Covid. However, the criminally indicted chairman, Dr. Charles Lieber, was a “strategic scientist” at Wuhan University of Technology, perhaps just a coincidence; the university has not come up in the Covid story that we have read about. See Department of Justice press release. See NPR coverage.
The most interesting thing about the court papers, in my view, was the description of the depth and complexity of U.S.-China relations where biotechnology is concerned. Read coverage from June 2021 in the Harvard Crimson.
In other news, senior WHO delegation led by the Director-General travelled to Beijing to meet China’s leadership, learn more about China’s response, and to offer any technical assistance. [pw]
Op-Ed by Luciana Borio, the former head of medical and biodefense preparedness at the National Security Council (NSC), and Scott Gottlieb, who led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from May 2017 to April 2019: Act Now to Prevent an American Epidemic – Quarantines, flu vaccines and other steps to take before the Wuhan virus becomes widespread. “[T]he CDC will struggle to keep up with the volume of screening. Government should focus on working with private industry to develop easy-to-use, rapid diagnostic tests that can be made available to providers.” [The CDC did the opposite, issuing narrow testing guidelines.] [pw]
January 29, 2020 — Little Dog paper published on Medium. It is a personal account of the in silico discovery of 2019-nCoV that had SARS-like qualities. and similarities to bat viruses.
The White House announces a coronavirus task force led by the secretary of Health and Human Services Alex M. Azar II. President Trump attends the group’s first meeting and tweets that the experts “are on top of it.” [pw]
January 30, 2020 — Pasteur Institute claims it has sequenced the whole virus from samples it received on January 24. [science daily] This is not actual sequencing from purified isolate of wild virion; it is assembling nucleotides into a kind of potential, hypothetical “virus,” probably using CRISPR.
January 30, 2020 — A new, affordable (and unspecified) pneumonia vaccine was high on the agenda at the inaugural Global Forum on Childhood Pneumonia in Barcelona. The new vaccine could save many lives from the top childhood killer— and improving access in middle-income countries should be a central focus, says Médecins Sans Frontières, or Doctors Without Borders, an international humanitarian medical non-governmental organization of French origin. [Global Health Now]
HHS boss Azar declared a “public health emergency,” announcing travel restrictions —including barring noncitizens who had recently visited China from entering the United States — in an effort to curtail the virus’s spread inside the country. The declaration triggered emergency testing protocols, which increased restrictions on which labs could make a coronavirus test. Any lab would be required to acquire an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the FDA to perform testing for covid- 19. The FDA granted the CDC the first EUA. Late January ‘Criminal Negligence’: Trump Officials Ignored Company’s Offer to Make 7 Million N95 Masks Per Month. The World Health Organization began shipping its tests out to countries during the first week of February. [pw]
According to NIH, The virus has been spread to 17 other countries [25], with number of confirmed cases: Thailand (14), Japan (11), Singapore (10), Australia (9), Malaysia (8), USA (6), France (5), Germany (5), Korea (4), United Emirates (4), Canada (3), Vietnam (2), Nepal (1), Finland (1), Sri Lanka (1), India (1), and Cambodia (1). Using back-calculation method, Nishiura has estimated the cumulative incidence in China in real time, allowing us to update and discuss the extent of transmission at the source [26]. [nih]
All age groups can be infected. According to Bin Cao, the Executive vice President at the Institute of Respiratory Medicine, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, 72% confirmed infection cases are aged 40 and above, 64% are male. 40% patients also have other underlying diseases such as diabetes and high blood pressure [27]. [nih]
On January 31, after a planned debate session, the Senate voted against allowing subpoenas to call witnesses or documents with a 51–49 vote.[161] Fifty-one Republican senators voted against calling witnesses, while 45 Democratic senators, two independents (Bernie Sanders and Angus King) who typically vote Democratic, and two Republicans (Mitt Romney and Susan Collins) voted for witnesses.[162] Further attempts to add witnesses, Bolton in particular, via amendments were tabled with similar vote tallies but with Romney and Collins joining their fellow Republicans except for votes specifically calling for Bolton as a witness.[163]
February 2020
Early February 2020 — Stanford University develops its own test for the coronavirus but runs into regulatory roadblocks at the FDA. The U.S. opted to develop its own test, but the distribution was limited. Other countries, like China, developed their own tests as well. In the early weeks of the pandemic, the United States recorded an estimated 15,400 excess deaths, nearly two times as many as were publicly attributed to covid-19 at the time [wapo]
February 2, 2020 — The first alleged coronavirus death was reported outside China. This is in the Philippines. He is 44 years old and was from Wuhan. [pw] BBC also reports that 200 people have died in the outbreak, “the vast majority from Hubai.” BBC also claims that 14,000 have been infected as of this date. [bbc]
February 3, 2020 — WHO releases the international community’s Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan to help protect states with weaker health systems.
The US test was approved by the Food and Drug Administration on February 4 — around two weeks after the first case was reported in Washington State and more than a month after the outbreak was first reported in China.
“Early” CDC test couldn’t distinguish between coronavirus and water. [pw, biz insider]. Repeat, tested positive for water. [Battini explains somewhere how exactly this happened. Water is the negative control — the substance that should always test negative. One way to get a positive test out of water is the primer-dimer issue, with the primers from the test annelling to one another and forming a sub stance that tests “positive.” This may have been what was called at the time test contamination. [see Four Steps of PCR, a concise explanation of the process. Includes video.]
The United States Senate voted 52 to 48 to find Trump not guilty on the charge of abuse of power; all 45 Democrats, Independent senators Bernie Sanders and Angus King, and Republican senator Mitt Romney voted guilty. Romney’s vote marked the first time in American history a senator voted to convict a president of his own party. On the second charge, the Senate voted 53 to 47, in a party-line vote, to find him not guilty on the charge of obstruction of Congress.
February 4, 2020 — FDA issues Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) requiring CDC to retest all positive results. CDC finally started to send kits to state and local health labs on February 5. [pw]
February 5, 2020 — A cruise ship in Japan quarantined thousands. [pw] “On Wednesday, it was confirmed that 10 people on board a cruise ship in Japan had also tested positive, prompting authorities to instruct all passengers to remain inside their cabins. Thousands of people on the Diamond Princess face spending the next fortnight stuck off the Japanese port of Yokohama, as officials attempt to prevent further infection.” [guardian]
The death toll in China has now risen to 490, according to the latest figures from the country’s National Health Commission (NHC). [guardian]
February 6, 2020 — Officials in Santa Clara County, Calif., announced on April 21 that two residents there died of the coronavirus on Feb. 6 and Feb. 17, making them the earliest known dead? victims of the pandemic in the United States. The CDC-manufactured kits were sent to state labs on Feb. 6 and Feb. 7. CDC press release. [pw]
February 7, 2020 — Li Wenliang — the eye doctor who warned people about a new virus — died allegedly from Covid-19 disease at age 34.[8][9] A subsequent Chinese official inquiry exonerated him, and the Communist Party of China formally offered a “solemn apology” to his family and revoked the admonishment of him.
February 10, 2020 — “We’re in great shape, though. We have 12 cases, 11 cases and many of them are in good shape.” –Trump remarks. [pw]
February 11, 2020 — The disease the virus causes was named COVID-19. [pw]. The word “covid” should not exist anywhere before this time, such as in spellcheck, disinfectant packages, etc.
February 12, 2020 — CDC revealed that several labs had difficulty validating the test because of a problem with one of the reagents. A problem with one ingredient in the US tests caused more than half of state labs to receive inconclusive results. Health experts said the glitch was unprecedented. [pw] [science]
“The key problem with the kits is what’s known as a negative control, says Kelly Wroblewski, director of infectious diseases at the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL). CDC’s test uses the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay to find tiny amounts of the SARS-CoV-2 genome in, say, a nose swab. To make sure a test is working properly, kits also include DNA unrelated to SARS-CoV- 2. The assay should not react to this negative control, but the CDC reagents did at many, but not all, state labs. The labs where the negative control failed were not allowed to use the test; they have to continue to send their samples to Atlanta.” [science] This seems to be the first reference to potential problems with the WHO- Corman-Drosten assay.
February 11- 12, 2020 — WHO convened a Research and Innovation Forum on COVID-19, attended by more than 400 experts and funders from around the world, which included presentations by George Gao, Director General of China CDC, and Zunyou Wu, China CDC’s chief epidemiologist. [pw]
February 13, 2020 — Azar testified that he intended to implement a pilot program, adding coronavirus surveillance to the existing flu surveillance networks. But it never came to fruition. There were not enough tests to make it happen. [pw]
February 14, 2020 — France announced the first coronavirus death in Europe. Experts share concern that procedures on the quarantined ship will increase infection risk. [pw]
February 16-24, 2020 — The WHO-China Joint mission, which included experts from Canada, Germany, Japan, Nigeria, Republic of Korea, Russia, Singapore and the US (CDC, NIH) spent time in Beijing and also travelled to Wuhan and two other cities. They spoke with health officials, scientists and health workers in health facilities (maintaining physical distancing). The report of the joint mission can be found here: WHO-China Joint Mission report. [pw]
By now the CDC and state public health labs tested nearly 1,600 specimens. As a rule of thumb, two specimens are required per person, meaning that in total, only about 800 people had been tested. That’s roughly 2.4 tests per million people in the United States. [pw]
February 18, 2020 — Even as coronavirus testing remained limited nationwide, the CDC reminded hospitals that they shouldn’t do their own testing without an “emergency use authorization” from the FDA. [pw]
February 19, 2020 — Hundreds left the quarantined Diamond Princess. A scientist onboard the quarantined ship calls conditions “completely chaotic”. [pw, nyt]
February 20, 2020 — A man in Lombardy tests positive after previously leaving the hospital without a test. He is believed to have spread the disease widely before developing severe symptoms. (Italy now has three PCR positives.)
February 21, 2020 — A secretive church was linked to the outbreak in South Korea. [pw]
February 23, 2020 — In Italy, small towns said to be affected by the outbreak are placed under quarantine. Carnival celebrations and some soccer matches are canceled (150 PCR positives as of this date).
February 24, 2020 — Iran emerged as a second focus point. State public health labs made an unusual plea for the FDA to open testing. [pw]
The chief executive of the Association of Public Health Laboratories writes to the F.D.A. that “we are now many weeks into the response with still no diagnostic or surveillance test available outside of C.D.C. for the vast majority of our member laboratories.”
APHL asked FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn for “enforcement discretion” to sidestep the emergency process and allow APHL members labs to use their own tests. On 26 February, Hahn replied that the CDC test could be modified to use just the primers that specifically detect SARS-CoV-2, essentially ignoring the faulty portion of the kits. FDA, in other words, would look the other way to make more widespread testing possible. [science]
CDC has notified labs of FDA’s decision in a letter, but the agency must still file an emergency use authorization with FDA for the protocol change. Once it does, it won’t take long, Hahn promised in his letter to APHL: “FDA has been able to authorize tests for public health emergencies within as little as 1 day upon receipt of the complete validation.” [science]
In New York, the State Department of Health has designed its own test based on the CDC protocol and plans to seek emergency use authorization. [science] It is later revealed that the test utilizes 45 cycles of the PCR, assuring 90% false positives.
February 25, 2020 — Azar boasts to a Senate panel about his agency’s “aggressive response” to the coronavirus. A total of 12 other labs received EUAs from the FDA by late February. [pw] “We have contained this,” White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow insisted to a television interviewer on Feb. 25. “I won’t say airtight but pretty close.” [politico – march 6 2020 lots here]
February 26, 2020 — Latin America reported its first case. On this Wednesday, under pressure from health experts and public officials, the CDC and the FDA told labs they no longer had to worry about the portion of the test intended “for
the universal detection of SARS-like coronaviruses.” After three weeks of struggle, they could now use the test purely to check for the presence of COVID-19. [pw]
February 27, 2020 — “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” — Trump remarks [pw]
February 28, 2020 — Infections spiked in Europe. Sub-Saharan Africa recorded its first infection. [pw]
February 29, 2020 — The United States reported the first COVID-19 death. On this Saturday, the FDA announced an “accelerated policy to achieve more rapid testing capacity in the United States,” allowing academic hospital labs capable of performing high-quality testing to develop and begin using their own tests to detect COVID-19. Before now, hospital labs weren’t sent test kits by the CDC and the FDA required an extensive review process even if the hospitals had internally validated their tests. Under the new policy, the FDA review will still be required, but labs will be able to start using their diagnostics once they are internally validated. [pw, propublica]
End of February — By the end of February, the World Health Organization had shipped tests to nearly 60 countries. [politico – march 6 2020 lots here] These are all flawed Corman-Drosten assays.
Undated – Probably February — “Please provide an explanation for why the Covid-19 diagnostic test approved by the World Health Organization was not used,” Sen. Patty Murray, the ranking Democrat on the Senate health committee, who represents the hard-hit state of Washington, asked in a 31⁄2-page letter on the testing fiasco to Pence, Health Secretary Alex Azar, CDC director Robert Redfield, and Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Stephen Hahn. [politico – march 6 2020 lots here]
“We developed a test very rapidly after China produced the [genetic] sequence. We are in the process of validating that and that’s the test we’re going to be using,” said the CDC’s Stephen Redd, a 30-year veteran of the agency, at a recent briefing, even as members of the presidential task force acknowledged that the pace of testing had lagged. [politico – march 6 2020 lots here]
The WHO test, which adopted a German test as its model [Corman-Drosten], was developed soon after Chinese researchers publicly posted the genome of the coronavirus in January. It shipped millions of tests to countries around the world, but generally only those without the capability to develop their own. The U.S. developed its own test around the same time, but manufacturing and quality control issues soon set it well behind the WHO.
CDC officials acknowledged that one of the three components of the initial test were faulty, but it took weeks before the agency approved a workaround. [the hill, march 17, 2020]
The initial tests didn’t work, and officials are probing whether there was possible contamination. The protocol for who could be tested was restricted to people already known to have been exposed to the virus or who had been in China, even as the epidemic raced to multiple countries like Japan, South Korea, Italy and Iran. [politico – march 6 2020 lots here]
March 3, 2020 — Olympic Committee promises the Tokyo games will go on. Covid19 News commences publication.
March 4, 2020 — Schools and universities are closed in Italy by government orders (3,089 PCR positives as of this date).
March 6, 2020 — Testing controversy between WHO and Trump, seemingly based on a press report in Politico: The disease has now spread to more than 60 countries in six continents, sickening more than 100,000 and killing well over 3,000. “Why the United States declined to use the WHO test, even temporarily as a bridge until the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could produce its own test, remains a perplexing question and the key to the Trump administration’s failure to provide enough tests to identify the coronavirus infections before they could be passed on, according to POLITICO interviews with dozens of viral-disease experts, former officials and some officials within the administration’s health agencies.” [politico – march 6 2020 lots here]
March 8, 2020 — In Italy, several northern provinces are placed under lockdown (7,375 PCR positives as of this date).
March 9, 2020 — In Italy, the lockdown is extended nationwide (9,172 PCR positives as of this date).
March 11, 2020 — WHO’s director general calls Covid-19 a pandemic. Note, at some point prior to this, the definition of that word changed. In Italy, all restaurants and bars are closed (12,462 PCR positives in Italy as of this date).
March 13, 2020 — At 3:33 in the afternoon, with the Moon in Scorpio and five planets in Capricorn, Trump declares a national emergency.
March 15, 2020 — New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio says that city schools will close, elective surgeries will be canceled, and that five people are dead in New York City allegedly due to Covid. See video.
March 16, 2020 — Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College in the U.K., whose work is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, predicts that 82% of the American population will be “infected” with SARS-CoV-2 and that up to 3% will die.
This sensational prediction is off by orders of magnitude; the admitted, actual death rate under the virus scenario was a fraction of a percentage point, similar to seasonal flu, and in the high 90th percentile of “cases” are asymptomatic. Ferguson, who is infamous for this kind of overstatement in his projections, assumes an RO of 2.4, meaning that every “infected” person will convey the virus to 2.4 people.
The predicted result will be more than 2.2 million dead in the United States and 510,000 deaths in the U.K. (if mitigation measures are not imposed, so this served as a successful advertisement for the lockdowns). These numbers are parroted by Angela Merkel, the chancellor of Germany. [hponline links to other sources]. Here is an analysis of Ferguson’s past failures of statistical modeling.
Trump administration health officials on Tuesday defended the pace of diagnostic testing for the novel coronavirus while pushing back on criticism that the U.S. rejected a test from the World Health Organization (WHO).
The federal government has been criticized for not at least temporarily using the WHO test until the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) created its own. While officials have acknowledged there are still not enough tests to meet demand, they denied refusing other tests.
“No one ever offered a test that we refused,” said Adm. Brett Giroir, assistant secretary for health at the Department of Health and Human Services. “This was a research-grade test that was not approved, not submitted to the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] … there was a small number that we have greatly surpassed in a very short period of time.”
The WHO test, which adopted a German test as its model, was developed soon after Chinese researchers publicly posted the genome of the coronavirus in January. It shipped millions of tests to countries around the world, but generally only those without the capability to develop their own. [The Hill, March 17]
March 21, 2020 — Politico reports that the Justice Department has “quietly” asked Congress for the ability to ask chief judges to detain people indefinitely without trial during emergencies — part of a push for new powers that comes as the novel coronavirus spreads throughout the United States.
Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House coronavirus coordinator, says that over 90% of people are testing negative for the virus (it is actually far less), but are told they may have Covid, or some other infectious disease– and should wear a mask at home, and self-quarantine at home — even if they test negative. They are concerned that negative may not mean negative, and that there may be some other unnamed, undocumented infectious disease involved. She says that children are the greatest potential risk for asymptomatic spread with no scientific backing to her theory.
Even those who are perfectly healthy are told that they may be sick. This “may be” is technically correct, since anyone could, potentially, have a disease; and as we learn in April, the PCR cannot diagnose, confirm or deny infection, according to its emergency use authorization by the FDA. So, anything goes, anything at all, based on what Birx is saying: medical science by fiat.
March 22, 2020 — In Italy, factories are closed and all nonessential production is halted (59,138 PCR positives in Italy as of this date).
March 24, 2020 — CDC issues an official guidance memo changing the rules for reporting deaths, suspending previous guidelines for the first time in 17 years, allowing many causes of mortality to be counted as “COVID-19” as the underlying cause. In reality, 94% of deaths will be shown by CDC data to have average 2.6 serious underlying causes of mortality. The advisory says:
Should “COVID-19” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test?
COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death [bold emphasis in the original].
Commenting on this guidance, Children’s Health Defense reports that had the old guidelines been followed, “COVID-19” mortality would be 90.2% lower. They write, “On March 24, the CDC decided to ignore universal data collection and reporting guidelines for fatalities in favor of adopting new guidelines unique to COVID-19. The
guidelines the CDC decided against using have been used successfully since 2003.”
March 25, 2020 — The Washington Post reports that hospitals are considering blanket “do not resuscitate” (DNR) orders for Covid patients. The Bezos-owned newspaper reports:
“The conversations are driven by the realization that the risk to staff amid dwindling stores of protective equipment — such as masks, gowns and gloves — may be too great to justify the conventional response when a patient “codes,” and their heart or breathing stops. Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago has been discussing a do-not-resuscitate policy for infected patients, regardless of the wishes of the patient or their family members — a wrenching decision to prioritize the lives of the many over the one.”
March 30, 2020 — USNS Comfort, on loan from the Navy, arrives in New York City to great acclaim, with its 1,000 hospital rooms and 100 operating rooms. The plan is for non-Covid patients to be treated aboard the vessel, and for land-based hospitals to treat Covid patients. It is not used, and leaves one month later.
USA Today reports that there are eight strains of SARS-CoV-2 roaming the planet. This may be the first public reference to the “variant” issue — way back in March 2020.
April 4, 2020 — The New York Times reported that half the world — about 4.4 billion people — is under a stay-at-home order. CDC recommends that Americans all wear cloth masks in public.
The Daily Mail in England reports that the lab-leak theory of where the claimed virus came from “is no longer being discounted.” This controversy never goes away, particularly after it is made public that the United States, under the direction of Anthony Fauci, funded gain of function work through EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
April 7, 2020 — Celia Farber publishes Was the COVID-19 test meant to detect a virus? in Undercover DC. The article includes introductions to PCR inventor Kary Mullis (making his first Covid cameo), and Infectious Myth host David Crowe, plus some relevant HIV/AIDS history which is important background to 2020.
“In one paper,” Crowe says, “I found 37 cycles. If you didn’t get enough fluorescence by 37 cycles, you are considered negative. In another, paper, the cutoff was 36. Thirty-seven to 40 were considered ‘indeterminate’. And if you got in that range, then you did more testing. I’ve only seen two papers that described what the limit was. So, it’s quite possible that different hospitals, different states, Canada versus the U.S., Italy versus France, are all using different cutoff sensitivity standards of the Covid test. So, if you cut off at 20, everybody would be negative. If you cut off a 50, you might have everybody positive.”
This seems to be the first public reference to what becomes known as the cycle threshold (Ct) issue in relationship to Covid. It turns out that New York is using 45 cycles, very close to the “all positive” level of sensitivity. The Ct of any test or jurisdiction is not openly reported, and as Crowe notes, they all vary.
“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.”
Translation: A positive test doesn’t guarantee that the COVID virus is causing infection at all. And, ahem, reading between the lines, maybe the COVID virus might not be in the patient’s body at all, either.
From the World Health Organization (WHO): “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) technical guidance: Laboratory testing for 2019-nCoV in humans” [2]:
“Several assays that detect the 2019-nCoV have been and are currently under development, both in-house and commercially. Some assays may detect only the novel virus [COVID] and some may also detect other strains (e.g. SARS-CoV) that are genetically similar.”
April 15, 2020 — New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomoorders all 19.5 New Yorkers to cover their faces, claiming it will stop the spread of the virus. The previous week, New Jersey’s Gov. Philip D Murphy issued a similar order.
“Stopping the spread is everything,” Mr. Cuomo said during his daily briefing in Albany. “How can you not wear a mask when you’re going to come close to a person?” On Dec. 15, 2020, the New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH), which serves as a reference for other states and countries around the world, admitted in response to a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request that it did not have a single study on the effectiveness of masks at stopping their spread of disease, or the safety of those who wear them. See article here; lower section, “Sorry, No Science.”
“It erodes popular faith in democracy when public officials insist that their arbitrary policies are ‘science based’ and yet cannot produce a single study to support sweeping mandates,” said Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., in response to this disclosure.
“This letter illustrates the hazard of abandoning due process,” he added, in reference to the state’s reply to the FOIL request (which was filed by investigative reporter William Huston).
April 27, 2020 — The Washington Post reports an unusually high all-causes death count for year to date, without a hint that there could be some specific cause besides Covid, rather than mysterious general causes or results of the lockdowns: “In the early weeks of the coronavirus epidemic, the United States recorded an estimated 15,400 excess deaths, nearly two times as many as were publicly attributed to covid-19 at the time, according to an analysis of federal data conducted for The Washington Post by a research team led by the Yale School of Public Health. This is later refuted when all-cause mortality for 2020 is found to be unusually low, if Covid is excluded.
“The excess deaths — the number beyond what would normally be expected for that time of year — occurred during March and through April 4, a time when 8,128 coronavirus deaths were reported.
“The excess deaths are not necessarily attributable directly to covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. They could include people who died because of the epidemic but not from the disease, such as those who were afraid to seek medical treatment for unrelated illnesses, as well as some number of deaths that are part of the ordinary variation in the death rate. The count is also affected by increases or decreases in other categories of deaths, such as suicides, homicides and motor vehicle accidents.”
April 29, 2020 — In the midst of a claimed pandemic, the Pentagon for the first time released three videos of footage they say are authentic images of UFOs, or what are now called “unidentified areal phenomena.”
The Pentagon has officially released three short videos showing “unidentified aerial phenomena” that had previously been released by a private company.
The videos show what appear to be unidentified flying objects rapidly moving while recorded by infrared cameras. Two of the videos contain service members reacting in awe at how quickly the objects are moving. One voice speculates that it could be a drone.
The Navy previously acknowledged the veracity of the videos in September of last year. They are officially releasing them now, “in order to clear up any misconceptions by the public on whether or not the footage that has been circulating was real, or whether or not there is more to the videos,” according to Pentagon spokesperson Sue Gough.
April 30, 2020 — USNS Comfort steams out of New York Harbor, the hospital ship having never been used. Nor was the Javits Center used as a hospital, nor were SUNY and CUNY dormitories used to take care of patients. The expected crisis never grew to those proportions, and by April 30 is essentially over.
May 15, 2020 — Los Angeles County Unified School District closes schools.
For a detailed news chronology from May 2020-present please see Covid19 News. Months are listed at the top of the page, as is my portfolio of investigative articles. We are now working on distilling the events of the past 16 months into the format of this chronology. It will take a little while, though with your support we will make it happen.
*
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 document is a work in progress. It updates frequently; the version number is at the top right. We are still working out consistency of the typing style from the many source documents we are quoting (and fixing typing errors). If you have submissions of documented dates of events, please send them to us at [email protected]. You may also donate to the continued development of the chronology project. Thank you.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
As the state prepares to hire a recruiting firm to bring desperately needed health care workers to New Hampshire, some nursing students with safety concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine are leaving their nursing programs over vaccine mandates. A new state law prohibits most of their colleges from requiring a COVID-19 vaccine, but their clinical sites can – and most will have to under the new Biden administration vaccine mandate for health care settings.
“A critical health care workforce shortage is on the horizon in New Hampshire unless these health care organizations drop their rigid policies,” said Rep. Leah Cushman, a Weare Republican who has proposed legislation that would require hospitals and other health care settings to accept exemption requests by clinical students. (The law requires them to consider medical and religious exemption requests, but Cushman said she’s been told they are being rejected without review.) “We can’t afford to stop new nurses from entering the field.”
Mandated vaccines for workers in health care settings has been both celebrated and attacked here and nationally, with opponents warning mandates will lead to large-scale resignations and exacerbate an already dire workforce shortage.
It’s unclear how many New Hampshire nursing students have left their programs over mandates. Rep. Tim Lang, a Sanbornton Republican whose “vaccine freedom” bill prohibits public institutions like the state’s universities from mandating a vaccine, said he knows of at least 18 nursing students who’ve withdrawn from their programs. (The law does not include private schools.) Lang has suggested hospitals offer a testing option instead, but that won’t be allowed under the Biden administration’s new mandate.
Of the nursing programs that responded to Bulletin messages, the Community College System declined to say whether students had left the program, citing student privacy, but acknowledged it’s been an issue; Plymouth State University said no students have withdrawn; and the University of New Hampshire said it is not aware of any vaccine-related issues.
The concerns raised by nursing students in New Hampshire and nationally range from the vaccine’s unknown long-term effects; its fast approval; suspicions the drug companies are motivated by profits, not public health safety; and opposition to mandates.
They are not persuaded by assurances from nearly all public health and government officials of the vaccine’s safety. Nor do they believe officials’ warnings that they are being misled by unproven claims and misinformation.
Nursing student Michelle Hammond said she is one of at least four students who left the nursing program at Lakes Region Community College because of vaccine mandates. She was two semesters shy of graduating from a program she began 15 years ago. Hammond is not opposed to all immunizations and got the flu vaccine last year. She said her resistance to a COVID-19 vaccine grew after she felt health care providers – including hers – didn’t take her concerns seriously.
“I love being a nurse. It’s like being a mom all the time,” Hammond said. “Ethically, I just don’t know if I want to be in that environment where doctors are ignoring the possibility that there are side effects related to the vaccine. We’ve been trying this COVID vaccine long enough to see there are problems.”
Nicole Lheureux, 13 weeks pregnant, said she will leave her program at Plymouth State University if her two clinical sites do not give her a medical exemption. Among other concerns, she said she’s worried the vaccine isn’t safe for her unborn child given that it has not been approved for children under 12. And Jennifer Tuthill, who withdrew from her program at River Valley Community College in Claremont, doesn’t believe the vaccine went through sufficient testing. “There were not even animal trials on these vaccines,” she said. “We are the trial. We are the science experiment.”
All said they felt like their nursing programs did too little to advocate for them.
Nursing programs said they are limited in how much they can intervene because unlike their state colleges, the sites that provide their students hands-on clinical experiences are not prohibited from mandating COVID-19 vaccines. And those sites said their vaccine policies will apply to students and staff.
That means students doing their clinical work within the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health System must be vaccinated by Sept. 30. North Country Healthcare will require vaccines as of next month, as will Concord Hospital, which also owns Franklin Regional Hospital and Lakes Region General Hospital. In announcing the mandate, North Country Healthcare CEO Tom Mee said: “The data continues to reinforce the safety and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines, including the mitigation of new and emerging threats such as the Delta variant. To that end, we confidently know more than ever that vaccination is the best way to end this public health crisis.”
Shannon Reid, spokeswoman for the Community College System, said they are aware the vaccine mandate has become an issue at some clinical sites.
“The colleges can’t dictate the terms under which hospitals and other health care provider sites allow individuals to work in their facilities and the ways in which these facilities seek to safeguard patient safety,” she said in an email. “We are doing our best to work with students on a case-by-case basis, in ways that support their beliefs, individual circumstances, and educational aspirations.”
The vaccination rate among health care workers nationally is estimated to be between 75 and 80 percent, but reliable data can be hard to find for most settings. And while the unvaccinated percentage may seem small, the numbers are not. New York is considering using the National Guard to replace the 16 percent of unvaccinated health care workers who don’t have their first vaccine dose by a Monday deadline, The New York Times reported Saturday. That’s about 70,000 workers.
Currently, nursing homes in all states must report staff vaccination rates to the federal government; according to a state-by-state map from the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, many New Hampshire nursing homes report more than 75 percent of staff are vaccinated, but several report rates below that. Beginning in October, staff vaccination rates must also be reported by hospitals.
What’s harder to find are vaccination rates among just nurses because data is often not broken down by position. In July, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that among long-term care facilities, just 56.7 percent of nurses had been vaccinated compared with 75.1 percent of physicians. The rate was much higher – 88 percent – among 4,912 nurses who responded to a recent survey by the American Nurses Association.
When asked in the survey about their and their patients’ vaccine concerns, the nurses’ responses were similar to those voiced by the nursing students who’ve left their programs or are considering it. These included a lack of data about potential long-term effects, pregnancy risks, the vaccine’s effectiveness, and uncertainty about the need to be vaccinated.
Nurses also cited concerns about conflicting media reports of the vaccine’s benefits and risks, a reason many in and outside the health care field also cite for their vaccine hesitancy.
Lheureux, whose concerns include not only health risks to her baby but also an increased risk of miscarriage, relies on two sources of information: her training and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a database of post-vaccination symptoms voluntarily reported by providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public.
Although some believe the database is run by an independent third party, it is co-managed by the CDC and the federal Food and Drug Administration. To search it, users must acknowledge that the reports may be incomplete, “subject to biases,” and have not been verified or investigated to determine whether there is a connection between the vaccination and the reported symptom.
As of Friday, there were 2.5 million reported symptoms for the COVID-19 vaccine, the vast majority of them headache (109,259); fever (91,361); fatigue (90,122); chills (80,520); and unspecified pain (77,522). There was one report of “risk of future preganancy miscarriage.”
Still, Lheureux remains unpersuaded by the CDC’s warnings that COVID-19 virus – not the vaccine – puts pregnant women at greater risk for severe illness. Or that the vaccine is safe for people ages 12 and up, pregnant women included. It’s not a risk she’s willing to take, she said.
“This vaccine came out faster than any other vaccine in our history, and on one hand that is the miracle of modern medicine,” she said. “On the other hand, we don’t have a lot of information on it. I think it has more side effects than are being talked about.”
Lheureux has applied for a medical exemption citing her pregnancy at her two clinical sites, both of which require staff to be vaccinated. If her exemptions are denied and she cannot find another site that does not mandate vaccinations, Lheureux said she will withdraw.
Hospitals not mandating staff vaccinations include Parkland Medical Center in Derry, Portsmouth Regional Hospital, and Frisbie Memorial Hospital in Rochester. But that is unlikely to last under President Joe Biden’s new executive order mandating vaccines, with no testing option, for all health care settings that receive Medicare or Medicaid funding. (Gov. Chris Sununu and Republican lawmakers are challenging that mandate, and the lawmakers have proposed legislation blocking the mandate from being enforced in New Hampshire.)
“We are reviewing the details of President Biden’s plan and will respond accordingly,” said Ryan Lawrence, spokesman for Parkland Medical Center, which like the other two sites is part of HCA Healthcare. “While to this point we have not mandated that our colleagues receive the vaccination, our infectious disease experts have strongly encouraged vaccination as a critical step to protect individuals from the virus.”
Leaving her program was not an easy decision for Hammond, who began her studies 15 years ago but took time off to raise her kids.
“Understand that (a lot) is unknown. I was kind of waiting and being open-minded,” she said. But as she heard about others’ experiences following vaccination, the more fearful she became. Hammond said those symptoms have included leg swelling, rash, and temporary paralysis. Her father-in-law suffered chest pains after receiving the vaccine. There’s no proof the symptoms were caused by the vaccine, but, Hammond noted, there is no proof they weren’t.
“You weigh the risks of side effects against the risk of getting sick from COVID,” she said. “And the fear of side effects scares me more than the fear of getting COVID.”
Tuthill, who was to graduate in December, shares Hammond’s concerns about the vaccine’s side effects, and like Hammond, she has received other vaccines. She’s also firmly opposed to mandates and is upset the CDC and federal Food and Drug Administration have warned against other medical treatments like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. She also suspects the government is downplaying what she believes are legitimate negative effects of the vaccine.
Tuthill sought a medical exemption and asked her nursing program to allow her to do her clinical work online. When none of her attempts worked before she had to commit to her final semester, Tuthill withdrew rather than lose a semester’s worth of tuition.
She persuaded the program to defer her enrollment for a year with hopes vaccine mandates would end by then. But she’s not optimistic they will, and she believes people who share her views will continue to be dismissed.
“A lot of the stuff I am getting is not from mainstream media,” she said. “A lot of what I say would be pooh-poohed because a lot of people out there are not doing their research.”
*
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.
Senior reporter Annmarie Timmins is a New Hampshire native who covered state government, courts, and social justice issues for the Concord Monitor for 25 years. During her time with the Monitor, she won a Nieman Fellowship to study journalism and mental health courts at Harvard for a year. She has taught journalism at the University of New Hampshire and writing at the Nackey S. Loeb School of Communications.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
A Yahoo News’ investigation reveals that, through much of 2017, the CIA weighed up whether to use wholly extrajudicial means to deal with the supposed threat posed by Julian Assange and his whistleblowers’ platform Wikileaks. The agency plotted either to kidnap or assassinate him.
Shocking as the revelations are – exposing the entirely lawless approach of the main US intelligence agency – the Yahoo investigation nonetheless tends to obscure rather than shine a light on the bigger picture.
Assange has not been deprived of his freedom for more than a decade because of an unimplemented rogue operation by the CIA. Rather, he has been held in various forms of captivity – disappeared – through the collaborations of various national governments and their intelligence agencies, aided by legal systems and the media, that have systematically violated his rights and legal due process.
The reality of Assange’s years of persecution is far worse even than the picture of a thuggish, vengeful, power-mad CIA painted by Yahoo’s reporting.
More than 30 former senior officials, who either served in the US foreign intelligence agency or the Trump administration, helped to piece together for Yahoo the various components of the CIA’s plan. They show that the agency considered two main options for dealing with Assange in addition to then secret moves laying the groundwork for prosecuting the Wikileaks founder in the US courts.
One plan was to kidnap Assange from the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where he had been seeking political asylum since 2012.
The aim was to smuggle him to the US – violating the sovereignty of Ecuador and the UK – in an operation that would have had all the hallmarks of “extraordinary rendition”. That was the illegal procedure the US used after 9/11 to abduct suspects in the “war on terror”, usually so they could be sent to “black sites” where they were tortured and held without judicial oversight.
The other CIA proposal was to assassinate Assange – or, perhaps more accurately, commit extrajudicial murder to silence him once and for all. Poisoning him was reportedly one of the methods considered.
These scenarios need to be borne in mind when we cast our minds back to 2012, to the moment Assange decided to seek sanctuary in Ecuador’s embassy, fearing the wrath of the US at his exposure of its war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Not a single corporate journalist gave credence to his concerns. In fact, they ridiculed them. These latest revelations confirm what was obvious to many of the rest of us: Assange had very good reasons indeed to seek political asylum.
Let us examine that bigger picture obscured by the reporting of the CIA’s plan.
1. The agency’s much greater interest in the Assange case – and its more openly hostile attitude towards him – were a result of Wikileaks’ release of parts of a cache of secret files on the CIA’s hacking capabilities known as “Vault 7”. The agency, considering it “the largest data loss in CIA history”, was deeply humiliated by the exposure.
The misleading impression created by the Yahoo investigation is that until 2017 a standard legal process was being pursued against Assange that only turned rogue after the Vault 7 release, when the CIA wanted vengeance and to intimidate Wikileaks to prevent any further leaks.
In the words of one Trump national security official: “There was an inappropriate level of attention to Assange given the [CIA’s] embarrassment, not the threat he posed in context. We should never act out of a desire for revenge.”
The implication is that, because the CIA’s various extrajudicial plots were never implemented, justice has otherwise been well served in Assange’s case.
But the CIA plans indicate something else entirely. They show that, once the CIA was as infuriated by Wikileaks’ exposure of the agency’s own crimes as the Pentagon, the State Department and the White House already were of theirs, it joined them in getting more actively involved in an existing extrajudicial process meant to finish off Assange and Wikileaks.
‘Don’t you dare’
From the moment Assange’s legal troubles began in late 2010 – when two Swedish women were reported to have launched allegations of rape – nothing followed a standard procedure. As I have previously documented, Assange’s case was treated in exceptional ways by Sweden, the UK, Australia and, always lurking in the background, the US.
My latest: Here are 17 legal abuses Assange has suffered over the past nine years, demonstrating how normal procedures have been systematically violated by Sweden, the UK and US – a fact the corporate media apparently never notices or comments on https://t.co/lTfRj6Zmdo
Swedish police, the country’s media and a second prosecutor all meddled in a case the main prosecutor had already ruled did not involve a criminal offence. The testimony of one of the women – who had been encouraged to go to the police by the other – was effectively hijacked and turned into a rape allegation, seemingly against her wishes.
Inexplicably, Interpol issued a Red Notice for Assange’s arrest, usually reserved for terrorists and dangerous criminals, shortly after Swedish officials had approved his travelling abroad.
In the UK the courts approved an extradition warrant for Assange that had been issued without any Swedish judicial authority. The ruling set such a terrible legal precedent that the agreement on which the extradition was based was amended shortly afterwards to ensure such a ruling could not be made again.
Once Assange fled to Ecuador’s embassy, the UK government surrounded it with huge numbers of police, at great public expense. For a while, government ministers threatened to tear up diplomatic protocols established in law by sending police in to arrest Assange on foreign soil.
A Freedom of Information request shows Britain’s prosecution service pressured Swedish prosecutors not to come to London to interview Assange through 2010 and 2011, thereby creating the embassy standoff that began a short time later. Other evidence shows Swedish prosecutors were regularly interviewing suspects in the UK – only in Assange’s case was that made impossible.
Another of those astounding coincidences. The journalist trying to get information on the Julian Assange case released has been stymied in her Freedom of Information requests *for years* by every single country involved: the UK, Sweden, US and Australia https://t.co/6iBRNhigx4
British prosecutors destroyed emails relating to Assange to circumvent another FoI request, but the few that survive – by mistake – show it meddling directly in a case it should have had no legal stake in.
In one, as Sweden proposed dropping the investigation against Assange in 2013, UK officials warned: “Don’t you dare”. Another revealing email stated: “Please do not think this case is being dealt with as just another extradition.”
‘Legal’ theatre
This and much more took place before the CIA plans exposed by Yahoo were being hatched in 2017. Two years later, Assange was dragged by London police from the Ecuador embassy in a scenario that echoed the CIA’s plan.
Since then, new, even more irregular “legal” proceedings – either for a supposed minor bail violation or for “espionage” in exposing US war crimes – have kept Assange indefinitely locked up in a London maximum-security prison.
The point here is that the idea that the CIA suddenly tried to interfere in a sound, legal process against Assange is laughable.
Everything about the Assange case from the outset has been extrajudicial – in the sense that there has been no legal basis for the proceedings. It has been “legal” theatre, concealing the brute force of an unaccountable superpower angry and fearful that, in the digital age, its secrets and crimes can no longer be concealed from the public.
What the CIA brought to the table was not some new interest in extrajudicial vengeance – that was at the core of Assange’s treatment from the outset – but the specific extrajudicial tools it excels in, such as abduction and murder.
Ultimately, calmer heads prevailed, even in the Trump administration, understanding that a sham “legal” process would better serve and conceal the war the US was waging against the efforts by Assange and Wikileaks to bring greater transparency to state actions and accountability for state crimes.
The campaign to lock away Assange for life is being pursued as enthusiastically by the Biden administration as it was earlier under Trump.
A reminder that the Biden administration will be every bit as repressive and cruel as Trump's in crushing our ability to share information that exposes US crimes.
Assange's torture and permanent jailing is entirely a bipartisan affair https://t.co/OHr9y3z5ed
And the UK courts, including the highest in the land, have been actively colluding in this charade of justice.
CIA score-settling
2. Doubtless, we are now learning of the CIA’s plots against Assange in part because there has been a change of administrations. Presumably, some of this is driven by score-settling from disaffected agents against Mike Pompeo, Trump’s CIA director.
The revelations, after all, are not coming from whistleblowers concerned about justice for Assange. They are being mediated through the CIA community, officials with an intelligence agency mindset that views Assange in the same self-serving terms as Pompeo – as “a non-state hostile intelligence service”. Like Pompeo, these officials see Assange as a “transparency terrorist”.
But what is worthy of note is the fact that Yahoo is the news service delivering us these disclosures.
Three newspapers with huge readerships and vast resources, The New York Times, Guardian and Washington Post, all worked closely with Assange on Wikileaks’ early releases, raking in big profits from the earth-shattering leaks he provided.
All three papers should have a vested interest in ensuring that Assange is not extradited to the US and locked away for life on the pretext that his journalism amounts to espionage, as both the Trump and Biden administrations are claiming.
And perhaps most relevant of all, the three newspapers have long records of drawing on their extensive contacts inside the intelligence services, often allowing themselves to be used to peddle misinformation and psy-ops.
Remember, for example, that it was the New York Times’ reporters Judith Miller and Michael R Gordon who became the US intelligence services’ favoured conduit for the weapons of mass destruction deceptions that provided the rationale for the US to attack, occupy and dismember Iraq.
In the UK, the Guardian has been growing ever closer to the intelligence services since it broke with Assange and Glenn Greenwald, the reporter who brought it the Edward Snowden revelations that the US national security state was conducting illegal mass surveillance of the public.
An investigation, fascinating and horrifying in equal measure, of how the Guardian was gradually co-opted by the UK's security services after it published the Snowden files – a process that has only accelerated since Kath Viner became editor https://t.co/hwXazkgQVF
So how is it that these newspapers, with their wide-ranging sources inside the intelligence community and their historic investment in the Assange case, heard not a peep about this story over the past four years. Is it possible that not one of the 30 or so officials who spoke to Yahoo has also spoken to these newspapers? Why is Yahoo News the one breaking such an important story?
And maybe even more to the point, how is it that these three newspapers have all but ignored Yahoo’s investigation, and so far appear to be doing nothing to follow it up?
The Guardian could barely stifle a yawn as it covered the story as an extended brief online (and offered a slightly fuller report for its Australian readers). But at least it mentioned the story. I have been unable to find any coverage in either the New York Times or Washington Post.
Is the fact that large numbers of senior US officials are admitting that their agency seriously thought about abducting or murdering a journalist these publications worked with on some of the biggest stories of the modern age not hugely newsworthy for them?
But all of this indifference or aversion to reporting on Assange’s horrifying plight is par for the course for these respected, supposedly liberal media outlets.
Two former senior officials of the National Union of Journalists say 'we are incredulous that the present generation of journalists is ignoring this critical travesty' as the US and UK use the Assange trial to demolish the foundations of press freedom https://t.co/FKslZPTcfB
Like the rest of the corporate media, they have largely ignored the extradition proceedings going on in the UK courts over the past year and which are due to reach their climax next month when a final hearing is expected.
The media’s continuing silence can only be understood as complicity in the persecution of a fellow journalist.
Colluding with power
The Guardian’s failings have been particularly egregious, as I have documented before (here and here). The paper has barely concealed its vendetta against Assange – much of it following a falling out with him after one of its senior reporters recklessly exposed a Wikileaks password to a cache of classified documents that has been exploited by Washington in building its so-called “espionage” case against Assange.
My latest: A new Guardian statement denies evidence in court that it is a 'bad faith actor' in US efforts to extradite Julian Assange.
The paper's statement is not only full of deceptions, it deepens the Guardian's betrayal of Assange and journalism https://t.co/4z2R3zflzr
The Guardian has a vested interest – one it has not disclosed – in keeping the spotlight on Assange rather allowing it to shift to its own role.
That is the context for interpreting its pitifully false and malicious story – again provided by intelligence services – tying Assange to a supposed conspiracy between Trump and the Kremlin that has been obsessively advanced by the liberal media.
The Guardian’s report that a Trump aide, Paul Manafort, and unidentified “Russians” repeatedly visited Assange at the embassy, one of the most heavily surveilled spots in the world, without leaving a single trace of their presence should never have made it into print. The simplest checks would have raised dozens of red flags. But the paper has chosen silence rather than correcting or withdrawing the story.
German investigation finds emails between the Guardian and security at the Ecuador embassy about Julian Assange that lead Glenn Greenwald to suggest the paper may have perpetrated intentional 'journalistic fraud' in publishing its infamous Manafort story https://t.co/fdOrb1ioAh
The only conclusion one can draw from their behaviour is that the liberal media, far from being watchdogs on power, regard themselves as adjuncts of power. They feel much closer to the countries’ secret, duplicity-dealing, murderous intelligence services than they do to a fellow journalist being hounded into permanent incarceration.
Net widens
3. The Yahoo report makes clear too that the surveillance operation against Assange and Wikileaks intensified dramatically after Snowden released his confidential documents in 2013 in collaboration with reporter Glenn Greenwald.
The Snowden files showed that the US had begun expanding its ambition to use new digital technology to covertly surveil the rest of the world. Now it was increasingly turning that technological prowess inwards to covertly surveil its own population.
A transparency organisation like Wikileaks, it quickly became obvious, was a major threat to the US intelligence services’ plans.
According to Yahoo’s sources, it was the Obama administration that began surveilling Wikileaks more intensively and threw the net wider to expose its networks.
The CIA was already centrally involved, creating a special “Wikileaks team” that worked closely with other friendly spy agencies – including one can presume the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing states that also comprise Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand. (One official, William Evanina, who recently retired as a top US counterintelligence official, notes the key role the Five Eyes group played in Assange’s case.)
The goal, Yahoo was told by Evanina, its main named source, was to “tie [Wikileaks] back to hostile state intelligence services”. In other words, the aim was to suggest not that Assange was interested in transparency or acting out of principle but that he wanted to undermine the US on behalf of a hostile foreign power.
Assange’s fate was sealed within the Obama administration in summer 2016 when Wikileaks released a cache of Democratic party emails that cast Obama’s chosen successor, Hillary Clinton, in a damning light and showed that the party had rigged its election procedures to stop her main challenger, Bernie Sanders, from winning.
As an aside, the Yahoo report notes that the idea of kidnapping Assange – in violation of Ecuador and the UK’s sovereignty – actually preceded Pompeo’s arrival at the CIA.
Despite Yahoo’s focus on Pompeo, it was actually Obama and the Democratic party’s thirst for vengeance that paved the way for Trump’s appointee to have viable options of either prosecuting Assange for espionage or abducting him.
Obama’s officials immediately tarred Assange as conspiring with Donald Trump, Clinton’s rival for the presidential election. He was thereby dragged into an establishment conspiracy theory, Russiagate, that claimed Trump was serving as a puppet of the Kremlin.
Given the many years, spent under both Obama and Trump, trying to shore up this claim by the most digitally advanced states in the world, it comes as something of a surprise to learn that they came up with nothing.
Evidence of Wikileaks collusion with Russia appears never to have surfaced, even though it became an implicit, driving assumption behind the Russiagate claims.
One unusually honest official, Robert Litt, a former general counsel of the Office of the Director for National Intelligence, observed to Yahoo of the claims made by Pompeo that Assange was acting on behalf of the Russians: “Based on the information that I had seen, I thought he was out over his skis on that.”
Special counsel Robert Mueller found no evidence to back up such a claim. The extradition hearings in London made no plausible case for it either.
The only tangible piece of evidence is the Guardian’s Manafort story mentioned earlier, which proved so embarrassingly ridiculous everyone involved has tried to quietly forget about it.
House of cards
If there was really a case that Assange and Wikileaks were working hand in glove with the Kremlin, it is hard to imagine that no trace of that collusion was ever found.
Instead, Washington built much of its espionage case against Assange on the testimony of Sigurdur Thordarson, a convicted paedophile and financial fraudster, as well as an FBI asset. He now admits his testimony was a fabrication, and that he lied after he was promised immunity from prosecution.
The #Assange case is a bit #JamesBond But this isn't a movie & the lunatic war criminals ARE killing innocents. One plot twist is that a fraudster & paedophile is the FBI's star witness against Assange. I interviewed the journalist who dug out the truth:https://t.co/p93KvdGhvJ
The entire case against Assange has been shown to be a house cards.
Interestingly, Yahoo News’ report shows that, despite the void of evidence, justice department officials were keen to concoct a “legal” case to forestall two dangers that might undermine their efforts to keep Assange incarcerated and preclude them from launching a credible prosecution.
The first was the CIA’s unhinged scenarios that included rendition or a possible Hollywood-style gun battle on the streets of London to prevent Ecuador helping Assange escape the embassy. Were the CIA to be successful, justice department officials fretted, Assange might arrive in the US without any formal or plausible charges levelled against him.
The other was that the UK was rapidly running out of pretexts to keep Assange locked out of view, after police had been allowed to drag him from the embassy in early 2019. (Ecuador’s new president had changed official policy on sheltering Assange, shortly after the IMF agreed an enormous $4.2 billion loan.)
Sweden had already dropped its investigation of Assange in May 2017. So Assange was moved to Belmarsh maximum-security prison on charges relating to a minor bail infraction. Those charges ignored the fact that he had violated his bail conditions only because he was seeking political asylum, as recognised in international law.
The UK judge issued the maximum sentence possible for such an infraction, giving the US time to formulate the espionage case that has provided the pretext for keeping him locked up ever since, in conditions during a pandemic that have put his life at risk.
British collusion
4. Did the UK conspire with the US in all this? The massive police presence around the embassy; the British government’s illegal threats to invade Ecuador’s embassy; the original, highly irregular ruling on extradition; the threatening emails from state prosecutors to Sweden; the complicity in holding Assange in a maximum security prison in London on a debatable bail infraction; and the known role of the Five Eyes group of which the UK is a key member, all strongly suggest it was.
Yahoo reports:
“Former officials differ on how much the UK government knew about the CIA’s rendition plans for Assange, but at some point, American officials did raise the issue with their British counterparts.”
In other words, yes, the UK did know about the most unlawful parts of the CIA’s plans. The question is only how closely was it involved.
One former counter-intelligence official observed:
“There was a discussion with the Brits about turning the other cheek or looking the other way when a team of guys went inside and did a rendition. But the British said, ‘No way, you’re not doing that on our territory, that ain’t happening.’”
The UK could not afford to look publicly complict in illegal US actions that would have treated the streets of London no differently from those of Mogadishu. Instead, all the evidence suggests that Britain conspired repeatedly over a decade to help the US turn its illegal campaign against Assange and Wikileaks into a seemingly “lawful” extradition process through the courts.
Again, according to the Yahoo report:
“White House officials developed a backup plan: The British would hold Assange on a bail jumping charge, giving Justice Department prosecutors a 48-hour delay to rush through an indictment.”
In other words, the UK explicitly followed US instructions in holding Assange over a minor bail infraction.
Evanina confirmed the UK’s collusion with the US efforts to keep Assange permanently incarcerated, telling Yahoo that the pair developed a “joint plan” to prevent Assange being able to walk free from the embassy.
UN torture expert Nils Melzer on how the US, after losing its extradition hearing against Julian Assange, has woven a legal web around him from which he may never be able to extricate himself and win back his freedom https://t.co/kOtP4Ig9ie
The truth is that, appalling as the Yahoo News revelations are, they fail to convey the reality that the US could count on multiple states, not least the UK, to conspire in providing a “legal” veneer to a decade-long, covert war against Assange and Wikileaks for exposing US war crimes.
Even more frightening, all the evidence suggests that the US was also able to manipulate the legal processes in both Sweden and the UK to engineer Assange’s effective incarceration all that time, and to this day.
And even more terrifying, the same evidence suggests that the establishment media in several countries could be relied on, at best, to turn a blind eye to a fellow journalist’s persecution and, at worst, to actively conspire in that persecution.
Yahoo News provided a great service in bringing some of the reality about Assange’s persecution to light. But there is much more to unearth. Sadly, our supposed watchdogs on power appear far too busy feeding at the trough to start sniffing out more of the truth.
*
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.
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.
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).
Health experts have been left baffled by a big rise in a common and potentially fatal type of heart attack in the west of Scotland.
During the summer there was a 25 per cent rise in the number of people rushed to the Golden Jubilee National Hospital in Clydebank with partially blocked arteries cutting blood supply to the heart.
According to NIH’s U.S. National Library of Medicine, “A blood clot may block an artery or vein in the heart” which could affect a number of major organs, including the legs, lungs, kidney or heart.
The paper reports over the summer Golden Jubilee saw a 25 percent rise in NSTEMI, or non-ST segment elevation, myocardial infarctions, or heart attacks.
The number of so-called STEMI attacks, where there is extensive heart damage, recorded at the Golden Jubilee has remained stable for a decade at about 750 a year. Yet N-STEMI attacks, where there is less tissue damage but an equal risk of death, have increased over the summer.
In a quote to the paper, Golden Jubilee lead consultant cardiologist Mitchell Lindsay listed off numerous possible causes, but curiously neglected one – the Covid vaccine.
There is not any evidence that it is as a consequence of any delayed care or missed opportunity. It is likely to be due to a multitude of factors: people being sedentary with lockdown; stress; people ignoring symptoms because they do not want to present at hospital. There are probably five to ten causes, all linked.
According to Google statistics, 70.3 percent of Scots are vaccinated, with 76.8 percent having received at least one dose.
Meanwhile, on Twitter, users didn’t hesitate to make the correlation between the so-called mysterious heart attack increase and Covid vaccination.
A rise in heart attacks from blocked arteries. If only we knew what people have been doing for the last few months so we could study & solve the ‘mystery.’ Oh, if only there was a clear indicator, a huge flashing arrow pointing to the culprit!
The heart attacks are no mystery to anyone who’s been paying attention to prominent medical doctors who’ve in recent months issued dire health warnings regarding the Covid vaccine.
Perhaps the most distressing warning came from Canadian family physician Dr. Charles Hoffe, who conducted an independent study on his patients and determined that 62 percent had developed microscopic blood clots due to spike proteins contained in the mRNA jab.
Dr. Hoffe said the blood clots could lead to high blood pressure in the lungs, from which vaccinated people could develop right-sided heart failure and die within three years.
“The concern is: because these vessels are now permanently damaged in a person’s lungs, when the heart tries to pump blood through all those damaged vessels there’s increased resistance trying to pump the blood through those lungs.”
“So those people are going to develop something called ‘pulmonary artery hypertension’ – high blood pressure in their lungs, and the concern with that is that those people will probably all develop right-sided heart failure within three years and die because they now have increased vascular resistance through their lungs.”
Time will tell whether Scottish doctors will admit a link to the Covid vaccine if they find that one does indeed exist to these mysterious heart attacks.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
A U.S. Army doctor who is also a specialist in aerospace medicine has made an unprecedented call to Pentagon leaders, asking them to ground all pilots in all services who have gotten a COVID-19 vaccine.
In an affidavit, Lt. Col. Theresa Long lays out her reasoning, with citations and studies, stating that she is doing so under the auspices of the Military Whistleblower Protection Act.
Long then went on to lay out her credentials: She earned “a bachelor’s degree from the University of Texas Austin, completed my medical degree from the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston Medical School in 2008” then “served as a Field Surgeon for ten years and went on to complete a residency in Aerospace and Occupational Medicine at the United States Army School of Aviation Medicine” at Fort Rucker, Ala. Long wrote that she’s “been trained by the Combat Readiness Center at Ft. Rucker as an Aviation Safety Officer” and has had additional training in the “Medical Management of Chemical and Biological Causalities at Fort Detrick.” She’s also “board certified in flight Aerospace Medicine and board eligible in Occupational Medicine.”
The Army doc noted that before the COVID-19 pandemic, she underwent “specialized military training from Infectious Disease doctors from the Army, Navy and Air Force on emerging infectious disease threats,” and has “recently functioned as a medical and scientific advisor to an Aviation training Brigade seeking to identify risk mitigation strategies, and bio statistical analysis of SARS- Cov-2 (“Covid 19”) infections in both vaccinated and unvaccinated Soldiers.”
She’s also both diagnosed and treated COVID-19 cases, so again, she’s certainly qualified to offer an opinion.
“I have observed vaccine adverse events following the administration of EUA vaccines, and followed the success of Soldiers who obtained various Covid 19 therapies outside the military. The majority of the service members within the DOD population are young and in good physical condition,” she testified in her affidavit.
“Military aviators are a subset of the military population that has to meet the most stringent medical standards to be on flight status. The population of student pilots I take care of are primarily in their 20s-30s, males and in excellent physical condition. The risk of serious illness or death in this population from SARs-CoV-2 is minimal, with a survival rate of 99.997%,” she continued.
After taking in all the data and observing how the virus does — and, importantly, does not affect — military readiness, Long said she has since formed a professional opinion she is obligated to report to her superiors. The problem, she said, is that no one wants to hear about it.
“I have done so with mixed results in terms of acceptance, rejection and threats of punishment for so sharing,” she wrote.
The doctor went on to quote Army Training Doctrine regulations, which state that “risk decisions” are up to individual commanders to accept or reject, and that they, too, must either act on decisions or pass them further up the chain of command. Either way, she made clear that she is fulfilling her responsibilities in reporting what she has found and the conclusions she has reached.
“The CDC and the FDA are civilian agencies that do not have the mission of National Defense that the DOD has. Guidance and recommendations made by these civilian agencies must be filtered through strategic perspective of national defense and the potential risks recommendations may have on the health of the entire fighting force,” Long testified, adding:
The majority of young new Army aviators are in their early twenties. We know there is a risk of myocarditis with each mRNA vaccination. We additionally now know that vaccination does not necessarily prevent infection or transmission of SARs-CoV-2. Therefore individuals fully vaccinated with mRNA vaccines have at least two independent risk factors for myocarditis after vaccination. Additional boaster shots add more risk. It is impossible to perform a risk/benefit analysis on the use of mRNA as counter measures to SARs-CoV-2 without further data… Use of mRNA vaccines in our fighting force presents a risk of undetermined magnitude, in a population in which less than 20 active-duty personnel out of 1.4 million, died of the underlying SARs- CoV-2.
The problem, she said, is that few of the young aviators would know if they had developed myocarditis, which could affect them negatively — including cause sudden death — while they are flying.
Her opinion:
I personally observed the most physically fit female Soldier I have seen in over 20 years in the Army, go from Colligate level athlete training for Ranger School, to being physically debilitated with cardiac problems, newly diagnosed pituitary brain tumor, thyroid dysfunction within weeks of getting vaccinated. Several military physicians have shared with me their firsthand experience with a significant increase in the number of young Soldiers with migraines, menstrual irregularities, cancer, suspected myocarditis and reporting cardiac symptoms after vaccination. Numerous Soldiers and DOD civilians have told me of how they were sick, bed-ridden, debilitated, and unable to work for days to weeks after vaccination. I have also recently reviewed three flight crew members’ medical records, all of which presented with both significant and aggressive systemic health issues. Today I received word of one fatality and two ICU cases on Fort Hood; the deceased was an Army pilot who could have been flying at the time. All three pulmonary embolism events happened within 48 hours of their vaccination. I cannot attribute this result to anything other than the Covid 19 vaccines as the source of these events. Each person was in top physical condition before the inoculation and each suffered the event within 2 days post vaccination.
“The politicization of SARs-CoV-2, treatments and vaccination strategies have completely compromised long-standing safety mechanisms, open and honest dialogue, and the trust of our service members in their health system and healthcare providers,” she added.
Now, the question becomes, is SECDEF Lloyd Austin going to listen to her? Doubtful.
*
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.
Comments Off on Army Physician and Aerospace Medicine Specialist Calls on Pentagon to Order All Pilots Who Have Received COVID-19 Vaccine to be Grounded
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The public deserves a complete and transparent accounting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s safety monitoring, including the results of all interim reports and analyses, whether through a Freedom of Information Act request, Congressional order or some other means.
There are 91x the number of deaths and 276x the number of coagulopathy events reported after COVID-19 vaccination than after flu vaccination.
Safety signals were found for 242 adverse events using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) methodology.
Full transparency of CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety monitoring is urgently needed.
On Aug. 30, the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted to recommend Pfizer/BioNTech’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for people 16 years and older.
In comments I submitted to the committee along with my collaborators, we provided evidence of large safety signals from VAERS, using published CDC methods to analyze the data.
In this article, I describe the safety signals highlighted in our comments, which raise pressing questions about the CDC’s and FDA’s COVID vaccine safety monitoring efforts.
To begin with, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of adverse event reports to VAERS associated with COVID-19 vaccines. The chart below shows the number of deaths for all other vaccines reported to VAERS annually since the system’s inception in 1990, compared to deaths reported for COVID-19 vaccines, from both domestic and foreign sources.
Figure 1. Number of Deaths Reported to VAERS Since 1990
As of early September, there have been 14,506 deaths reported to VAERS for COVID-19 vaccines, compared to 8,673 for the preceding 30 years for all other vaccines. That is already more than 50 times the annual average — and we still have four months left to go until the end of the year.
It is hard to imagine how anyone can look at these numbers and not be at least a little bit concerned. Yet many people are dismissive, saying the unprecedented number of reports is due to the unprecedented number of vaccinations being administered.
I crunched the numbers, and even after taking into account the total number of vaccinations, the number of reports for COVID vaccines still towers over previous years.
See, for example, Figure 2 below, which shows the number of deaths reported per million vaccine doses from 2010-2020 and for COVID-19 vaccines. That’s nearly 40 deaths reported per million COVID vaccines versus an average of 1.6 for all other vaccines from the previous 10 years.
No matter what I did to the data, or what types of adverse events I looked at, I could not make the big jump in COVID vaccine reports go away.
Figure 2. Deaths Reported to VAERS per Million Vaccine Doses Since 2010
So why do the CDC and FDA not seem to be concerned about this? I don’t know, but to try to answer that question, we have to take a step back to talk about VAERS and how the CDC uses it to detect safety signals.
VAERS, which is jointly administered by the CDC and FDA, is typical of all reporting systems used to monitor the safety of medicinal products. Although widely used, there are many known limitations with this type of system. Probably the biggest is that it is passive or spontaneous, meaning it relies on the willingness of people and medical professionals to “spontaneously” submit reports. So reporting rates are low and inconsistent.
READ + SHARE my letter to Dr. Kessler, newly named co-chair of Biden’s #COVID-19 Advisory Committee, requesting he immediately fix Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (#VAERS), system that monitors adverse outcomes following vaccination. #TheDefenderhttps://t.co/Jw77i8NrOA
Another limitation is that reports cannot be used reliably to show a causal connection between a vaccine or medication and an adverse event. So what are they good for?
They are used to provide a kind of early warning system. When enough reports accumulate about a particular type of event, those reports produce a safety signal, like an alarm bell. When the alarm rings, it doesn’t mean there is definitely a problem, but it is supposed to alert authorities to a possible problem and prompt further investigation.
In late January, the CDC released a briefing document outlining the agency’s standard operating procedures for ongoing monitoring of VAERS for safety signals from COVID-19 vaccines.
The document lays out plans to produce weekly reports that would highlight any safety signals found across a range of different adverse events. Although those reports have not been made public, we don’t need to rely on the CDC, as VAERS data is publicly available.
To detect safety signals with new vaccines, I took my lead from a study published by CDC researchers who were trying to detect safety signals for the new H1N1 swine flu vaccines introduced in 2009. The researchers compared VAERS reports for H1N1 vaccines to reports for regular flu vaccines.
So I took a similar approach and compared adverse events reported for COVID-19 to events reported for flu vaccines. This comparison makes a lot of sense, as flu vaccines are the only other type of vaccine administered to adults and the elderly in large numbers.
Of course, because the number of flu and COVID-19 vaccines administered is not the same, it makes sense to look at the number of reports per dose administered, something not specified in the CDC briefing document.
Table 1 (below) shows a comparison of VAERS reports for COVID-19 vaccines versus flu vaccines per million doses administered for a range of different event types and age groups.
Table 1. COVID-to-Flu Ratio Reporting Ratios per Million Vaccine Doses
For each adverse event type, the table shows the COVID-to-flu ratio, which simply shows how many more events were reported per million doses of COVID-19 vaccines compared to the number per million doses of seasonal influenza vaccines.
The comparison is based on all reports to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccines (from Dec. 15 – Aug. 6) to all reports for all seasonal influenza vaccines from the previous five influenza seasons (from 2015/16 to 2019/20).
Keep in mind that for all the analyses, I excluded all reports that came from people with an indication of a SARS-CoV-2 infection, such as a positive test result or even a suspicion of COVID-19 — so the adverse events can’t be blamed on that.
The first thing to notice is that for every type of adverse event for every age group, there were more reports per million doses of COVID-19 vaccines than for flu vaccines. If you look at the bottom row for all age groups (12 and older), you see that for every million vaccine doses administered, there were 19 times more reports to VAERS for COVID-19 vaccines than for flu vaccines, 28 times more serious events, 91 times more deaths, 3 times more reports of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), 276 times more reports of coagulopathy; 126 times as many reports of myocardial infarction; and 136 times more reports of myopericarditis.
Also notable is the variation across age groups. For example, death and coagulopathy were more preponderant for older age groups, whereas GBS and myopericarditis were more frequent for younger age groups.
The ratios for myopericarditis put the full significance of these results into perspective, since it is an officially recognized side effect of COVID-19 vaccines, especially among men under age 50. See for example this FDA press release and the below slide from an Aug. 30 CDC presentation to the ACIP:
Slide from Aug. 30 CDC presentation to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
While the COVID-to-flu ratio for myopericarditis among 12- to 17-year-olds in Table 1 is in a league of its own at 1251-to-1, the ratio for the 18- to 49-year-olds is 81-to-1, which is well within the range of many of the other ratios in the table — and even smaller than many of them. (I used the reporting rates per million vaccine doses from the ACIP report, slide 30, to calculate the COVID-to-flu ratios for myopericarditis, which were slightly smaller than my own calculations.)
Because the CDC has acknowledged that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis in this age group, a reporting ratio of at least 81 is like an alarm bell going off to warn us of a potential safety problem. And the much larger ratios for coagulopathy and myocardial infarctions are like a 4-alarm fire.
So why does the CDC seem to be unconcerned about these safety signals? Is it possible they haven’t picked up on them?
Admittedly, comparing reports for COVID versus flu after taking the number of doses into account is not the same exact methodology anticipated in the CDC’s briefing document. Although it is arguably superior for a variety of reasons I won’t get into here, just to be sure I went ahead and did the exact same type of analysis outlined in the briefing document and found unambiguous safety signals.
Before showing the results, I need to explain how it works, but to do that we’ll have to get a bit deep in the weeds.
The method is a well-established pharmacovigilance technique based on calculating what’s known as the “Proportional Reporting Ratio” or PRR. To calculate the PRR, you first have to calculate the proportion of each type of event out of all events reported for that vaccine (COVID-19 and flu).
So for example, we take the number of VAERS reports of myocarditis for COVID-19 vaccines and divide that by the total number of all events reported for COVID-19 vaccines. Then we do the same for flu vaccines.
Then, to get the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), we divide the proportion of reports for a given type of event (like myopericarditis) for COVID-19 vaccines by the proportion for flu vaccines.
If the proportion for COVID-19 vaccines is large relative to the proportion for flu vaccines, that sends a signal alerting us to a potential safety problem. A safety signal is defined as a PRR that is greater than 2, statistically significant (with what’s known as a Chi-square value above 4) and has at least three of that type of event reported for each vaccine.
Table 2 below shows the PRR’s I calculated for several different adverse events across different age groups. All of the PRR’s in bold fit the CDC’s definition of a safety signal. This includes all PRR’s for death, except for the youngest age group, all PRR’s for coagulopathy and myopericarditis, and all PRR’s for myocardial infarction, except for the youngest age group because there were no myocardial infarctions reported for influenza vaccines.
Table 2. COVID-19 vs. Flu Vaccines: Proportional Reporting Ratios (PRR’s)
Note that, by default, the PRR method will never detect a safety signal for events that have never been reported for the comparator vaccine — like the zero teenage myocardial infarctions reported for flu vaccines ever compared to 10 for COVID-19 vaccines — which arguably should be seen as an even stronger indication that something is amiss.
The only event that makes up a larger proportion of flu vaccine reports than COVID-19 vaccines is GBS.
Here, too, the PRRs for myopericarditis are instructive. Even though the PRR value for myopericarditis in the youngest age group is off the scale, the values for the 18 to 49 age group is similar to or even lower than the PRR’s for deaths, myocardial infarctions and coagulopathy.
Because the signal for myopericarditis is indicative of an actual, acknowledged safety problem, other signals of similar size might very well be alerting us to actual but unacknowledged problems.
I then went a step further and calculated PRRs for all adverse events submitted to VAERS. I found 242 adverse events that satisfied the definition of a safety signal according to the CDC.
Some of them were minor, like abnormal dreams or vaccination site discomfort. But many of them were very serious and included, in addition to the events shown in Table 2: cardiac arrests; cerebral hemorrhages; cerebrovascular accidents (strokes); renal failure; and vaginal hemorrhages — and that’s just the tip of the iceberg of serious events that show unambiguous safety signals.
An additional 87 types of events didn’t qualify as a safety signal just because they had been reported only once or twice for flu vaccines. An additional 6,159 types of events had never been reported for flu vaccines, despite more than 600 million flu vaccines administered among the age groups I examined.
For these events, it could be argued the safety signal is infinite, since the number of events in the denominator is zero. But instead of raising an alarm, they are by definition considered unworthy of concern.
No matter how I sliced and diced the data, the safety signal for COVID-19 vaccines rang loud and clear. It’s hard to imagine how anyone could miss it. It would be like taking a hike in Arizona and falling into the Grand Canyon because you didn’t see the big hole in the ground.
Some people are dismissive when presented with this evidence. “VAERS data can’t be trusted,” they say. “Anyone can submit a report and some of the reports are fraudulent.”
Yes, anybody can submit a report, and some might be fraudulent. But the CDC hasn’t raised any concerns about this and continues to use VAERS to monitor for safety signals.
A recent study found 67% of VAERS reports were submitted by healthcare workers, and the CDC confirmed that 88% of VAERS myopericarditis reports they examined fit their case definition.
Yes, VAERS is imperfect, but the large majority of reports are legitimate and reliable.
Another objection is that the increase in reporting is artificial. Many people are scared of these new vaccines. Awareness of VAERS is higher than it has ever been. And the government has actively encouraged, and in some cases required, people to report adverse events — so of course VAERS reports are going to increase.
But that doesn’t mean there are really more events. This phenomenon is known as “stimulated reporting.”
Nobody at any of the recent CDC advisory committee meetings raised any concern that VAERS reports were inflated. If the unprecedented increase in VAERS reports was just due to stimulated reporting, CDC researchers tell us we should expect to see COVID-to-flu ratios and PRRs that are roughly similar across different types of events. So if there was a 20-fold increase in reporting of serious events, say, then there should be a similar increase in other types of events.
A brief glance at Tables 1 and 2 clearly shows this is not the case — the reporting rates vary greatly across different types of events, and also across different age groups for the same event.
This is a huge giveaway that the increase — or at least a large portion of it — is not due to stimulated reporting. Indeed, underreporting is usually a bigger concern with data like VAERS, and there are good reasons to think the true number of adverse events is much larger.
But if the safety signal from VAERS is loud and clear and VAERS reports can be trusted, then how is the CDC not picking up on this? Or are they ignoring it? It’s hard to say.
It might have to do with how the CDC handles signals once they are detected. The agency’s protocols call for a thorough clinical review of events that trigger a safety signal in order to determine if the event could plausibly be caused by the vaccine. If that’s the case, it’s conceivable they found safety signals, but then determined that there was no plausible connection and therefore no cause for concern.
What this means in practice, however, is that if the CDC investigators do not understand how these novel vaccines — which use gene therapy technology and have had only limited use in humans — might cause a particular type of adverse event, the presumption is that there is no plausible connection.
For example, the CDC has declared after reviewing over 7,000 reports of deaths reported in the U.S. as of Sept. 7, they were not able to determine a plausible causal relationship for any of them, except for three due to thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) from the Janssen vaccine.
But the methods and criteria they use to make these determinations aren’t published anywhere, assuming they even exist. It would be easier to take their word for it if their decision-making process wasn’t hidden behind a veil of secrecy.
And maybe that’s the biggest problem of all: lack of transparency. VAERS reports are public, which is laudable, but what the CDC does with those reports is mostly hidden from view.
For example, the CDC briefing document outlining plans to monitor VAERS speaks of producing some dozen or more tables every week detailing the agency’s search for safety signals. To my knowledge, none of these have ever been made public.
And keep in mind that VAERS isn’t the only data source the CDC uses for safety monitoring. The other main source is the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), which should be more reliable than VAERS because it uses patient medical records from some of the nation’s largest HMO’s.
There are several ongoing COVID-19 vaccine monitoring initiatives that use the VSD, including “COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Evaluation in Pregnant Women and their Infants,” “Mortality and Vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccines,” “COVID-19 Vaccine Safety, Spontaneous Abortion (SAB) and Stillbirth,” and “COVID-19 Vaccine-Mediated Enhanced Disease (VMED) and Vaccine Effectiveness.”
While these monitoring efforts are certainly praiseworthy, of the five that should have already started yielding initial results and interim reports, only partial results from two of them have been presented to the CDC advisory committee or made public in any way.
Where are the others? And how could forcing workers to get vaccinated ever be justified when so much of the evidence regarding their safety is still missing?
A complete and transparent accounting of the CDC’s safety monitoring is urgently needed, including internal communications and the results of all interim reports and analyses, whether through a Freedom of Information Act request, Congressional order or some other means.
The public deserves to know how the CDC reached the conclusion there was no plausible connection between the COVID-19 vaccines and the thousands of deaths they’ve reviewed, and also why they have failed to detect safety signals — or if they have, why they are being ignored.
Postscript: Since completing this article, I and others submitted comments to the meeting of FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) on Sept. 17, which voted 16 to 2 to not approve a booster dose for people under 65 years old, citing a lack of sufficient safety and efficacy data. However the FDA overruled its advisory committee, as did the CDC after its vaccine safety committee recommended against authorizing a third Pfizer dose for anyone other than people 65 and older, long-term care facility residents and certain people with underlying conditions.
*
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.
Josh Guetzkow is a senior lecturer in the Department of Sociology & Anthropology and the Institute of Criminology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
A whistleblower has provided government data documenting 48,465 deaths within 14 days of COVID-19 vaccination among Medicare patients alone, according to medical freedom rights attorney Thomas Renz.
The announcement Saturday was made by the Ohio-based attorney, who remains involved in several major cases brought against federal agencies relating to fraud and violations of medical freedom rights.
In his presentation, Renz expressed his appreciation for whistleblowers who were coming forward to provide the public with such important information from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS). He described the CMS database as the largest available in the U.S. for the study of COVID-19 trends because it contains the data of approximately 59.4 million Medicare beneficiaries.
One slide showed that the number of “persons who died within 14 days of a COVID-19 vaccine” equated to 19,400 for those younger than 81 years old, and 28,065 for those 81 and over, totaling 48,465 deaths.
“This is raw data,” Renz explained. “There’s no analysis.” And, he emphasized, these death numbers are from less than 20% of the U.S. population.
“Do you want to know why 14 days is important?” he asked. “Because if you die with 14 days, you’re not considered vaccinated.” According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), one is not considered as being “vaccinated” until 14 days after their completed injection regimen, raising the question of whether government authorities have been classifying these fatalities as something other than vaccination-related deaths.
Renz provided screenshots of the “raw data from the Medicare servers,” calling it “a present for the scumbag ‘fact-checkers’ who keep lying.”
“And what I want to know, are you going to fact check the HHS now?” he taunted. “Are you going to fact-check Fauci?”
In July, a whistleblower who works professionally as a computer programmer in health care data analytics, made a declaration under penalty of perjury that CMS data revealed “at least 45,000” vaccine-related deaths due to experimental COVID-19 vaccine injections. USA Today and others “fact-checked” the claim and called it misinformation.
A press release on Renz’s website responds, “Today’s revelations solidify that the ’Trusted News Initiative’ is actually the source of misinformation and propaganda, and that [the] Attorney Thomas Renz Whistleblower was correct all along.”
Since the roll-out of the COVID-19 gene-based vaccines began last December, with adverse reactions, including death, being passively reported on the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), many have believed the actual numbers of injuries to be much higher.
Yet the presumption of significantly higher real numbers is supported by a 2010 Harvard Pilgrim study which found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries” are reported on VAERS. In addition, even vaccine manufacturers have calculated at least a “fifty-fold underreporting of adverse events” on this system.
Further, a recent whistleblower report from Project Veritas reveals medical personnel in federal hospitals confirming the presence of many patients suffering from COVID vaccine injuries, yet “nobody” reports them to VAERS.
Renz also provided evidence affirming that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been using this same CMS data to monitor different types of adverse reactions to the injections in “near real time,” even while these government agencies and the media continue to repeat that this gene-based vaccine is “safe and effective.”
Displaying data of Medicare beneficiaries in the State of New York alone revealed thousands of cardiovascular events, cases of COVID-19, and deaths among a total of 16 tracked adverse events.
“Remember, these are ‘side effects’ that the government, media, and social media continue to tell the public that are not happening,” he said. “They are lying. There is no question they are lying.”
“The mantra of ‘safe and effective’ must stop after today’s information,” Renz 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.
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).
Autonomous weapon systems – commonly known as killer robots – may have killed human beings for the first time ever last year, according to a recent United Nations Security Council report on the Libyan civil war. History could well identify this as the starting point of the next major arms race, one that has the potential to be humanity’s final one.
Autonomous weapon systems are robots with lethal weapons that can operate independently, selecting and attacking targets without a human weighing in on those decisions. Militaries around the world are investing heavily in autonomous weapons research and development. The U.S. alone budgeted US$18 billion for autonomous weapons between 2016 and 2020.
I see four primary dangers with autonomous weapons. The first is the problem of misidentification. When selecting a target, will autonomous weapons be able to distinguish between hostile soldiers and 12-year-olds playing with toy guns? Between civilians fleeing a conflict site and insurgents making a tactical retreat?
Killer robots, like the drones in the 2017 short film ‘Slaughterbots,’ have long been a major subgenre of science fiction. (Warning: graphic depictions of violence.)
The problem here is not that machines will make such errors and humans won’t. It’s that the difference between human error and algorithmic error is like the difference between mailing a letter and tweeting. The scale, scope and speed of killer robot systems – ruled by one targeting algorithm, deployed across an entire continent – could make misidentifications by individual humans like a recent U.S. drone strike in Afghanistan seem like mere rounding errors by comparison.
Autonomous weapons expert Paul Scharre uses the metaphor of the runaway gun to explain the difference. A runaway gun is a defective machine gun that continues to fire after a trigger is released. The gun continues to fire until ammunition is depleted because, so to speak, the gun does not know it is making an error. Runaway guns are extremely dangerous, but fortunately they have human operators who can break the ammunition link or try to point the weapon in a safe direction. Autonomous weapons, by definition, have no such safeguard.
Importantly, weaponized AI need not even be defective to produce the runaway gun effect. As multiple studies on algorithmic errors across industries have shown, the very best algorithms – operating as designed – can generate internally correct outcomes that nonetheless spread terrible errors rapidly across populations.
The problem is not just that when AI systems err, they err in bulk. It is that when they err, their makers often don’t know why they did and, therefore, how to correct them. The black box problem of AI makes it almost impossible to imagine morally responsible development of autonomous weapons systems.
The proliferation problems
The next two dangers are the problems of low-end and high-end proliferation. Let’s start with the low end. The militaries developing autonomous weapons now are proceeding on the assumption that they will be able to contain and control the use of autonomous weapons. But if the history of weapons technology has taught the world anything, it’s this: Weapons spread.
Market pressures could result in the creation and widespread sale of what can be thought of as the autonomous weapon equivalent of the Kalashnikov assault rifle: killer robots that are cheap, effective and almost impossible to contain as they circulate around the globe. “Kalashnikov” autonomous weapons could get into the hands of people outside of government control, including international and domestic terrorists.
The Kargu-2, made by a Turkish defense contractor, is a cross between a quadcopter drone and a bomb. It has artificial intelligence for finding and tracking targets, and might have been used autonomously in the Libyan civil war to attack people.Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, CC BY
High-end proliferation is just as bad, however. Nations could compete to develop increasingly devastating versions of autonomous weapons, including ones capable of mounting chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear arms. The moral dangers of escalating weapon lethality would be amplified by escalating weapon use.
High-end autonomous weapons are likely to lead to more frequent wars because they will decrease two of the primary forces that have historically prevented and shortened wars: concern for civilians abroad and concern for one’s own soldiers. The weapons are likely to be equipped with expensive ethical governors designed to minimize collateral damage, using what U.N. Special Rapporteur Agnes Callamard has called the “myth of a surgical strike” to quell moral protests. Autonomous weapons will also reduce both the need for and risk to one’s own soldiers, dramatically altering the cost-benefit analysis that nations undergo while launching and maintaining wars.
Asymmetric wars – that is, wars waged on the soil of nations that lack competing technology – are likely to become more common. Think about the global instability caused by Soviet and U.S. military interventions during the Cold War, from the first proxy war to the blowback experienced around the world today. Multiply that by every country currently aiming for high-end autonomous weapons.
Undermining the laws of war
Finally, autonomous weapons will undermine humanity’s final stopgap against war crimes and atrocities: the international laws of war. These laws, codified in treaties reaching as far back as the 1864 Geneva Convention, are the international thin blue line separating war with honor from massacre. They are premised on the idea that people can be held accountable for their actions even during wartime, that the right to kill other soldiers during combat does not give the right to murder civilians. A prominent example of someone held to account is Slobodan Milosevic, former president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, who was indicted on charges against humanity and war crimes by the U.N.’s International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.
But how can autonomous weapons be held accountable? Who is to blame for a robot that commits war crimes? Who would be put on trial? The weapon? The soldier? The soldier’s commanders? The corporation that made the weapon? Nongovernmental organizations and experts in international law worry that autonomous weapons will lead to a serious accountability gap.
To hold a soldier criminally responsible for deploying an autonomous weapon that commits war crimes, prosecutors would need to prove both actus reus and mens rea, Latin terms describing a guilty act and a guilty mind. This would be difficult as a matter of law, and possibly unjust as a matter of morality, given that autonomous weapons are inherently unpredictable. I believe the distance separating the soldier from the independent decisions made by autonomous weapons in rapidly evolving environments is simply too great.
The legal and moral challenge is not made easier by shifting the blame up the chain of command or back to the site of production. In a world without regulations that mandate meaningful human control of autonomous weapons, there will be war crimes with no war criminals to hold accountable. The structure of the laws of war, along with their deterrent value, will be significantly weakened.
A new global arms race
Imagine a world in which militaries, insurgent groups and international and domestic terrorists can deploy theoretically unlimited lethal force at theoretically zero risk at times and places of their choosing, with no resulting legal accountability. It is a world where the sort of unavoidable algorithmic errors that plague even tech giants like Amazon and Google can now lead to the elimination of whole cities.
In my view, the world should not repeat the catastrophic mistakes of the nuclear arms race. It should not sleepwalk into dystopia.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Featured image: The term ‘killer robot’ often conjures images of Terminator-like humanoid robots. Militaries around the world are working on autonomous machines that are less scary looking but no less lethal. John F. Williams/U.S. Navy
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).
Jordan is reopening its border crossing with Syria and resuming flights to Damascus. In Syria, more armed groups are laying down their weapons. But amid these positive developments, the US is hunkering down to inflict more pain.
On September 29, Jordan’s Nassib border crossing to Syria re-opened, meaning a resumption not only of travel but of trade between the two nations. In early October, Royal Jordanian will start flying again to Syria’s capital.
Jordan's state carrier, Royal Jordanian, will resume direct flights to Damascus from Oct. 3 for the first time in nearly a decade in the latest step to restore extensive business ties with Syria hurt by the conflict, officials said.https://t.co/O50nKhlqv5
In Syria’s south, after years of government and allied attempts to restore full peace, the last armed groups have finally laid down their weapons in Daraa, which journalist Vanessa Beeley wrote about after her recent return there.
And while the Biden administration recently changed talking heads in a Syria-related diplomatic position, little else has altered regarding America’s position on the country.
Sanctions against the Syrian people have continued under Biden, and at least 900 US troops continue to illegally occupy Syria.
Same old, same old for Syrians, who have endured 10 years of foreign war and terrorism against their country, as well as ten years of some of the most obnoxious lies and war propaganda.
In their September 13 meeting in Moscow, Presidents Assad and Putin made clear that while Syria continues to work towards restoring stability, doing so has been hampered by the presence of foreign troops not invited by the Syrian government and not under a mandate of the UN.
While speaking diplomatically, it is clear they meant the US and Turkish troops occupying areas of Syria, which – along with the proxy forces they support – bring the opposite of peace to Syrians.
However, type ‘Syria’ into your search engine of choice and you will still come across screaming headlines of inexplicable “violence” in Syria, and stories stating that Syria is “not safe” for the return of refugees. Many of these recent claims emanate from a recent update from the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria.
But this is not true. In fact, since Septmber 2015, nearly one million Syrians have returned to Syria, with another nearly 1.4 million internally displaced refugees resettling, according to the September 27, 2021 bulletin of the Center for Reconciliation of Opposing Sides and Control of the Movement of Refugees.
What the delusional articles omit are the real factors that make life in Syria difficult, and dangerous: the continued presence of Al-Qaeda affiliated groups in Idlib, terrorizing the population and firing on civilian areas in surrounding Hama and Aleppo provinces; and the deadly Western sanctions against Syrians, among other preventable factors.
Starving and thieving Syria
The latest news from the UN commission refers to fuel shortages and food insecurity without a mention of the many brutal Western sanctions against Syrians, once again showing that the supposed impartiality of the UN is non-existent.
I have written repeatedly about the deadly impact of sanctions, noting that they impact Syria’s ability to import medicines or the raw materials needed to manufacture them, plus medical equipment, machines, and materials needed for prosthetics, among other things.
The food insecurity mentioned by the UN commission comes as a direct result of sanctions which “cripple a state’s economy; disrupt the availability of food, medicines, drinking water, and sanitation supplies; interfere with the functioning of health and education systems; and undermine people’s ability to work.”
Deliberating causing the devaluing of the Syrian pound (as US envoy James Jeffrey boasted about) is not targeting the Syrian government; it is targeting the Syrian people. Western leaderships havesaid blatantly that sanctions will continue until Assad is deposed.
More recently, journalist Dan Kovalik was in Syria. He noted that, “10 years ago, abject poverty in Syria affected less than one percent of the population. By 2015, this had risen to 35 percent of the population. The rise in food prices – up 209 percent in the last year – is also noted.”
Indeed, the comparison of pre-war Syria and lack of abject poverty then rings true to what Syrians have told me over and over again in my visits to their country since 2014: that they were living well, in safety, and in harmony.
As for the increasingly debilitating effects of the sanctions, I saw life get increasingly more expensive. Syrians got more desperate during the six months I spent there last year, and again even more so this May and June, with skyrocketing prices meaning Syrians – despite working multiple jobs – can’t afford to put food on the table.
Under the Biden administration, the illegal US forces continue to pillage Syrian oil. Last year, I wrote about this theft of around $30 million a month. In March 2021, Syria’s petroleum minister compared the illegal US forces to “pirates” for plundering Syria’s oil, saying the US occupation has inflicted over $92 billion in damage on Syria’s petroleum sector.
Turkish-backed terrorists imprison, torture, and kill civilians (including children) in northeastern Syria, with Turkish forces themselves routinely shelling Syrian villages. Meanwhile, before his meeting with President Putin, Turkey’s Erdogan sent thousands more troops into Syria.
These are all factors contributing further to Syrians’ hellish circumstances and poverty, as well as factors omitted by most media and UN reports on Syria.
Peace-bringing reconciliation initiatives ignored
When armed groups reconcile with the state, laying down their weapons, they’re largely ignored by Western leaders, media, and the UN.
Indeed, the same UN report mentioned earlier claimed that under Assad’s leadership, there seem to be “no moves to unite the country or seek reconciliation.”
Reconciliations have been ongoing since the Reconciliation Ministry was established in 2012. Although the process is not perfect – the state cannot guarantee that armed groups who promise to cease violence against the state and population will adhere to their word – it is still the most peaceful option of enabling armed Syrian men to reintegrate into society, if they so choose.
How would America deal with such men on US soil? Kill them without blinking, most likely.
I interviewed the minister of reconciliation in 2014 and 2017, after the successes of returning peace to Homs, Aleppo, Madaya, and al-Waer, among others.
The objectives of reconciliation are the obvious restoration of security and enabling Syrians to return to their lives. But also, according to Minister Haidar, helping Syrians resolve their suffering in all respects: “Their security and safety, the economy, social services, education, the large number of martyrs and injured, the kidnapped, the missing, the internally displaced… We are trying to find a solution to each one of these cases. That is the deepest meaning of ‘reconciliation’: to return people to their normal lives.”
In our 2017 conversation, I asked the minister whether Syria had any outside support for reconciliation. Only, he said, from countries who are friends of Syria.
He said even the UN wasn’t interested.
“The UN during this period was siding with the Western policies, and not mentioning the achievement that the Syrian government has reached from these efforts. Western governments were against this project because it considered it a victory for the Syrian government and a major pillar for the unity of the Syrian people and the Syrian territories.”
At the end of our conversation, he made one particularly poignant point: “Most of the people that support the reconciliation process are the martyred’s families. For example, I was in a Latakia suburb and there I met a mother of four martyrs. She said, ‘I lost 4 children and I don’t want other mothers to suffer what I suffered.’”
Incidentally, the minister is also the father of a martyr: his son was gunned down by terrorists in 2012, in what Haidar described as an attempt on his own life.
Daraa, a long-awaited reconciliation
The UN commission called the restoration of peace to Daraa al-Balad an “unfolding tragedy.” That’s right, it is utterly tragic that armed extremists who have shelled, killed, and maimed civilians for years are finally laying down their weapons.
As Vanessa Beeley wrote,
“The armed groups that had committed multiple war crimes and atrocities against Syrian civilians and anti-terrorism armed forces had no intention of relinquishing their campaign of retaliatory crimes against anyone they considered to be loyal to the Syrian government and state. A vicious offensive was unleashed by these extremist gangs formerly associated with terrorist Al-Qaeda and ISIS factions in the southern region.”
Further, it is truly tragic (sarcasm) that those terrorists can no longer shell and snipe the state hospital, preventing civilians from getting medical care, as they have done for years.
As I previously wrote, in May 2018 – before Daraa was fully liberated – I travelled in a hired taxi to areas which were under fire from terrorists, and took a perilous high-speed ride to the state hospital, down a road exposed to terrorist sniping from less than 100 metres away.
The hospital was battered and partially destroyed from terrorists’ mortars, and mostly empty of patients. The director showed me destroyed wards and off-limits areas due to the high risk of snipers.
Al-Qaeda's rescuers never speak of their buddies' bombs on Dara'a streets, including the day I visited in May 2018. Dara'a hospital is battered from their "freedom" bombs and is extremely dangerous to get to, due to snipers. Nope, just hysterical accusations, as per norm. https://t.co/50dq5FlcBw
In that article I noted that upon my return months later, I was able to see just how close the nearby terrorist headquarters had been to the hospital: 50 metres away, hence the extreme risk of being shot while inside the hospital.
So yes, UN and Western media, shed your tears that another reign of terror has come to an end.
And keep ignoring the brutal Western sanctions as you churn out more war propaganda against the Syrian people and ignore positive developments on the ground. Because you care so much for the Syrian people…
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Eva Bartlett is a Canadian independent journalist and activist. She has spent years on the ground covering conflict zones in the Middle East, especially in Syria and Palestine (where she lived for nearly four years). Follow her on Twitter @EvaKBartlett
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
We are witnessing an aggressive build-up by the US and its allies for a confrontation with China. The Biden administration is making massive upgrades to the US’s military capacity, and sharply reorienting it to focus on China. At the same time, the US is waging a propaganda war against China and attempting to rally its allies, including the so-called Quad countries of India, Japan and Australia, to form an anti-China bloc. The Australian government has made it crystal clear over recent years that it is very much on board with this US project.
Australia isn’t being dragged along unwillingly by the US. The Australian authorities have been urging the US on. They are delighted by Biden’s approach, seeing him as much more serious and resolute than the erratic Donald Trump. This orientation is not the result of some sort of colonial cringe or hangover by the Australian establishment. Far from it. The Australian military and foreign policy establishment have made a calculated assessment that the imperialist interests of the Australian ruling class will be best served by a wholehearted commitment to the US side in any showdown with China.
This is precisely what the new AUKUS alliance between Australia, the United Kingdom and the US is all about. AUKUS is in not a defensive alliance in any sense. There is no threat of a Chinese attack, let alone a successful invasion of the Australian mainland, any time in the foreseeable future. The Chinese simply do not have that sort of capability now, and will not at any time in the next couple of decades.
No, AUKUS is not about “defending” the mass of the Australian population from being conquered by invading Chinese troops. It is an aggressive alliance, beating the drums of war to maintain US imperialist domination of the Indo-Pacific region.
The agreement for Australia to use US/British technology to build a fleet of nuclear-powered attack submarines is the initial step in this new alliance. Defence Minister Peter Dutton has flagged that he would welcome more US troops, warships and first strike military aircraft being stationed on Australian soil.
The new, highly sophisticated submarines will be Australia’s most expensive military expenditure of all time. At more than 7,000 tonnes, they are more than twice the size of Australia’s current Collins class submarines and have a greater operational capacity. They are being built for entirely aggressive purposes. These submarines need to be highly sophisticated, and consequently massively expensive, because their role will be to operate for long periods of time in cahoots with the US Navy off the coast of China, 5,000 km from Australia.
Workers will have to pay the cost of these incredibly expensive nuclear-powered submarines—well over $100 billion to build just six of them, and another $145 billion in maintenance costs over their lifetime. Australia’s military spending has been escalating more rapidly than most other elements of government expenditure for some years. Australia currently has the ninth largest military spending per head of population in the world. Now it will increase even further. As Scott Morrison stated: “Australia’s defence spending, as a share of GDP, will continue to increase because it is not just about submarines. This is about a whole range of other capabilities”.
According to the Parliamentary Budget Office, Australian military spending is set to climb by 68 percent to reach $75.7 billion per year early next decade. By 2030-31 it will account for $9 of every $100 of budget spending. At the same time, federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is foreshadowing slashing vital areas of government spending, such as education and social welfare, to rein in the mounting debt from the COVID-related expenditures and economic slowdown.
It won’t be the banks and the incredibly profitable mining companies and the growing class of billionaires that are going to bear the burden of this military build-up. The Liberal government is yet again cutting corporate tax rates and taxes on the top income earners. It will be the average working-class taxpayer who has to foot the bill. Meanwhile, the IMF is urging the government to further raise the rate of the highly regressive GST, a move that would further burden working-class people with financing the political priorities of the ruling class.
In any coming war with China, it will also be working-class people who are the main casualties. Any serious war with China, even one waged with conventional weapons, will lead to a horrendous level of deaths.
If the fighting turned into a nuclear war, which is a real risk given that both the US and China would have so much at stake, tens of millions might die. This is the reckless road that the Morrison government is leading us down.
Disgracefully, Labor has backed the AUKUS alliance and the purchase of the fleet of nuclear-powered submarines. This should come as no great surprise, as Labor has long championed the interests of Australian imperialism and increased military spending. It was the Rudd Labor government, after all, that drew up the initial plan for a new submarine fleet.
There needs to be concerted resistance built over the coming years to this relentless military escalation and the sharpening of imperialist tensions. This war drive needs to be stopped in its tracks. The alternative for workers in Australia, the US and China is too catastrophic to contemplate.
*
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).
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan concluded their “historic meeting” in Moscow.
The two discussed Greater Idlib and reached agreement on absolutely nothing of substance. As a result, the situation is as volatile as ever.
Militants will continue shelling both the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), as well as civilians, while the Russia’s Aerospace Forces (VKS) will continue their airstrikes on Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and co.
During the summit, President Erdogan praised the joint work with Russia on Syria after stressing that Turkish-Russian relations are vital for any peace process in the Middle East.
Both presidents repeatedly called each other friends, while agreeing on nothing conclusive. Many observers expected that the summit will see the birth of a new Russian-Turkish agreement to resolve the issue of Greater Idlib. However, it ended without any announcement or even a press conference.
As a result, either a hidden agreement was made that the public wasn’t notified, or the status quo will be kept.
Still, likely as a sign of good will, VKS warplanes didn’t carry out airstrikes on Greater Idlib over the day, but if no actual solution was agreed on the raids are likely to continue.
The situation in the Syrian region is slowly spinning out of control. A Russian-Turkish ceasefire agreement reached last year is barely holding up.
Russia has stepped up its airstrikes on terrorists in the region in the last two months. A large-scale ground operation by the SAA and Russia has been expected for nearly a week. In 2020, the ceasefire agreement was signed precisely to avoid such a significant ground offensive.
To prepare for the potential operation, Turkey deployed more troops in the region, including new artillery and other hardware.
These troops are necessary, because despite most of the militant factions in northeastern and northwestern Syria being backed by Turkey, infighting amongst them is not that uncommon.
On September 28, clashes broke out between two units of the Mu’tasim Division in the Turkish-occupied town of Ras al-Ain in northeastern Syria.
A disagreement over checkpoints located on profitable smuggling routes and the distribution of houses forcibly taken from locals were reportedly the main cause of the clashes, which took place in the central and eastern parts of Ras al-Ain.
The following days will reveal whether best friends Putin and Erdogan agreed on anything to avoid further fighting in Greater Idlib. It is yet to be seen if ceasefire violations by the militants continue and what the SAA and VKS response will be.
*
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).
Independent peer-reviewed scientific evidence proving the so-called virus ‘SARS-CoV-2’ is isolated and purified is required by 05 September 2020, otherwise measures against something which does not exist must end.
We were REFUSED a Parliamentary Petition to enlist public support in order to demand a debate in Parliament on these science issues.
It is unacceptable that WHO advised Public Health England NOT to isolate the virus (see letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson).
Isolation and purification of a virus and proof it causes so-called ‘Covid19’ disease using Koch postulates have not been achieved and procedures not followed (see letter to PM).
This is a fatal flaw in the basis for policy and given it is not a ‘High Consequence Infectious Disease’ (March 19th announcement), and the tests used are of unknown accuracy, the possibility of a vaccine is hopeless, and the measures directed against it are beyond reason and out of proportion.
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
A September 16, 2021 Saskatchewan Government Public Health Measure proclaims:
Effective October 1, a proof of vaccination or negative test requirement will be implemented for all Government of Saskatchewan, ministry, crown and agency employees.
And:
Effective October 1, a provincial requirement of proof of vaccination or a negative test is required for public access to: (the Measure lists) bars, gyms, taverns, nightclubs, concerts, casinos, theatres, museums, fitness centres, conference centres, ticketed indoor sporting events and indoor dining establishments.
What percentage of Saskatchewan’s 550,000 waged and salaried employees must submit to injections?
All Canadian provinces employ armies inside education, health, corrections and transportation ministries. Saskatchewan’s state-owned (Crown) commercial corporations augment its public sector. In ballpark terms, “ministry, crown and agency employees” constitute 15% of Saskatchewan’s workforce.
School Divisions will soon purge their ample workforces of the un-vaxxed.
Post-secondary education institutions have already mandated vaccinations.
Service sector (bars, gyms etc.) employees comprise a significant portion of Saskatchewan’s workforce. They too must submit to injections.
Federal Government agencies are major employers in Saskatchewan; as are municipalities. The Feds are on board the vaccination express; as soon will be: all municipal governments; and, all Saskatchewan-based branches of banking, insurance and media companies.
Thus, after this Health Measure hits, most Saskatchewan workers will face: “get-the-jab-or-lose-your-job.”
The Health Measure warns:
Employees that do not provide proof of vaccination will be required to provide proof of a negative test on a consistent basis.
“Consistent basis” is undefined; as is “fully vaccinated.” With forty thousand Saskatchewanians triply-vaxxed, and hundreds sampling Covid-4; what might “fully-vaxxed” come to mean?
On September 28 Big Pharma kicked-off “Flu Season 21.” A chunk of annual influenza vaccine profits come from “booster shots” sold months after the main jabs; to boost customers through the ‘Season.’
Add Covid-3 and Covid-4 jabs to an amped Flu Season pitching cocktail and booster, and one surmises four mass-injection opportunities betwixt Halloween and Valentine’s.
October 2021 marks the month Saskatchewan’s workforce (including 100,000 vaccination resisters) begin accepting, or rejecting, a regime of monthly mandatory injections.
*
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).
Most Americans do not know that in the United States currently there are approximately 900 Active-duty generals and flag officers to lead 1.3 million troops in the combined armed forces. During World War II, an admittedly different era, there were roughly twice as many flag and general officers for a little more than 12 million active duty troops a ratio of one to 6,000. In the Navy there are 32 flag officers for each ship currently in commission. In 1944, there was one flag officer for every 24 ships.
This development is referred to as “rank creep” which does not improve performance and instead clutters the chain of command by adding multiple bureaucratic layers to decision-making while also costing more due to funding the higher paygrades. And lest one be confused about why there continue to be so many flag officers, possibly concluding that they are needed to provide the leadership to fight wars, it could be pointed out that most of them will never get anywhere near combat even if the U.S. continues its belligerency on a global scale in an effort to establish and enforce its leadership of a fictional “rules based international order.”
It turns out that current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley was, during the latter days of the Donald Trump Administration, talking to his counterparts in China as well as to some folks in Congress who had no love for Trump. Some of the conversations were routine, but others were apparently driven by the notion that Donald Trump just might do something stupid like starting a war unless some restraints were placed on his ability to do mischief. Inevitably, there have emerged major differences of opinion regarding the propriety of what Milley was engaged in, with Democrats in general and Trump haters in particular finding no problem with the intrusion into policy-making while many Republicans have been calling for a thorough investigation to include possible consequences up to and including court-martial.
The various conversations were reported in a just released book “Peril” written by Bob Woodward and, Robert Costa and, based on a claimed 200 interviews, are generally conceded to be accurate by both sides to include the Milley camp plus the journalists involved. Some of the calls at least were made with other officials in the room and on separate phone lines, though there were also conversations with politicians like Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, that were clearly considered off-the-record as they dealt with keeping nuclear weapons out of the president’s hands.
Milley, according to the book, reportedly told the Chinese General Li Zuocheng in a back-channel phone call that had as a subject the possibility that the president might order an attack directed against China, something in the nature of a “surprise attack.” He reportedly said
“General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise.”
Milley apparently justified the action by stating that he disapproves of surprise attacks in principal and his defenders cite the example of “Pearl Harbor,” which was viewed so repugnantly by the American public that something like a war of extermination became inevitable. Unstated by the Milley supporters, though implicit in their argument, is the assumption that Donald Trump was both ignorant and a loose cannon on deck who would do something stupid like initiating a conflict with China.
Milley also shared his view that Trump had experienced a “mental decline” after the election with Nancy Pelosi in a phone call to her on January 8th, two days after the alleged insurrection at the Capitol. Pelosi reportedly demanded that Milley take the nuclear launch codes away from Trump, which admittedly he did not seek to do. On the same day Milley also reviewed procedures with the senior officers at the National Military Command Center for launching nuclear weapons, insisting that he also had to be involved. To be completely clear, Milley had no legal authority or power to insert himself into the chain of command, though “Peril” reports that he did just that and at a minimum he was acting “extra-constitutionally” in his interpretation of his government role.
But it is the outreach to China is most disturbing. It is indeed possible to regard Donald Trump negatively while at the same time responding rationally with one’s international nuclear armed adversaries. One does not know what Milley intended to do by his phone call, but “Peril” makes the case, without providing any evidence, that “American intelligence showed that the Chinese believed that Mr. Trump planned to launch a military strike to create an international crisis that he could claim to solve as a last-ditch effort to beat Joseph R. Biden Jr.” In any event, it is unlikely that the Milley phone call reassured Li of anything. Indeed, Li and the Chinese government would have only two possible responses to the threat. First would be to shut up shop, batten down the hatches, and sit still for punishment. The other option would be to preemptively strike U.S. forces in and around China which presumably would be used for the attack. Either option could easily lead to a nuclear exchange once things cease to go according to plan, presuming that the surprise attack itself was not intended to include nuclear weapons in the first place.
“If the report of Milley’s intentions is accurate, he should be relieved for cause, for though he did not consummate a criminal act by making that promise, the promise was so fraught with impropriety that an officer who betrayed his government in such fashion should ever be trusted to serve. Indeed, it is likely that had his Chinese counterpart made such a promise to General Milley, he’d have been executed for doing so.”
Beyond the disruption of the chain of command and ignoring the Constitution, there are, of course, some other problems with Milley’s line of thinking. Trump has, to be sure, demonstrated enough irrational behavior to make one suspect that he is not in full possession of all his marbles, but that is not the point. He was elected president of the United States and the U.S. Constitution was set up to ensure civilian control of the military, not vice versa.
And there is no solid evidence, only innuendo, that Trump ever seriously contemplated war with China. Indeed, he ran for office pledging to end the pointless wars that Washington was engaged in in Asia and towards the end of his administration he negotiated an exit from Afghanistan, which Joe Biden then postponed before bungling the evacuation. Trump did indeed assassinate a senior Iranian General and also launched cruise missiles against Syria based on bad intelligence, but otherwise his record is significantly better than that of his predecessor Barack Obama who both initiated and broadened the policy of assassinating American and Afghan citizens overseas by drone and also was party to the overthrow of the Libyan government while also conniving to replace the government of Ukraine.
In any event, in America war is clearly playing politics by other means. President Joe Biden has already declared that he has full confidence in Milley. Several Republican Senators, including Marco Rubio, have instead demanded that he be fired. Given the fact that at least one of the general’s phone calls to his Chinese counterpart could have started a war that might have gone nuclear, he should at least have the integrity to resign and take up his expected board appointment with a defense contractor.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.orgaddress is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
From the U.S. Right to the U.S. Left, We Need to Reorient our Attention to What Our Own Government and Scientists Have Been Doing in Germ Research and Germ Warfare Labs.
At the end of August, the U.S. intelligence community released its report on the origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The findings, however, left us in the same place we started—with no definitive answer as to whether the virus arose naturally or from a lab leak.
The question of the virus’s origins has been intensely politicized since the start of the pandemic. Most notably, the U.S. right has pushed the Wuhan lab leak theory to advance a hawkish stance towards China—with tales of inept Chinese researchers or worse, sinister Chinese bio-weaponeers turning coronaviruses into germ weapons. These assertions are part of a growing China-as-threat narrative peddled by U.S. and European press and officials, and conveniently serve to divert blame from the U.S.’s poor COVID-19 response onto China.
Fox News has brought on Chinese scientist Li-Meng Yan to advance the Wuhan lab leak theory. [Source: cnn.com]
The Wuhan lab leak theory has gained traction in mainstream circles as well. Many pursue the lab leak theory as part of a broader agenda to track down SARS-CoV-2’s origins in the hopes of gaining insights to prevent the next pandemic—even though tracking down disease origins has proven notoriously difficult and despite the fact that we already know the factors that contribute to infectious disease emergence.
Science watchdog groups on the left foreground the lab leak theory to shine a spotlight on the research activities of bio-labs like the Wuhan Institute of Virology. While I am particularly sympathetic to the latter view, the problem with any singular focus on China’s top virology lab—besides lending fodder to hawkish U.S. approaches to China and violence against Asians and Asian Americans—is that it pulls focus from the global scope of these bio-labs and the lab leaks emanating from them.
To be sure, this research has resulted in useful disease treatments. But some aspects are unjustifiably risky; what has been called “gain-of-function” research involves the enhancement and production of more lethal or transmissible forms of viruses and other pathogens.
Scientists, anticipating viral or bacterial mutation, preemptively produce new variants and strains to test treatments (like vaccines) against them. The dangers of this preemptive approach, as critics point out, is that it necessarily entails guess work—scientists bring into existence the very threats they anticipate.
A case in point: U.S. and European researchers have been genetically modifying potentially pandemic influenza strains, namely, H5N1 avian influenza strains—specifically making the strain more transmissible—since at least 2003. These actions, while taken in the name of preventive research, have the potential of creating the very properties that would turn the strain pandemic.
Further, the research that takes place in high containment labs is not only for disease prevention. CAM’s esposé of the CIA attack on Cuba with the African Swine Fever virus is a case in point. Underneath the dark tales spun about China and bioweapons lies a disturbing global trend: even after the 1972 international ban on offensive bioweapons research, the United States and other world powers have continued this research in the name of so-called biodefense against a potential bioweapons attack. The dire implications of such research—which may also leak from labs—is magnified by the fact that this research can entail germ enhancement in the same way as “gain-of-function” health research.
Most notably, the infamous Ames anthrax strain used in the “anthrax attacks” in 2001 derived from research to generate a highly virulent strain that would challenge vaccines; this research was conducted at Fort Detrick, Maryland, the U.S. Army’s premier bioweapons research facility established during World War II. As recently as 2019, the Fort Detrick lab had to be shut down due to lab safety lapses.
Targeting the United States and Europe
The possibility that SARS-CoV-2 came from one of these high containment bio-labs conducting gain-of-function health research and/or bioweapons research is indeed concerning.
Setting aside questions of the likelihood of this scenario, I can understand the impulse to seize the pandemic moment to draw attention to this global research industry vis-à-vis the Wuhan lab. However, China is a relatively small player in the global industry [often on contract with Big Pharma], and hardly an egregiously bad actor—evidence of lax biosafety or risky research exploration into germ enhancement and bioweapons capabilities are certainly no worse than found in the United States.
In my view, the best strategy for addressing the industry is to target its greatest purveyors: the United States and Europe.
Both regions possess a high concentration of these bio-labs where they pursue boundary-pushing research and generate significant lab accidents and other bio-hazards. Beyond Fort Detrick and the numerous lab accidents throughout its long history, the United States houses many other bio-labs such as Dugway Proving Grounds in Utah, which has conducted dangerous “open-air” tests causing illness and death among humans and other animals nearby. Moreover, the United States (along with countries in Europe) continues to propagate high containment labs around the world—they even helped build the Wuhan Institute.
Defunding, reinvesting, accountability
The moment is ripe—particularly amidst campaigns to defund the police and military—to spur change in the germ research field and reinvest in research for health care. Activist scientists and health workers as well as the larger anti-war movement have long worked to chip away at the powerful sectors driving germ research in the United States and Europe: 1) The military/defense industry pours massive amounts of funding into germ research for so-called biodefense, instead of investing in health research; and 2) Big Pharma corporation executives dictate research agendas according to profit motives, and draw on intellectual property and trade regimes to hinder government accountability and public transparency.
Holding these industries accountable—and in their primary locales of the United States and Europe—will go far in addressing worldwide issues of lab safety and militarized germ research. Foregrounding key players in the global industry would, moreover, still leave room for local struggles. Many Chinese scientists, for example, have expressed concernswith the work taking place in high containment labs in their country, including the Wuhan Institute. An international coalition of local struggles would be quite powerful (if recent examples like the Amazon workers strike in Bessemer, Alabama and around the world are any indication). Guided by careful global power analysis, such efforts might truly succeed in transforming the global germ research industry and better tether it to social good, health, and well-being.
*
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.
Gwen D’Arcangelis is a scholar who writes on the socio-political dimensions of science, medicine, and public health. Her newly released book, Bio-Imperialism: Disease, Terror, and the Construction of National Fragility, examines the gendered, raced, and imperial features of U.S. focus on bioterror and germ threats. Gwen can be reached at: [email protected].
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
‘An empire within an empire,’ the Pashtun are essential to understanding the complexities of Afghanistan as a nation-state today. What is the ‘Pashtun universe,’ and why will they always outlast those who try to govern them?
It was bound to happen: the remixed Saigon moment at Kabul airport and the stunning comeback of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, led by Pashtuns, has unleashed across the West a cheap Orientalization avalanche.
The whole of Afghanistan is now ‘threatened’ by the return of the ‘barbarians.’
Once again, Afghan women ‘need to be protected,’ all Afghans ‘need to be rescued,’ ‘terrorists will rebuild’ and Afghanistan may even need to be re-invaded for the sake of ‘civilization.’ All because of those wild tribal Pashtun barbarians.
Imperialist pathologies never die. ‘Barbarian’ yields from the Greek original barbaros – as in someone who could not speak Greek, or spoke it incorrectly.
When faced with the sophisticated Persians, the concept of barbarian evolved. And then the Romans gave it its final contours, encompassing people who could not speak Greek or Latin, those who deployed military skills, were fierce or cruel to their enemies, or came from a non Graeco-Roman culture.
All this eventually coalesced into a toxic Western cultural construct deployed for centuries, the ultimate, pejorative denomination for a warrior-like Other: uncouth, uncivilized, rural, non-urban, prone to violence and cruelty, maybe not a total savage, but close.
As a contrast, Imperial China always referred to various Central Eurasian tribes and peoples as warring, civilized, urban, nomads, agrarian, but never as barbarians.
Pashtun Afghanistan is a much more sophisticated universe than the prevailing reductionism that evokes rural subsistence economy, mud-brick architecture, caravans of nomads, burqas and bearded men in sandals brandishing Kalashnikovs.
So as a tribute to the late, great Norwegian social anthropologist Fredrik Barth, let’s subvert Orientalism by taking an – Orientalist! – magic carpet ride to the twists and turns of the Pashtun world.
It’s all about Turko-Persia
Afghanistan may be approached as southern Central Asia, as western South Asia, or as eastern West Asia.
The fact remains that Afghanistan, historically, is a crucial node of Turko-Persia – as much in culture and language as in geography. Turko-Persia stretches east from Anatolia and the Zagros mountains, along the Iranian plateau, all the way to the Indian plains. This has been no less than the heartland of Persian empires.
Pashtuns have an immensely complex ethno-genesis. There are historians who identify Pashtun tribes in Afghanistan as far back as the Achaemenid empire in 500 BC.
Pashtuns may be descendants of the Hephtalites, which by the way are not the White Huns of Central Asia, as demonstrated by scholar Etienne da la Vaissiere. The Hephtalites defeated the Sassanid empire in the 5th century and occupied vast stretches of Bactria and Transoxiana.
But Pashtuns may also be descendants from the Sakas – nomadic Iranic peoples of the Eurasian steppe. And that, famously, would put them as descendants of the Sogdians and the Scythians.
Herodotus wrote that the Persians called the Scythians Saka, and later Oswald Szemerenyi in his 1980 classic Four Old Iranian Ethnic Names; Scythian-Skudra-Sogdian-Saka showed that Saka was the Persian name for all Scythians. An earlier form, Sakla, suggests historically the conquest of the entire steppe by northern Iranians – literally Scythians.
What’s certain is that Pashtuns have multiple origins; after all, they are a tribal confederation.
Pashtuns have a knack of linking multiple lineages (zai, in Pashto, as in ‘son of’) with tens of millions of people into a single genealogy, right to their – arguably mythic – common ancestor: Qais, a contemporary of Prophet Muhammad.
These lineages merge into larger clans (khel, in Pashto) and lead to tribal confederations, the most important of which are the Durranis, the Ghilzais and the Karlanri, which the British called Pathans. The Pathans are the indigenous inhabitants of the mountains that straddle what is now an artificial Afghanistan–Pakistan border; they only became Pashtuns much later, adopting their language and culture.
The 11th century capital of the Turkish Ghaznavids lay in what would later become territory held by the Ghilzai tribes. This intermingling is explainable because Afghanistan was always the eastern frontier of the Persian and then Turko-Mongol empires.
The large nomad tribal confederations emerged only in the early 13th century, in oases in the southwest Afghan desert, or congregating peasants in the eastern mountains. It’s an array of heterogeneous groups interlinked by a code and value system establishing their social relations: the Pashtunwali.
Pashtunwali rules
Pashtunwali has integrated quite a few elements of Muslim morals, but it’s in contradiction with sharia law in many aspects. French scholar X. de Planhol succinctly described it as “a set of rules that model the customs (adat), character (khoui) in relation to social exigence (raouadj), and thus define ethnic identity (khouyouna).” Pashtunwali regulates individual honor and also regulates a set of sanctions, with death prominently featured.
In the Pashtun world, everything must be decided by a jirga (assembly). They happen at every level – home, village, clan, tribe, whenever necessary. The number of participants varies from a dozen to thousands. I’ve been to a few. It’s a fascinating exercise in direct democracy.
There’s no ‘conductor.’ Results don’t come by vote, but by a consensus that must naturally evolve once there’s no opposition to a decision. Elders are way more influential than youngsters. This is how the Taliban decided their new caretaker government.
As much as the Pashtun code is one of the most meticulous on the planet, Islam has brought to the fore quite a few moral issues, sometimes in contradiction with Pashtunwali. To add to the complexity, there are juridical norms imposed by a hereditary nobility, coming from the Turko-Mongols.
Starting in the 11th century, Afghanistan received an influx of Turk nomads, preceding the 13th century Mongol conquests. At the time, virtually all of Bactria was Turkicized – except for the Pashtuns.
Balkh, the legendary capital of Bactria, which stunned Arab invaders described as Mother of Cities, the richest satrapy of the Persian empire, was the dominant city in the Afghan northern plains for millennia, located north of the Hindu Kush. Those waves of Turkish-speaking nomads were over-spilling from Turkestan, which included the khanates of Bukhara and Samarkand: they merged with the local Persian population, and Dari – which is Farsi (Persian) with a different accent – remained the predominant language.
Peshawar was a completely different story. Historically, Peshawar was closely connected to Kabul because it was its winter capital for centuries (Kabul was an Hindu kingdom well into the 11th century). Afghans lost Peshawar when it fell to the Sikhs in 1834; later it became part of the Raj when the Sikhs were defeated.
Peshawar is the Pashtun Mecca. Pashtun tribes living in the mountain valleys above Peshawar have never in history answered to any government. For them, there’s no border or ID papers: only their rifles.
A key Pashtun characteristic is that they have been living essentially at the margin of great empires. They evolved based on their own norms and had the freedom to build their own system of reference. And that explains why they are so independent.
Pashtuns identify two types of land: Yaghestan (the land of rebels) and Hokumat (the land of government). There may be serious internal social differentiations, but the whole Pashtun social body comes together when it’s a matter of facing external conditions. That explains the fierce fighting spirit against any foreign invader, be it British, Soviet or American.
So we’re talking about extraordinary social cohesion – with a coordinated reaction towards external events. No wonder Pashtuns believe the political structures they develop are superior. History has shown that once neighboring imperial structures started to weaken, Pashtuns ended up forging ‘their’ state.
And don’t forget the Turko-Mongols
Between the 16th and the 17th centuries, Afghanistan was squeezed between three empires: the Uzbeks of lower Central Asia, the Mughals in India, and the Iranian Safavids. The Mughals and the Safavids were fighting for Herat and Kandahar. Pashtuns privileged the Safavids, even though they were Shia. Afghan territory, a natural extension of Iranian mountains and plateaus, facilitated Safavid influence.
This went on until in the early 18th century when Afghan tribes rebelled against declining Safavid power. An independent political entity around the Durrani tribe emerged in 1747, and Ahmad Shah was crowned King of the Afghans in Kandahar, via a loya jirga (grand assembly).
This first Afghan state south of the Hindu Kush was quite homogeneous. The structure was basically Turko-Persian, in fact Turko-Mongolian, much more than based in Pashtun tribal tradition.
Since the late 10th century, every major empire from the borders of northern India to trans-Oxiana, Iran and Anatolia was founded by Turks or Mongols. Some would last centuries – like the Ottoman Turks. Afghanistan was in fact ruled by Turko-Mongols for no less than 750 years, until the Pashtuns formed a state in the mid-18th century.
Yet an Afghan state was definitively established only after the Great Game between the Russian and British empires. That was Afghanistan in the late 19th century, configured as a buffer state between Russian Central Asia and the Raj. The Brits needed it to block the road to India and the sea of Oman to the Russians, who were getting ever closer after they set a protectorate in Bukhara in 1873.
Drawing up the Russo–Afghan and Sino–Afghan borders was not a problem. The real issue was the border with the Raj along the 1893 Durand line, dividing the territory of numerous Pashtun tribes just so imperial Britain could control the main access points to the Indian subcontinent, the Khyber pass and the Quetta corridor. The Durand line was only definitively drawn in 1921. It divides Pashtun lands in two – and was never, and will never, be recognized in Afghanistan as a real border.
So if we had the first Afghan state with a strong Pashtun majority, the second was a colonial invention bearing a complex ethnic mosaic. Before the 1979 Soviet incursion and the 1980s jihad, that accounted for 40 to 55 percent of Pashtuns, 35 to 45 percent to Persian-speaking ethnic groups, and 10 to 15 percent to Turkish-speaking ethnic groups. It hasn’t changed much since.
The creator of modern Afghanistan, ‘Iron Emir’ Abd-ur-Rahman, actually ‘Pashtunized’ northern Turkestan, transplanting sedentary Pashtun populations from the south from the Durrani and Ghilzai tribal confederations, and then encouraging nomads to migrate.
And that’s one of the reasons why the ethnic composition of Afghanistan is extremely tricky, especially in the west and in the north. Everyone is in perpetual movement – alliances included (the Taliban profited from it for their lightening fast surge before arriving in Kabul on 15 August).
What is immutable is that across a structurally unstable nation, Pashtuns consider themselves top of the heap – and the ‘owners’ of the Afghan state. And yet their perpetual intra-ethnic strife always wins over communitarian solidarity. There’s always a huge clash between the Durrani – who in fact took over the state since the mid 18th century – and other Pashtun groups, especially the Ghilzai. The Ghilzais are more egalitarian in spirit and do not accept Durrani hegemony: they just consider them more manipulative.
Mullah Omar, for example, is Ghilzai. But former Afghan President Hamid Karzai is from Sadozai Durrani descent, an impeccable lineage, and later he inherited the leadership of the Popalzai sub-clan.
The Durrani elite supported Karzai in late 2001 because they identified him as their own return to power after the socialist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), civil war and Taliban interregnum. Other tribes were deeply disorganized and could not agree on anything. The only other possible option would have been Massoud the Tajik, a true nationalist, and respected even by Pashtuns. But he was assassinated on 9 September, 2001.
Down with the nation-state
Pashtuns have a natural aversion to the Westphalian notion of the nation-state. After all, they see themselves as an empire within the empire. Centralized power usually tries to neutralize them by bribery built as a system of government (that was the modus operandi during the Karzai years).
Afghan political life, in practice, is set in motion by factions: sub-tribes, Islamic coalitions (what the Taliban de facto forged to come back to power), and regional groups, usually led by warlords since the 1980s jihad. Add to it religious conflict, with hegemonic Sunnism, the Shiism of the Hazaras and the Ismailism of the Pamiri Tajiks always clashing.
In Afghanistan, Islam is as much ideology (the 2004 constitution recognizes an Islamic Republic of Afghanistan) as religion. It’s the stepping stone of Afghan identity, Pashtun or not. Every tribal member adheres wholeheartedly to Islam, even when there are glaring differences between sharia and pashtunwali. Afghans as a whole may be defined as the quintessential Natural Born Muslims.
The ‘historic’ 1990s Taliban – who now compose the majority of the interim government – are Pashtun tribals who speak Pashto and so affirm their identity, much more than emphasizing being member of a particular tribe. What is unshakeable for these men issued from rural conservatism is their suspicion of the city – especially Kabul and its modernists – and the Pashtun superiority complex in relation to other ethnic groups.
Even as the NATO-occupied Karzai years were a disaster, the Taliban were also in crisis and in internal disarray most of the time. Their ideology could be accused of being more Pakistani than Afghan: after all, the Taliban as a movement was born in Pakistani madrassas, and the leadership all these years was based in Balochistan.
Taliban 2.0 may suggest they are venturing beyond tribal identity, and the perennial Durrani–Ghilzai confrontation is being pushed to the background. But the bitter negotiations for the interim government seem to spell otherwise, opposing the Doha ‘moderates,’ some of them Durrani, some Ghilzai, to the ‘warrior’ Haqqanis, who are Karlanri.
In Afghanistan, prior to the latest horrendous four decades of war, the center of the rural political order revolved around landowning khans. As a rule, they were allies of the state. But then, starting with the 1980s jihad, this old elite was smashed by young, self-made military commanders who rapidly built their own political bases. The new generation, who fought NATO on the ground, now also expects to have a future in the new Kabul arrangement. As far as state building goes, this will be extremely tricky to negotiate.
So the big question now is how the old Pashtun breed, having learned the lessons of their dismal governing experience in 1996-2001, will be able to circumvent the inherent weakness of every Afghan central government. The periphery tribal system is bound to remain very strong, with nearly autonomous territories controlled by warlords that are not tribal chiefs, but in fact competitors for regional power and sources of income that should be feeding the state coffers.
And here is the ultimate challenge for these Pashtun warriors: to forge an Islamic system where the center can hold. The dire alternative, to paraphrase Yeats, will be mere anarchy loosed upon the Afghan world.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
This article was originally published on The Cradle.
Pepe Escobar,born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
With the slogan “No poor people in a wealthy country”, Pedro Castillo, a poor, indigenous peasant farmer, elementary school teacher, and union leader, became president of Peru on July 28. Castillo was the candidate of Peru Libre (Free Peru), a Marxist-Leninist party. Castillo’s victory is unprecedented in Peru’s 200-year history. As he emphasized in his inaugural speech, “It is the first time that this country will be governed by a peasant.” Professor Cecilia Méndez, a Peruvian historian at the University of California-Santa Barbara, adds: “There are no cases of a person unrelated to the professional, military or economic elites [of Peru] who reaches the presidency.”
Castillo has never held political office and is known mainly for the teachers’ strike he led in 2017. He won the election by a razor-thin margin of 44,000 votes (less than 1%), beating his rich and powerful right-wing opponent, Keiko Fujimori, the epitome of “entrenched privilege.” Fujimori is the daughter of former President Alberto Fujimori (1990-2000), a disgraced dictator who is serving a 25-year jail sentence for corruption, kidnapping, and murder committed by death squads under his command. His regime also sterilized more than 270,000 women, most of them Indigenous. Keiko Fujimori disputed the July election results, claiming fraud, but could provide no evidence. After a six-week investigation, the election authorities rejected her complaint.
Like her father, Keiko is tainted by corruption and is being prosecuted for money laundering and running a criminal organization. If convicted, she also faces a long prison sentence. Becoming president would have given her respite from prosecution for five years.
Peruvian journalist and sociologist Francesca Emanuele tells me that Castillo’s election is a result of the crisis of neoliberalism in Peru. Emanuele is a columnist for Wayka, a progressive publication in Peru and was an observer of Peru’s election. She has also been a correspondent for Telesur. Emanuele points out that the crisis of neoliberalismis a regional phenomenon: the massive inequality, poverty and concentration of wealth produced by this economic model are driving the two leading neoliberal states of Latin America, Chile, and Peru, to the left. Leftist parties are currently writing a new progressive constitution for Chile.
Although Peru is the world’s second-largest copper producer, one-third of its population lives in poverty and has little access to health and education services. The richest fifth takes half the country’s income and the poorest fifth gets less than 5%. The wealthy tend to be concentrated in coastal cities such as the capital, Lima, while rural areas and northern regions such as Cajamarca (where Castillo comes from) wallow in poverty. In San Luis de Puna, Castillo’s village, 40% of the children are “chronically malnourished.”
Neoliberalism has given rise to intersecting crises in Peru and created a perfect storm of political destabilization, discrediting the country’s elite and opening the way for Castillo. As Emanuele explains, “Peru is in deep economic and health crises and has been dragging itself through a state of political instability for decades.” The fourth crisis is that of constant corruption scandals that have ensnared not only the twoFujimoris, but all presidents ruling Peru since 1985, two-thirds of Congress representatives (who have been indicted), and judicial officials. Alan Garcia, one former chief executive, committed suicide when faced with arrest.
Peru has had five presidents in the past five years and, in November 2020, three in one week. Combine all this with the COVID-19 pandemic, and the result is disastrous. Peru has the highest per-capita death rate globally from the coronavirus, partly due to neoliberalism’s failure to build an adequate health system. More than a million Peruvians out of a population of 32 million have been infected with COVID-19, and about 50,000 have died from it. In 2020, the economycontracted by an astounding 11.6% as the virus raged, and 6.7 million people lost their jobs.
Instead of ensuring fair public distribution of vaccines for COVID, government officials created another major scandal in March 2021 by jumping the queue to get the vaccines for themselves. About 500 people did this, using their influence as former presidents, vice-presidents, ministers, and vice-ministers, thereby eliciting public outrage.
Castillo started his election campaign by calling for the nationalization of mining companies and gas corporations in Peru. Later, he changed his stance to increasing taxes on the companies, regulating them (partly to ensure strict environmental standards), and renegotiating their contracts to fund expanded health and education facilities for the poor. He also plans to hold a constituent assembly to replace ex-PresidentFujimori’s dictatorial Peruvian constitution with one that empowers the poor and creates a political basis for implementing progressive policies.
How much of the neoliberal model can Castillo change? His objectives don’t look very radical, but his approach still may not work, warns Alexander Main, Director of International Policy at the Washington D.C.-based Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
“Currently, it appears likely that Castillo will choose, at least initially, to pursue a relatively moderate progressive agenda to try to ensure hispolitical survival,” says Main. “Given the widespread rejection of politics as usual in Peru, this strategy could end up backfiring.
“The most likely scenario for Peru is to see a progressive shift away from neoliberal agendas rather than the sort of dramatic ruptures with policy paradigms that were observed in the first decade of the 21st century in countries like Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador,” adds Main. “A partial re-orientation of social and economic agendas such as what was seen in Brazil under Workers Party administrations seems more likely.”
Castillo’s tempering of his radicalism is also partly explained by thefact that the right-wing opposition has a majority in the Peruvian Congress. For Main this means that “it remains to be seen whether Castillo will be able to effectively govern the country or even stay in power for very long.”
Main doesn’t think Castillo will be able to attain his constituent assembly partly because of the opposition of elites who control Peru’s economy “and seem prepared to carry out economic destabilization tactics” against their new president. Emanuele also warns of this economic danger by pointing out how concentrated corporate power is in Peru, which is “plagued by both monopolies and oligopolies.” One brand, Backus, controls 99% of beer sales, the Intercop company owns 83% of all pharmacies, and EL Comercio controls 78% of the printmedia (20 newspapers and magazines).
Castillo wants to regulate large corporations in Peru, but according to Emanuele, these companies “could take revenge and manipulate prices if Castillo implements measures to limit their oligopolies. A price war induced by these companies could lead to an economic crisis, people in the streets, instability and a possible overthrow of the government.”
Main is optimistic that Castillo can most likely make a significant difference, in the foreign policy arena: “Peru and Chile could, for thefirst time, play a proactive role in reviving the regional integration efforts that were pursued at the height of the ‘pink tide’ period [in the late 2000s and early 2010s] and developing a common front with other left governments in opposing much of the U.S. political, military and economic agenda in Latin America.”
Such a policy direction would include withdrawing Peru from the sinister Lima Group, the alliance of right-wing Latin American statesand Canada, which is aimed at overthrowing and undermining leftist governments in the region, especially that of Venezuela. The Lima Group is comprised of10 countries including Colombia, Brazil, Costa Rica, and Paraguay. Castillo has pledged to remove Peru from the Lima Group.
This would be a welcome setback for Canada’s destructive policy in Latin America, as would Castillo’s plans to regulate Canadian mining companies in Peru, which are the third-largest investors in the sector after China and Britain. The main companies are Barrick Gold, Teck, Pan American Silver, Iberian Minerals, Fortuna, and Málaga. Canadianmining companies are notorious for damaging communities and the environment all over the world, and they have a bad reputation in Peru as well. In a story in the June issue of Canadian Dimension magazine, Owen Schalk noted that “Barrick Gold’s Lagunas Norte project (which it sold to a Singaporean company earlier this year) faced significant criticism for its atrocious environmental and labour practices in Peru.” The company had frequent conflicts with the local people about waterpollution and with their own workers on labour rights. Barrick was also sued by the people of El Sauco, Quiruvilca, “who wanted the company to pay indemnifications for its pollution of nearby water sources.”
Castillo’s determination to make mining companies pay more and meet high environmental standards will most likely bring him into conflict with both the Canadian and U.S. governments, which will probably collaborate with the discredited Peruvian elite to try to overthrow him. Whether Castillo succeeds or not in the long run, his election hasalready shown the utter failure of neoliberalism in Peru and highlighted this tendency for the region as well. This failure is so massive that it has drowned the economic, political, and health systems of Peru in a cesspool of corruption. If Castillo is not allowed to save Peru, it is unlikely that anyone else can.
*
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 Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Monitor.
Asad Ismi is an award-winning writer and radio documentary-maker. He covers international politics for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Monitor (CCPA Monitor), Canada’s biggest leftist magazine (by circulation) where this article was originally published. Asad has written on the politics of 70 countries and is a regular contributer to Global Research. For his publications visit www.asadismi.info.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
Whenever we hear the word “sustainable” we would be well-advised to take a critical look behind the nice sounding words. In the case of the globalist Agenda 2030 with its 17 sustainable goals by 2030, the one for creating a “sustainable agriculture”, when looked at closely, will destroy a huge part of EU agriculture production and drive already rising global prices for food far higher. The EU Commission calls their Green Deal for food the cute title, “Farm to Fork.” It is being backed by Klaus Schwab’s omnipresent World Economic Forum and their Great Reset.
Keep in mind that sustainable as defined by the UN and the Davos World Economic Forum means achieving Zero Carbon emissions by 2050.
Yet there is no scientific study independently proving that CO2 is endangering our planet by creating global warming. Only myriads of dubious, well-funded computer models.
The harmless gas is essential to all human, animal and all plant life. Now the European Union Commission is pushing a top-down radical agenda on the agriculture heart of the world’s second most important food producer as part of its ill-conceived EU Green Deal. If implemented as is likely, it will cause drastic reduction in crop outputs, a severe reduction in meat protein and, perhaps most dangerous, an overturning of current EU law regulating new gene-edited crops, or GMO.2. That will have global consequences.
Farm to Fork…
In May 2020 the EU Commission released its Farm to Fork Strategy. The official Brussels rhetoric makes it sound like a food nirvana is coming. They state, “The Farm to Fork Strategy is at the heart of the European Green Deal, aiming to make food systems fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly.” Wow, that sounds super.
They then get to the real agenda:
“We need to redesign our food systems which today account for nearly one-third of global GHG (Green House Gas) emissions, consume large amounts of natural resources, result in biodiversity loss and negative health impacts…”
This is a clever way of demonizing farmers and our food production as CO2 violators.
The solution?
“New technologies and scientific discoveries, combined with increasing public awareness and demand for sustainable food, will benefit all stakeholders.”
What new technologies will be explained.
How do the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels plan to “redesign our food systems” to eliminate one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050?
By forcing farmers to go bankrupt by demanding new costly inputs to production and radical new genetic manipulated patented plants with unproven safety. Above all they plan to lift the current de facto ban on gene-edited plant cultivation. For those who do not know, it is the same unproven risky technology used in the COVID-19 vaccines of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA gene-edited vaccines using CRISPR.
EU Commissioner for Agriculture, Janusz Wojciechowski, says of the Farm to Fork Green Agenda, “Farmers will need to radically transform their production methods and make the best use of technological, digital, and space-based solutions to usher in the new agricultural transition.” So they plan a radical transformation. Already this sounds ominous.
To raise the share of pesticide-free organic farming to 25% of the EU total at the same time reducing chemical pesticide use by 30% by 2030 sounds great to the uninformed. Like the claims of Monsanto and the GMO industry that their GMO crops reduce need for pesticides, it is a lie. The EU is using this as bait to introduce a radical change in strict current EU rules for allowing approval of gene-edited plants and animals into agriculture. In their May 2020 document on Farm to Fork Green Deal, the EU states that the Commission is “carrying out a study which will look at the potential of new genomic techniques to improve sustainability along the food supply chain.” This means gene-editing, CRISPR/Cas9 genetic modification.
‘New Genomic Techniques’
In April this year, the EU Commission released that study on New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). NGTs are producing gene-edited plants and even animals.
The report claims that NGTs, “techniques to alter the genome of an organism, have the potential to contribute to a more sustainable food system as part of the objectives of the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy.” The report calls for a “public debate” to change the strict EU laws on approval of GMO crops that require extensive testing and labelling of GMO crops.
That law from 2001 has successfully restricted use of GMO across the EU in contrast with the USA where unregulated GMOs are dominant for key crops. In 2018 the European Court of Justice, the EU court, ruled that Gene-edited crops should be subject to the same stringent regulations as first-generation genetically modified (GMO) organisms. The key to the Davos and EU Farm to Fork Agenda is a radical reduction in pesticides to be replaced by gene-edited crops allegedly able to replace pesticides.
The EU Commission, in cahoots with Bayer-Monsanto and others of the GMO agribusiness lobby, are working hard to remove that court restriction. Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, Stella Kyriakides, said of their April EU study, “The study we publish today concludes that New Genomic Techniques can promote the sustainability of agricultural production, in line with the objectives of our Farm to Fork Strategy.” New Genomic Techniques is the euphemism for gene-edited crops.
EU Vice President responsible for the Green Deal, Franz Timmermans, has openly admitted the lure of promising huge cuts in pesticides, implying it will come from abolishing restrictions on gene-editing. He told a recent EU Green Week conference that the EU aims to give farmers the tools to adopt precision agriculture and to leverage scientific discoveries to optimize seeds: “That’s how we limit our dependency on pesticides.”
Precision agriculture and scientific discoveries to optimize seeds is Brussels doublespeak for massive introduction of unregulated gene-editing. He continued, “Going to ecological farming doesn’t mean we all have to munch on grass and live in caves, we need to use the latest technology to get us there.” That means gene-editing CRISPR.
Translated into plain English, the heart of Farm to Fork is the planned overturning of the 2018 ECJ court ruling that treats CRISPR gene-edited plants or animals under the same strict “precautionary principle” rules for GMO.
With no restrictions, gene-editing companies like Bayer-Monsanto will be free to introduce experimental and unproven genetically altered plants and animals into our diet with no labelling.
Such a gene-edit-free regime already exists in the USA where the USDA and regulators allow CRISPR gene-edited soy oil, mushrooms that don’t brown, wheat with more fiber, better-producing tomatoes, herbicide-tolerant canola and rice that doesn’t absorb soil pollution as it grows. Gene-edited US projects on fish and animals include such dubious ones as cows that only have male calves, using CRISPR; Pigs that don’t need castration; hornless dairy cows and growth-enhanced catfish using CRISPR to develop catfish with more muscle cells. It makes the mouth water…
CRISPR Risks Huge, Rewards Not
The major lobbying push to remove EU regulations on gene-edited crops or animals is coming from Bayer-Monsanto and the other GMO agribusiness giants including Syngenta, BASF, and DowDupont’s Corteva.
In November 2020 Liam Condon, the President of Bayer-Monsanto crop science division told a Bayer Future of Farming conference, that Bayer is lobbying “very strongly” to change the EU’s GMO regulations to exempt gene editing. Condon said, “[We are] promoting very strongly that regulations should catch up with technology and allow this technology to be used, [not only] for the benefit of Europeans, but also for the benefit of others all over the world who look to Europe for regulations.” Condon called gene editing and CRISPR technology an “amazing breakthrough” that would allow agriculture to be more sustainable. What he omitted was that deregulating gene-edited crops will allow Bayer-Monsanto and other major GMO companies to charge farmers for their patented “sustainable” seeds.
Gene-editing of plants or animals is not at all risk-free as claimed. The technology is not at all precise or controlled and often has unpredicted outcomes such as unintended genetic alteration, even the inadvertent addition of foreign DNA from other species, or even entire foreign genes, into the genome of gene-edited organisms.
This is still a new experimental technology. Its advocates such as Bayer-Monsanto claim that gene editing of plants is precise. Yet investigation finds that far from proven. Dr. Allison K Wilson of The Bioscience Resource Project, states, “plant gene editing methods are also prone to introducing UTs (Unintended Traits or genetic damage)…new evidence from both animals and plants indicates that gene editing itself can result in unintended mutations at or near the target site. These include the insertion of vector, bacterial, and other superfluous DNA, and the unintended introduction of large DNA deletions and rearrangements.”
These are not minor flaws that can be ignored. Wilson concludes, “plant gene editing outcomes are imprecise and unpredictable, and that, depending on the combination of techniques used, gene editing can be highly mutagenic. While in theory it might someday be possible to create a GM crop that meets the broad requirements of sustainable agriculture, in practice this seems highly unlikely to ever happen.”
According to an analysis of the EU Farm to Fork strategy by Global Ag Media, “the effect of these strategies will be an unprecedented reduction of EU production capacity and of its farmers’ income. All sectors show declines in production of 5% to 15%, with the livestock sectors being the most heavily impacted… Meanwhile, whatever the scenario, production prices show a net increase of around 10% with a negative impact for most farmers’ incomes. ” The EU farmers’ union, Copa-Cogeca warns the policy will result in an unprecedented reduction in agriculture capacity. But that’s the real intent of “sustainable agriculture.”
Davos and EU Farm to Fork
The radical EU Farm to Form Green agenda finds its echo in the Davos World Economic Forum which already in 2014 promoted what it called, “Enabling Trade: From Farm to Fork.”
A January 2018 WEF report states, “Gene-editing technologies such as CRISPR-Cas could provide a way to achieve multi-trait improvements, producing a step change in productivity while improving the drought resistance and nutritional content of food. “ This was done together with McKinsey & Co as part of the WEF Food Security and Agriculture Initiatives and their Great Reset. WEF Forum Partners include Bayer, Syngenta, BASF. According to the WEF website, “The World Economic Forum at its Annual Meeting in Davos in January 2020 brought together leaders from industry and business with Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans to explore how to catalyze the European Green Deal.” Bayer’s Liam Condon was also there as was the head of Syngenta and BASF.
If the EU agriculture sector is brought into the gene-edited GMO regime and its production radically reduced as a consequence, it will drive ever greater food shortages around the world. This is the Davos plan along with their COVID-19 eugenics Great Reset agenda. Calling it Farm to Fork makes it sound harmless. It clearly is not.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published.
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
Featured image is from NEO
Seeds of Destruction: Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation
Author Name: F. William Engdahl
ISBN Number: 978-0-937147-2-2
Year: 2007
Pages: 341 pages with complete index
List Price: $25.95
Special Price: $18.00
This skilfully researched book focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread. “Control the food and you control the people.”
This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO. Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms.
The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.
The discovery of an unmarked children’s graveyard on the territory of Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc First Nation has raised awareness about a massive crime against Indigenous people, as well as profound doubts about the issues of our collective past.
Gibraltar (34,000 inhabitants) started vaccination in December 2020 when the health agency counted only 1040 confirmed cases and 5 deaths attributed to covid19 in this country.
The whole world is under the power of an evil spell. The specters of the past are rapidly converging across the globe and hurling us towards a true prison planet where authoritarian rule is commonplace.
Fully understanding significant world events as they happened yesterday and unfold today invariably requires an understanding of the long arc of history; that is, knowledge about how the human world really works.
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.
A press release from the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference held in late July 2021 found a direct connection between the so-called Covid-19 virus and subsequent cognitive deficits, Alzheimer disease pathology and symptoms.
Hospital nurse whistleblowers are reporting that it is mostly the vaccinated, not the unvaccinated who are going to the hospital; and, their symptoms are not the symptoms of respiratory Covid-19 patients.
The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 26,041 fatalities, and 2,448,362 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.
Pax Americana is actually The Eternal Return of the Living Dead. “Pax” was never in order; War Inc. rules. The end of WWII led directly to the Cold War. The unipolar moment was an arc from the First Gulf War to the bombing of Yugoslavia.
Today in La Spezia the Minister of Defense Lorenzo Guerini inaugurates SeaFuture 2021, the military-naval exhibition sponsored by the main war industries. In the lead Fincantieri (“strategic sponsor”), Leonardo (“platinum sponsor”) and Mbda (European joint venture in which Leonardo has 25%) which participates as “gold sponsor”.
In 1996, Dr. Gary Nullinterviewed the late Nobel Laureate Dr. Kary B. Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test. He stated that no infection or illness can be accurately diagnosed with PCR. He also discussed his thoughts regarding Dr. Fauci and the scientific and medical establishments.
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).
Several studies over the last year have shown how the adverse effects of the COVID pandemic and school closures on the education of children in India. The Annual status of Education Report 2020 (ASER) highlighted the limited access to online education for both rural and urban children, with poor access to smartphones.
There was poor access to other learning materials as well, particularly in the children of first generation learners, with only 23% having access to these materials as compared to 49% of other children.
So also the SCHOOLS study, by Jean Dreze and Reetika Khera, found only 31% of children studying regularly online in cities, and 15% in villages.
The UNICEF rapid assessment of learning during school closures in the context of COVID also showed the poor penetration of digital learning: many students did not have access to mobile phones. Even where students had access to devices, the awareness on their use for remote learning was low. 40 % of respondents did not use any form of remote learning in 6 months.
This lack of access to digital learning and other resources contributed to other dismal findings. Most studies have shown actual regression in learning levels, not just a failure to advance in learning as expected each year. Even prior to the pandemic, primary school children have low levels of learning – for example Std 4 children fail to read simple sentence or do simple sums. This has been exacerbated by the pandemic. 60-70% of children who are now in standard 5, were in year 3 when the lockdown began and are likely to be at Y1/ Y2 levels of education.
Experts have given various suggestions as how to overcome this learning loss. All are agreed that if teachers merely teach the syllabus of the class in which the child is placed, the child will not be able to learn. Nor is this a matter of going over the previous year’s syllabus. The child will be unable to cope, and this will lead to dropouts. The child also internalises his failures. A young girl of about 10 who was selling flowers house to house in Tamil Nadu, said sadly that before the lockdown she could read English, but that she had forgotten it. She did not plan to go back to school as she felt she could not study. She is not aware that this is not her personal deficiency; it is a result of a systemic failure to provide her educational support.
How do teachers now manage the classrooms? They face a situation where learning levels in foundational aspects of language and maths now vary widely in children of the same age group. This is where some of the skills in teaching children with disabilities play a vital role.
In preparing schools for inclusive education teachers are taught to make individual education plans and teach the child at his own level. They learn to skills of managing classes with learners at varying levels of learning. This training will help the teacher manage his entire class. Classroom diversity is often considered in relation to demography – gender, linguistic, caste or socioeconomic groups, but diversity is also that of disability, interests, abilities learning levels and learning styles,. Inclusive education is about making the school environment responsive to these varying needs.
Training in inclusive education helps the teacher assess the child’s strengths and plan teaching based on his / her strengths. Learning how to make an individual education plan will have a positive impact on the learning of all children with and without disabilities. It is not just children with disabilities who need different teaching techniques because of visual or hearing or physical impairments.
Children without disabilities too have different learning styles- visual/ auditory/ print/ kinaesthetic etc. If a teacher knows how to teach a child with visual impairment, he will be able to help a child whose learning style is more auditory. Many of us who have gone into higher education may have reflected on our own learning styles as compared to our colleagues- do we prefer to learn alone or in groups? Do we learn better from a text book or from a lecture? Do we discuss things with our peers or write out answers? We may have developed this insight on our own learning styles only at a higher level of education. The teacher trained in inclusive education is able to assess the learning style of his students and cater to these. Teachers learn to develop lesson plans with a combination of teaching styles. They learn to engage the entire class using visual, storytelling and activities, which incorporate the most common learning styles (auditory, visual and kinaesthetic). This also creates a welcoming, friendly classroom atmosphere which is not threatening or discouraging. The classroom becomes more participatory, includes group activities and the purpose or relevance of the lesson is more clear to the students.
Other skills in inclusive education include different methods in assessment, with flexibility in answering or demonstrating knowledge. It builds from the known to the unknown, also based on the child’s home or local environment.
The government of Tripura state, India, initiated a programme, Saksham Tripura at the beginning of 2020, to improve the education of children in the state, including children with disabilities.
Though of course, the pandemic caused much delay in implementation, mainstream teachers in over 400 government schools are being trained in various pedagogical skill for the support of children with disabilities in inclusive education. This will stand the teachers in good stead as schools reopen and they are faced with such an unexpected diversity in the classroom of children at different levels of learning. This approach will benefit all the children in the state. It is an approach which deserves larger study, replication and implementation.
*
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.
September 30, 2021 has been declared by the Canadian Government as The National Day for Truth and Reconciliation,
This Global Research News Hour (GNNH) report hosted by Michael Welch on the “undocumented deaths’ of First Nations Children was first published on June 20, 2021
***
“We had a knowing in our community that we were able to verify. To our knowledge, these missing children are undocumented deaths….Some were as young as three years old.” – Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc First NationKukpi7 (Chief) Rosanne Casimir, May 27, 2021[1]
The discovery of an unmarked children’s graveyard on the territory of Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc First Nation has raised awareness about a massive crime against Indigenous people, as well as profound doubts about the issues of our collective past.[2]
In total, 215 small bodies believed to be attendees of an Indian residential school located in the city of Kamloops in the Canadian province of British Columbia. This finding was sadly not much of a surprise.[3]
The Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada focused on Canada’s Residential Schools: Missing Children and Unmarked Burials. Fully 3,200 deaths were identified on the Register of Confirmed Deaths of Named Residential School Students and the Register of Confirmed Deaths of Unnamed Residential School Students. It identified a high rate of death among First Nations children in residential schools versus their white counterparts. It also said that failure to establish and enforce adequate standards combined with inadequate financing contributed to the high layers of death. Plenty of students and parents of students are to credit for the findings.[4]
Still, viewing an actual site of concealed carnage hit home for far too many in the Native community. Using the technology of ground penetrating radar, other such grim discoveries will no doubt reveal themselves.
But in the immediate aftermath, the citizens of Canada have to adjust to some difficult questions. How fundamentally did we violate the rights of the peoples of this land before we came here? Was it a full blown genocide? Does the same racism that existed at that time still present itself in different forms and with comparable results?
With just days before we mark National Indigenous People’s Day, the Global Research News Hour attempts to pull aside the curtain concealing a collective menace no one wishes to see, confront the beast, and hopefully involve Indigenous people and settlers righting their relationship and finding a respectful path forward.
In our first half hour, we are joined by Professor of Native Studies Niigaan Sinclair who lays out the argument for referring to residential school legacy in Canada as indeed being a genocide. We next speak to Professor of Political Science David Macdouglas about the origin of these schools and whether they came back in other institutional forms. In our second half hour we speak with Kevin Annett, a man who blew the whistle on residential school abuses and death nearly 3 decades ago, and try to ascertain what aspects of it are concealed even today. Finally, researcher Richard Sanders shares his understanding of how a fictive vision helped conceal the atrocity of the events at these residential schools for over a century.
For listeners with affects from residential schools triggered by the subject matter, you can access emotional and crisis referral support by calling the 24-hour national crisis line: 1 866 925 4419
Niigaanwewidam James Sinclair is Anishinaabe and an associate Professor in Native studies at the University of Manitoba. He is a regular commentator on Indigenous issues for CTV, CBC, APTN and The Guardian. He is also a regular columnist for the Winnipeg Free Press. He is also the son of TRC chair Murray Sinclair.
David Macdonald is a Political Science professor at the University of Guelph. He focuses on Comparative Indigenous Politics in Canada, Aotearoa New Zealand, United States. He has worked in the areas of International Relations, American foreign policy, Holocaust and genocide studies, and critical race theory. He is author of the book The Sleeping Giant Awakens: Genocide, Indian Residential Schools, and the Challenge of Conciliation.
Kevin Annett was a former clergyman of the United Church of Canada. He heard multiple stories of abuses in residential schools and reported it resulting in his dismissal. He has made the movie Unrepentant: Kevin Annett and Canada’s Genocide and authored the book Murder by Decree. He has since co-founded International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State.
CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.
WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.
Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.
CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am.
Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.
Tk’emlúps te Secwépemc press release (May 27, 2021); tkemlups.ca/wp-content/uploads/05-May-27-2021-TteS-MEDIA-RELEASE.pdf
ibid
ibid
Canada’s Residential Schools: Missing Children and Unmarked Burials The Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Volume 4 (2015), pg 1,2, Published for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission by McGill-Queen’s University Press Montreal & Kingston • London • Chicago; ehprnh2mwo3.exactdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Volume_4_Missing_Children_English_Web.pdf
September 30th, 2021 by The International Tribunal for the Disappeared 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.
.
.
***
.
.
.
September 30, 2021 is the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, declared by the Government of Canada:
“The day honours the lost children and Survivors of residential schools, their families and communities. Public commemoration of the tragic and painful history and ongoing impacts of residential schools is a vital component of the reconciliation process.
Below is the Real Report by The International Tribunal for the Disappeared of Canada (ITDC) which confronts The official Truth and Reconciliation Narrative.
First posted on GR on May 31, 2021.
Censorship of this report at different levels of government, not to mention the Canadian Media and well as the online search engines.. Google has removed this article from search results.
To the many tens of thousands of children who died while in the internment and death camps falsely called “Indian residential schools”; To those men and women who have fought against impossible odds to recover the memory of those children and the truth of how they died, and bring to justice who and what is responsible; And to those who suffer and die today at the hands of the same criminal system. “Earth, cover not their blood”
And in Acknowledgment
Of the heroic efforts of three ground breaking citizen-based Inquiries into Genocide in Canada: The Truth Commission into Genocide in Canada (1998), The Friends and Relatives of the Disappeared (2005) and The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (2010); and of Rev. Kevin D. Annett, who has fathered and led these movements from the beginning at enormous personal risk and sacrifice. What Canada and all survivors owe to him is incalculable.*
And of seven of the fallen aboriginal leaders of this movement, who died of probable foul play after naming the names of killers of children and leading protests or occupations at the Roman Catholic, Anglican and United Churches of Canada:
Virginia Baptiste, died suddenly January 29, 2004 of unstated causes while in hospital
Louis Daniels, died suddenly February 4, 2006 of unstated causes while in hospital
Harriett Nahanee, died February 24, 2007 shortly after her release from prison
Johnny “Bingo” Dawson, died December 6, 2009 after a police beating
William Arnold Combes, died February 26, 2011 after a lethal injection in St. Paul’s Hospital
Ricky Lavallee, died January 23, 2012 after severe blows to the head and chest
Harry Wilson, died April 4, 2013 of unknown causes
*We urge the public to read this report alongside Kevin Annett’s latest book “Unrelenting: Between Sodom and Zion” (Amazon, 2016) which gives a stirring personal account of the two decade history of this movement. To order: https://www.createspace.com/6052421 . Also see www.itccs.org & www.KevinAnnett.com.
Preamble
This report was prompted by the enormous miscarriage of justice engineered by the government and churches of Canada known as the “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” (TRC). It is written as a corrective response to that Commission’s unlawful and deceptive efforts to conceal the extent and nature of deliberate Genocide in Canada by church and state over nearly two centuries.
This report is issued by The International Tribunal for the Disappeared of Canada (ITDC), an international coalition of jurists and human rights groups. The ITDC was formed in December, 2015 to investigate the disappearance of people in Canada and prosecute those responsible. The Tribunal arose because of continued efforts by the Canadian government to obstruct and subvert justice by concealing and falsifying the truth of the genocide of native people in Canada, both past and present.
What you will read in these pages is the most definitive independent account of that genocide ever published in Canada. It encompasses the work of researchers, activists and eyewitnesses spanning over twenty years, and is based on verifiable documented evidence that was deliberately suppressed, censored or destroyed by the Canadian government’s TRC between 2008 and 2015.
A genuine, non-governmental Inquiry has been operating in Canada since February of 1998: The Truth Commission into Genocide in Canada (TCGC) and its subsequent offshoots. As a grassroots, self- supporting network of native and non-native people, this movement has struggled against enormous odds to document and make public the true and uncensored story of the genocidal massacre known as the Indian residential school system. The TRC was deliberately established by church and state in response to the TCGC’s independent inquiry and public protests, in order to sabotage and defuse the tremendous impact this movement has had since the spring of 1998.
This current ITDC report is based on its own original research as well as the discoveries and work of the TCGC and other independent inquiries into the Canadian Holocaust. The purpose of this report is to pull back the false narrative of genocide in Canada constructed by the governmental TRC and provide a true account of the greatest crime in Canadian history.
This report is a precious archival resource that will be used as the basis for further legal and political action; not only against individual perpetrators of this crime against humanity, but the system of power as well as the institutions that slaughtered entire nations and continue to do so.
In that regard, it was deemed appropriate to publish this report on the fifteenth anniversary of the issuing by the TCGC of the first independent study into crimes in Indian residential schools, “Hidden from History: The Canadian Holocaust” by Rev. Kevin Annett. Long before the TRC and other state- sponsored efforts to control and “spin” the truth, this single work began the process of shedding light on legions of missing children and giving countless survivors a voice.
The authors have composed this report for future generations of the peoples of Canada, as a first step away from a murderous legacy that is still destroying them. Canadians must know of the crime in which they are expected to live, fund and collude, if there is any hope for them to one day repudiate that system and build a new and just federation of equal nations. For “Whoever fails to understand and embrace their own past is doomed to repeat it”.
March 1, 2016 – Toronto and Brussels
*
A Critique of the “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission: An Obstruction of Justice and Truth from Start to Finish
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission … shall not hold formal hearings, nor act as a public inquiry, nor conduct a formal legal process; shall not possess subpoena powers, and does not have powers to compel attendance or participation in any of its activities or events … shall not make any findings or express any conclusion or recommendation regarding the misconduct of any person or the possible civil or criminal liability of any person or organization … shall not name names in their events, activities, public statements, report or recommendations, or make use of personal information or of statements made which identify a person … The Commissioners shall not record the names of persons so identified. – From Section Two, “Establishment, Powers, Duties and Procedures of the Commission”, Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Ottawa, 2008
I saw lots of free food and fancy suits and rock bands at the Winnipeg TRC, but they didn’t have the money to pay our way down from our reserve to tell our story. What’s worse, when we tried to get up at the mike and tell about all the kids we buried at residential school we were told we couldn’t and the mike was turned off. That (TRC Chair) Murray Sinclair even laughed in our face, and he said, “Oh no, it’s those loonies from Sandy Bay again!” – Ernie White, residential school survivor, 2011
By definition, no regime suspected of committing crimes against any people within their national boundaries may credibly undertake an investigation of those crimes. Any legitimate inquiry and any legal actions arising from it must occur through independent, neutral bodies from outside that nation. Such independent bodies must be recognized by the international community and be allowed to operate freely and conduct their investigations within that nation without interference or influencing of any kind. – Statement by Rudy James, Field Secretary for the International Human Rights Association of American Minorities (IHRAAM) at the inauguration of its Tribunal into Canadian Indian Residential Schools, June 12, 1998, Vancouver
Canada’s “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” (TRC) was a rapid in-house response by church and state designed to present their own self-serving narrative of their Indian residential schools crimes. It was by any objective standard an elaborate misrepresentation of a monumental crime.
For one thing, the TRC was created by the same institutions of church and state that were responsible for the residential school crimes being investigated; this fact alone disqualified the TRC from the outset as any neutral or credible body. Indeed, the TRC only commenced its work after both institutions had legally indemnified themselves from any liability for those crimes: a maneuver that constituted an obstruction of justice under the law.
The government’s formal announcement of the TRC in June of 2008 was triggered prematurely by a series of widely reported church occupations led by residential school survivors early in 2008, followed quickly by a call from a Member of Parliament for an inquiry into missing residential school children. These events forced the government to announce the TRC as part of a general residential schools “apology” issued by Prime Minister Stephen Harper on June 11, 2008.
The protests and Parliamentary exposure concerning the missing residential school children that prompted this premature announcement of the TRC had embarrassed the government and caused the churches responsible for much of the crime to panic, and insist on exerting oversight of the TRC. This in turn caused the TRC to operate in a blatantly controlled and partisan manner from its inception. The Catholic, Anglican and United churches actually nominated all three of the TRC commissioners, who were in turn approved by the government’s Privy Council in Ottawa. Ironically but not surprisingly, this tag team action by the perpetrators represented the same kind of power sharing arrangement that characterized the Indian residential school system.
Similarly, the church and government lawyers who constructed the TRC mandate framed it as a legally toothless body whose findings could not be used to judge or convict any person or group (read, church), and whose records were censored to exclude any evidence of criminal acts or deaths in the residential schools. The mandate even declared that the TRC “shall not hold formal hearings, nor act as a public inquiry … and shall not name names in their events …” So then, since the TRC denied that it was an inquiry, what in fact was it?
In the words of a visiting South African scholar who observed three separate TRC public events during 2011 and 2o12,
“It was all an enormous pretense with very little substance to it. Its so-called ‘public forums’ were controlled events featuring stage-managed speakers, and were structured to prevent any damaging testimony from surfacing. I never once heard a child’s death or torture even being mentioned. It was remarkable how easily the government pulled off what was such an obvious whitewash. To compare it to the South African TRC is laughable.” (Dr. Neil Kruger, from an April 12, 2013 interview with Kevin Annett)
As part of its elaborate subterfuge, the TRC’s name was deliberately taken from the South African government’s “Truth and Reconciliation Inquiry” into crimes of apartheid , the Canadian TRC thereby giving itself the aura of a genuine investigation when it was nothing of the kind. The Canadian media assisted in the overall deception from the start, continually framing the TRC as a legitimate effort to tell the real story of the residential school crimes while never mentioning the powerless and restricted nature of the TRC as a “non inquiry”.
Starved of any alternative and commanded by their own state-funded “leaders” of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) to participate in the TRC events, many aboriginal survivors of the schools initially looked to the TRC to at least allow them the chance to publicly “tell their story”. But even that opportunity was denied to them at the TRC forums.
No residential school survivor was allowed to speak at such an event unless his or her statement was first examined and vetted by the church and state-appointed “Commissioners”; the statement was then stripped of any reference to a crime, a killing or the name of a perpetrator. And thus gagged, the survivor had only ten minutes to speak, whereas no such time restriction was placed on officials from the churches that committed the crime, who were regularly allowed to use the TRC events to publicly justify and minimize the atrocities in the schools.
Shawna Green is a Cree second generation survivor who tried to speak at the TRC forum in Victoria, British Columbia during 2011, and was prevented from doing so. (Her experience is described at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xb1u4S_tbs). As she recalls,
“I was disgusted by what we were all put through. I was barred from speaking, straight off, and when I challenged this I was threatened with physical expulsion from the hall. There were only a dozen or so actual survivors at the forum the day I was there, and they all looked miserable. They weren’t honored or given any help or counseling or recognition at all, and they could only speak at the mike for a few minutes. But some fat cat Catholic Bishop was given a half hour to spout his disgusting crap about how they were only trying to do good in the schools.
“At that point, an old lady who had gone to Kuper Island (residential school) started yelling out at the white church guy, “Stop lying! Tell the truth!”, and (TRC Chairman) Murray Sinclair stood up and yelled at her to be quiet and show respect to the Bishop! Show respect to your rapist! And Sinclair’s supposed to be a native. That old lady looked totally crushed. She looked like something had just been killed in her. It was like watching her get abused her all over again.”
Such re-traumatizing behavior by TRC officials was hardly accidental, considering their mandated aim to block unregulated statements, censor evidence and shield church and state from legally damaging revelations. Police were often conspicuously present at TRC events, and according to one officer at the Ottawa forum, were instructed to be on the alert for and detain “unauthorized speakers or protestors.”
Such intimidation, and the clearly unlawful mandate of the TRC to deny citizens their constitutional right to speak, name their abusers and have their evidence recorded for legal purposes, actually compelled the first head Commissioner of the TRC, Judge Harry Laforme, to resign from his appointment just a few months after the TRC was launched. (See “Chairman quits troubled residential school commission”, CBC News, October 20, 2008)
Citing differences with his two fellow Commissioners, Laforme “expressed fear that political and bureaucratic interference could compromise the panel.” But Laforme referred later to the questionable practices of TRC officials and implied that his position as a judicial officer was being compromised by his association with the TRC.
Such a startling public implication by a sitting judge that the TRC was operating unlawfully did not sway the TRC in its course under the new leadership of Murray Sinclair, a Cree politician from Manitoba who took over as the TRC chairman from Judge Laforme. Although denying it was any kind of public inquiry or open forum, Sinclair and the TRC nevertheless began staging public events in major cities across Canada that were wrongly depicted by them as “truth telling” forums at which residential school survivors could freely disclose their stories. In reality, nothing a survivor said at such an event was recorded in any open, public record but rather was kept in a private archive, and the copyright to the survivor’s own statement rested with the government.
This clandestine record system especially applied to any evidence of crimes or the deaths of residential school children shared at TRC events. In the spring of 2010, Sinclair stated that TRC researchers had uncovered proof that mass graves of children existed at “some” schools, but neither disclosed this evidence nor stated when it would be revealed, if ever. Later, Sinclair remarked that evidence of deaths or killings could be kept confidential “for five or ten more years”. As of February 2016, neither the TRC nor the government and churches have disclosed this evidence of children’s grave sites, despite the continual reference to burials and killings by eyewitnesses and in documents surfaced by independent inquires.
As in any controlled process, every TRC employee was required to sign confidentiality agreements that legally constrained them from sharing anything they uncovered in the course of their work. All of the churches that ran residential schools required a similar confidentiality statement from their employees after lawsuits by survivors commenced against them in the spring of 1995. (See the discussion of the Brantford Anglican school excavation in the fall of 2011 in Appendix Six)
Head TRC researcher John Milloy of Trent University was picked for his role because of his long and faithful service as a compliant scholar in several government “Royal Commissions” into aboriginal people in Canada during the 1990’s. Milloy performed a similarly dissembling role for the TRC by conducting a tightly edited “research” of already-censored church documents while never revealing his findings to the public. But even Milloy was forced to admit on one occasion that his research had revealed that dead residential school children were being routinely buried “two or three to a grave” at the Anglican school in Brantford, Ontario. (June 3, 20o9)
One of the most blatant aspects of this official cover up of evidence by the TRC was revealed in how it allowed the churches that ran the schools to edit, conceal or destroy incriminating evidence in its own records. The TRC had no mandated authority to issue subpoenas or compel disclosure of evidence or attendance at its events by the churches. And the latter were given months after the TRC commenced to re-organize their archives and remove incriminatory evidence from them.
In hindsight, and considering its nature as a creature of the parties that conducted the crime they were supposedly addressing, the TRC could be nothing other than a sanitized account of Canada’s enormous Crime against Humanity. What is perhaps less understandable is why the world and so many Canadians have given the TRC even an ounce of attention or credibility.
Such organized duplicity at the highest levels of power in Canada is not confined to the TRC’s obfuscation of past war crimes in Canada, but extends to the government’s recent efforts to throw a similar fog and misdirection around the escalating disappearance of aboriginal women and children. Part Three of this report will examine how police, government and foreign corporate interests are not only concealing but facilitating these disappearances as part of a wider campaign to dispossess and kill off the last remaining indigenous peoples of Canada.
This report is an answer to these crimes and an urgent summons to the world and all Canadians who refuse to live any longer under a genocidal regime. To truly honor and remember those who have fallen, all people of conscience must reclaim their true history as well as their future.
Synopsis of this Report
1. Our research has established that the crimes and murders committed against children in the Canadian Indian residential school system between 1889 and 1996 were legally authorized, sanctioned and protected by every level of government, church and police in Canada. All the evidence indicates that these crimes constituted calculated mass murder under the guise of religion and education, and represented a deliberate campaign of depopulation aimed primarily at western Canadian aboriginal nations and designed to strike at their weakest link: their children. By every legal and international standard and definition, this crime amounted to deliberate genocide.
2. The primary agents responsible for this genocide were the Canadian federal government and the Crown of England, the Vatican, and Roman Catholic, Anglican and United churches of Canada.
3. At no point during this 107 year period of the residential schools’ operation were these crimes ever halted or punished by authorities responsible for the schools, despite continual protests and reports documenting the crimes and a consistently enormous death rate. On the contrary, the perpetrators were routinely protected and exonerated by both government and church officials.
4. Native children began dying in droves the very first year the residential schools opened in 1889, at an average death rate of nearly 50%. The death rate in these schools was on average over ten times the mortality level on the Indian reservations from which the children had come. This death rate continued unabated for at least another fifty years, despite constant complaints and reports by doctors who inspected the schools.
5. After these huge mortality rates became public in 1903, the government stopped officially publishing any death records of students.
6. This enormous mortality was the result of a deliberate practice by all the churches that ran the schools of housing healthy children with those sick and dying from tuberculosis, and denying them medical treatment and care: in effect a regime of institutionalized germ warfare. (See Appendix Three, The Report of Dr. Peter Bryce, Medical Officer of the Department of Indian Affairs, 1907-9)
7. The ongoing high mortality rate was also caused by a continual denial of regular food, clothing and proper sanitation to children interned in the schools, amidst a regime of routine and systemic rapes, beatings, tortures and killings: conditions that continued unabated for over a century, from 1889 to 1996.
8. Despite these murderous conditions, attendance in the residential schools was made mandatory for all native children under a federal law enacted in 1920. Significantly, all government medical inspection of the schools was terminated that same year.
9. In the decade that followed this institutionalization of mass murder, special laws were passed across Canada that a) allowed the involuntary sexual sterilization of any residential school child, b) denied Indians the right to hire a lawyer or bring a case into court, and c) made the churches that ran the schools the legal guardian of the children.
10. In the 107 year history of the Canadian residential schools, from among the many complaints brought against staff members, clergymen and school officials there is no record of a single complaint resulting in any reprimand or disciplinary action.
11. Despite the death or disappearance of at least 66,000 children in these schools over a century and numerous statements of eyewitnesses to killings, not a single person has ever been charged or tried in a Canadian court for the death of one of these children.
12. Despite their pivotal role in these deaths and the regime of institutionalized terror in the schools, the churches responsible for the genocide – the Catholics, Anglicans and United Church – continue to operate legally, are supported by Canadian taxpayers and have been indemnified under Canadian law from any consequence for their crime.
13. Canada and its churches have never been charged with Genocide by any other nation or by the United Nations, despite their having committed this crime according to all five definitions of Genocide contained in the United Nations Convention on the Prevention of Genocide (1948), which was ratified by Canada in 1952.
14. The Canadian government and the Catholic, Anglican and United churches have engaged in a continual and illegal obstruction of justice for decades to conceal and destroy the evidence of their residential school crimes. They have done so by obliterating school records, silencing and killing eyewitnesses and survivors as well as in-house whistleblowers, destroying the remains and mass graves of children who died in the schools, and constructing a false narrative about the schools. This enormous falsification and cover up culminated in an official whitewash of their genocide established by them known as the “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” (TRC), which censored and misrepresented the residential schools genocide from start to finish.
15. In practice, Genocide has always been a legitimate tool of state and of religion. In Canada, its extermination of indigenous nations created and was a structural mainstay of the nation. Today, that extermination of indigenous nations is not only continuing but is expanding because of its continued importance to the resource extraction-based Canadian economy and its resulting institutionalization in the very fiber of government and society. Put simply, both foreign capital and domestic politics require that Indians in Canada continue to be made landless, impoverished and eradicated, and profited from in the process.
16. The Canadian state, its churches and its authorizing Crown authority are proven agents of intergenerational genocide, and as such constitute rogue powers under international law that have lost their authority and right to govern, to tax or to operate. The active replacement of these morally and lawfully nullified institutions is a duty and obligation of all citizens under the Law of Nations and such conventions as the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998) and the Nuremberg Legal Statutes of the United Nations (1950).
In Memory and Acknowledgement – 3
1. Preamble – 4
2. A Critique of the “Truth and Reconciliation” Commission – An Obstruction of Justice and Truth from Start to Finish – 6
3. Synopsis of this Report – 12
4. Chronology of Genocide in Canada by Church and State : 1840-2015 – 15
5. Part One: The Crime – 31
a) Understanding the Killing Machine
b) How many Children Died?
c) The Issue of Intentionality, and the exceptional case of Group Crime
d) Homicide – Contributory Causes of Death
e) Imposing Measures to Prevent Births and Conception – Sterilizations – Murder of Newborns, Forced Abortions and Segregation
f) Forcibly Transferring Children from one group to another
g) Inflicting Conditions designed to cause long term destruction
h) Causing Bodily and Mental Harm – Experimental Mind Control, MKULTRA and the residential schools
i) Destroying indigenous ways of life, cultures and souls
6. Part Two: The Concealment, Containment and Deception – 98
Fashioning the Deceptive Narrative and the Language of Normative Genocide
7. Part Three: The Ongoing Crime – 126
Disappeared Women and Children
8. Summary and Conclusions: A Consequential Course of Remedy and Action – 141
9. Documentation from the Text – 144
10. Appendices: Archive of key events, documents and testimonies – 286
11. Bibliography and Contact – 383
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The World Economic Forum’s 2030 agenda includes the dictum that you will “own nothing and be happy.” The unstated implication is that the world’s resources will be owned and controlled by the technocratic elite, and you’ll have to pay for the temporary use of everything
The WEF’s 2030 agenda is part of what is now advertised as The Great Reset
Also part of The Great Reset is the transition from shareholder capitalism to “stakeholder capitalism,” which world leaders claim will provide “equity” for all
In reality, stakeholder capitalism destroys freedom and shifts power over nations from elected governments to private corporations and other unelected “stakeholders” such as the WEF
Since the first quarter of 2020, we’ve already gotten a taste of what The Great Reset will mean for public health. The basic premise is that of a biosecurity state, where unelected “stakeholders” decide what is best for everyone
*
The World Economic Forum’s 2030 agenda includes the strangely ominous dictum that you will “own nothing and be happy.” The unstated implication is that the world’s resources will be owned and controlled by the technocratic elite, and you’ll have to pay for the temporary use of absolutely everything.
Nothing will actually belong to you. All items and resources are to be used by the collective, while actual ownership is restricted to an upper stratum of a social class. Just how will this imposed serfdom make you happy?
Again, the unstated implication is that lack of ownership is a convenience — they’re just making your life easier. Rent a pot and then return it. You don’t need storage space! Imagine the freedom! They even promise the convenience of automatic drone delivery straight to your door.
Artificial intelligence — which is siphoning your data about every aspect of your existence through nearly every piece of technology and appliance you own — will run your life, predicting your every mood and desire, catering to your every whim. Ah, the luxury of not having to make any decisions!
Planned Theft Under the Cover of a Pandemic
This is the mindset they’re trying to program into you. As just one example, in a mid-November 2020 video announcement, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said:1
“This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to re-imagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality and climate change.”
Some, however, are starting to realize that these narratives of “building back better” and “resetting” the economy to ensure “equity” are proverbial mouse traps. Once you bite the cheese, you’ll be stuck, robbed of your freedom forevermore.
In the video above, author Douglas Kruger explains why freedom is impossible without the right to private ownership. The technocratic elite of course do not want you to understand the real-world ramifications of what they have planned, which is why they try to sell this diabolical idea as something that will benefit society and finally make life fair for everyone. It’s an attractive narrative, but a dangerous fantasy to buy into. As noted November 16, 2020, by National File:2
“… Trudeau suggested the COVID-19 virus provided an ‘opportunity for a reset … to re-imagine economic systems.’ This was taken as an endorsement of a World Economic Forum plan to concentrate most private property in the hands of Big Tech mega-corporations.
The ‘Great Reset’ plan involves a collaboration between national governments and international bodies to ‘reset capitalism’ with an integrated transnational technocratic welfare/surveillance state by the year 2030 …
WEF member corporations and government partners would accomplish the ‘reset’ by using economic policy to virtually abolish individual property and concentrate nearly all wealth in the hands of international mega-corporations.
The idea would be to leverage the welfare state and gig economy to replace the economic status quo of individual ownership with one where the majority of individual needs are rented instead.”
Learn to Recognize the Great Reset Catchphrases
The WEF’s 2030 agenda is part and parcel of what is now advertised as The Great Reset,3 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” as a “new form of global governance.”4
On a side note, as I was entering the Transnational Institute reference, I noticed the URL included the words “taxonomy term backup delete later.” I don’t know if that means anything, but I archived5the page just in case. Other terms and slogans that describe various facets of this global takeover agenda include:
The Fourth Industrial Revolution, which is part of the transhumanist movement.6 In the video above, WEF founder Klaus Schwab describes these plans
Building Back Better
The Green New Deal
“Equity”
Stakeholder capitalism
In recent days, we’ve seen a slew of world leaders come out in lockstep to denounce capitalism, saying we need “stakeholder capitalism.” Among them is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who September 17, 2021, spoke out against capitalism at a meeting in London.7,8
“In America, capitalism is our system, it is our economic system, but it has not served our economy as well as it should,” she said. “So what we want to do is not depart from that, but to improve it.
You cannot have a system where the success of some springs from the exploitation of the workers and springs from the exploitation of the environment and the rest, and we have to correct that.”
President Biden is the first U.S. president to embrace stakeholder capitalism by name,9 and leading Democrats, including Vice-President Kamala Harris and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, have presented policy proposals that would write stakeholder capitalism into law.10
What Is Stakeholder Capitalism?
But just what is stakeholder capitalism? If it’s fairer and makes everyone more prosperous than the shareholder capitalist system we currently have, shouldn’t we all support it? The problem is that the way it’s described is not how it actually works in the real world. It sounds great in theory, but the end result is not going to benefit the average person.
As reported by Ivan Wecke on Open Democracy, in an article titled “Conspiracy Theories Aside, There Is Something Fishy About the Great Reset”:11
“The set of conspiracy theories around the Great Reset are nebulous and hard to pin down, but piecing them together gives us something like this: the Great Reset is the global elite’s plan to instate a communist world order by abolishing private property while using COVID-19 to solve overpopulation and enslaving what remains of humanity with vaccines.
Intrigued … I decided to find out what the WEF’s Great Reset plan was really about. At the heart of conspiracy theories are supposed secret agendas and malicious intent.
While these may be absent from the WEF’s Great Reset initiative, what I found was something almost as sinister hiding in plain sight. In fact, more sinister because it’s real and it’s happening now. And it involves things as fundamental as our food, our data and our vaccines.
The magic words are ‘stakeholder capitalism’, a concept that WEF chairman Klaus Schwab has been hammering for decades and which occupies pride of place in the WEF’s Great Reset plan from June 2020.
The idea is that global capitalism should be transformed so that corporations no longer focus solely on serving shareholders but become custodians of society by creating value for customers, suppliers, employees, communities and other ‘stakeholders.’
The way the WEF sees stakeholder capitalism being carried out is through a range of ‘multi-stakeholder partnerships’ bringing together the private sector, governments and civil society across all areas of global governance.
The idea of stakeholder capitalism and multi-stakeholder partnerships might sound warm and fuzzy, until we dig deeper and realize that this actually means giving corporations more power over society, and democratic institutions less.”
Stakeholder Capitalism Increases the Power of Corporations
The Global Redesign Initiative, which served as the basis for the Great Reset, has been described as “the most comprehensive proposal for redesigning global governance since the formulation of the United Nations during World War II.”12 So, this is no minor tweak. It’s a complete overhaul of how we do business and govern nations, not only in the U.S. but globally.
In this multi-stakeholder model, government is just one stakeholder among many. Other stakeholders that would have to be taken into account include nongovernmental organizations such as the WEF itself and multinational corporations. In other words, these other stakeholders will have a say in how nations are governed.
Notice that world leaders will stress that the stakeholders include the environment and workers. The truth, however, is that the needs and desires of workers and the natural world are hardly at the center of this model. As explained by Wecke:13
“Instead of corporations serving many stakeholders, in the multi-stakeholder model of global governance, corporations are promoted to being official stakeholders in global decision-making, while governments are relegated to being one of many stakeholders.
In practice, corporations become the main stakeholders, while governments take a backseat role, and civil society is mainly window dressing.”
Stakeholder Capitalism Is Taking Over by Stealth
Wecke points out that this multi-stakeholder ecosystem has already been implemented and is expanding with each passing day. It’s not something that they’re proposing to implement in the future. Instead, they’re basically just telling us now what they’ve been doing for years already.
“Multi-stakeholder groups have spread across all sectors of the global governance system,” Wecke says, noting there are already “more than 45 global multi-stakeholder groups that set standards and establish guidelines and rules in a range of areas.”
These groups, which have no democratic accountability, consist of large multinational corporations, which recruit insiders within government, civil society and educational institutions. Together, they claim to solve all sorts of problems that plague society.
Essentially, they believe they know what’s best for everyone, and without having been elected to speak and act on our behalf, they are making unilateral decisions that will dictate how we live, grow and prosper.
As just one example of a multi-stakeholder “ecosystem” that is already up and running is the COVAX initiative, the aim of which is to accelerate the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines. This initiative was created by two multi-stakeholder groups, GAVI and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), in partnership with the World Health Organization and funded by governments.
GAVI and CEPI are both tied to the WEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and a long list of drug companies. As noted by Wecki, while governments are funding the COVAX initiative, corporate-centered coalitions (GAVI and CEPI) are overseeing and reaping the profits from the work.
We’ve already been given a glimpse of the core problem with this system, which is that it’s entirely profit-driven. In 2020, South Africa and India sought to lift intellectual property rules on COVID-19 vaccine technologies to boost manufacturing in developing countries. GAVI, Gates himself and the drug industry strongly opposed, as you’d expect they would.
Why? Because public health is not their prime incentive or motivation. Profit is. Profit is their main interest, and as a primary “stakeholder,” their interests must be weighed against other stakeholder interests, such as people’s want and desire to not get sick and die. And, well, they’re at the center of the power structure, so guess whose interest wins, and will always win?
Stakeholder Capitalism Will Destroy Freedom
Wecke describes multi-stakeholderism as “the WEF’s update of multilateralism,” which is the system by which nations of the world are currently working together. At the core is the United Nations.
So far, this system is still democratic, at least in theory, as elected leaders are the ones brought together to make global decisions. The problem we’re facing is that the stakeholder capitalism now proposed is not going to deepen democracy but rather eliminate it altogether.
Its design sidelines governments and places unelected stakeholders, primarily transnational corporations, in the driver’s seat, giving them ultimate authority to make decisions for the world as a whole, which is precisely what we’ve increasingly started to experience during this pandemic. As explained by Wecke:14
“Put bluntly, multi-stakeholder partnerships are public-private partnerships on the global stage. And they have real-world implications for the way our food systems are organized, how big tech is governed and how our vaccines and medicines are distributed.”
We’re in for a Medical Reset as Well
Since the first quarter of 2020, we’ve already gotten a taste of what The Great Reset will mean for public health. It’s basically founded on the premise that we live in a biosecurity state, where these unelected “stakeholders” decide what is best for us, regardless of how we feel about it.
For example, hospitals around the U.S. are all instructed to use the deadliest COVID treatments imaginable, and doctors who defy the guidance and actually do what is best for their patients are having their medical licenses threatened. Merely speaking out about effective COVID treatments will put a bullseye on a physician’s back.
In countries everywhere, people are told COVID shots are the only way forward, and vaccine passports — once derided as a paranoid conspiracy theory — are being implemented. Who made these decisions? No one is admitting the real source of these lockstep decisions, but we can be sure they’re coming from a central hub, run by people no one ever voted into power.
Around the world, a twisted mind game is being played out, where world leaders are now telling us that vaccine passports are our “ticket to freedom,” completely ignoring the fact that our freedom is not, and cannot be, predicated on our medical choices.
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.15 And those who refuse to do “the right thing,” well, they simply aren’t entitled to those same “freedoms.”
Justin Trudeau says that vaccine passports are "all about" rewarding certain freedoms to people who have "done the right thing"— and that those who "still resist" simply won't get to enjoy those same freedoms.
That the disease countermeasures we currently see for COVID-19 won’t end with COVID-19 is clear. Already, President Biden has signed an executive order adding measles to the list of diseases for which a person can be quarantined and/or forced to self-isolate “to protect public health.”16
Again, what’s being built all around us is a biosecurity state that will control every aspect of our lives under the auspice of “protecting public health,” all while doing no such thing. It’s undeniable that the COVID countermeasures have wrought far more destruction than the virus actually did, and these countermeasures continue to destroy lives and kill people unnecessarily, all under the banner of keeping us “safe” from disease.
The fact that people are dying from suicide, starvation, untreated medical problems and vaccine injuries, well, that doesn’t count. They’re protecting us from COVID! Of course, that’ll be expanded to protecting us from other infections du jour.
In closing, stakeholder capitalism is essentially a form of global fascism, where nations are run not by elected governments alone, but by unelected corporations in partnership with government. As for “equity,” I wouldn’t hold my breath for that to come true. The equity they’re talking about is all of us being in the same miserable position of owning nothing and having no human rights.
Sen. Warren Threatens Amazon to Ban ‘The Truth About COVID-19’
Since the publication of my latest book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” which became an instant best seller on Amazon.com, there’s been a significant increase in calls for censorship and ruthless attacks against me.
Most recently, so-called “progressive” U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., in an outrageous, slanderous and basically unconstitutional attempt to suppress free speech, sent a letter to Amazon, demanding an “immediate review” of their algorithms to weed out books peddling “COVID misinformation.”
Warren specifically singled out “The Truth About COVID-19” as a prime example of “highly ranked and favorably tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures” that she wants to see banned from sale.
Two days later, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., followed in Warren’s footsteps, sending letters to Facebook and Amazon, calling for more prolific censorship of vaccine information. Even President Joe Biden has recently used a debunked report as his sole source to call for my censorship.
Sadly, these attacks are being levied by the very people elected to safeguard democracy and our Constitutional rights. Essentially, what they are calling for is modern-day book burning. This is a democracy, not a monarchy.
*
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: Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (Davos Forum), delivers a speech at Nankai University in Tianjin, China, September 11, 2010.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
A recently published study shows that the common pesticide pyriproxyfen could exacerbate the already severe effects that the Zika virus can have on brain development. The researchers found that pyriproxyfen impairs thyroid hormone signalling in the brain, modifying crucial processes for its proper development (more details below). The findings confirm hypotheses that GMWatch focused attention on five years ago – and was severely attacked for doing so.
GMWatch vindicated: You (probably) read it here first
Back in 2016, fear of the Zika virus as a potential cause of the birth defect microcephaly was at its height. An outbreak of microcephaly, in which babies are born with small heads and brains, had occurred in Brazil’s northeast, and Zika was being blamed as the sole cause.
But we at GMWatch noticed that evidence identifying the virus as a sole cause of the microcephaly cases was scant and unconvincing. We also noticed an increasing number of reports from South America suggesting that another hitherto overlooked potential cause of the outbreak. According to the Argentine doctors’ organisation, Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Towns (PCST), in the area where most of the affected people lived, a chemical larvicide aimed at eradicating disease-carrying mosquitoes was introduced into the drinking water supply in 2014, in a state-controlled programme to control the dengue and Zika viruses. This pesticide was known to produce malformations in mosquitoes, and PCST asked if it could do the same in humans.
The Brazilian doctors’ and public health researchers’ organisation, Abrasco, also named the pesticide as a possible factor (among others) in the microcephaly outbreak.
Vicious and irrational attacks
We began to draw attention to the pyriproxyfen link, publishing several articles on the topic. Our articles unleashed a deluge of vicious and often irrational attacks from pesticide defenders, which were among the most extreme we’ve experienced.
The defenders of pyriproxyfen included “experts” invoked by the Science Media Centre of Australia, who, in a seeming determination to exempt the pesticide from blame, followed the usual pro-pesticide and pro-GMO agenda of the different global branches of that organisation. This is not surprising given that current and past funders of the Science Media Centre UK include pesticide companies Bayer, BASF, Monsanto, and Syngenta.
While the new research shows that GMWatch was correct to draw attention to the now proven dangers of pyriproxyfen, it is shameful that the pro-pesticide “shouting brigade” were more concerned with defending this risky chemical than investigating a public health scandal that has resulted in permanent harm to the victims.
The new research
For their experiment, the researchers used genetically modified tadpoles that emit green fluorescence when exposed to thyroid hormone. More thyroid hormone means more green signal, showing that the hormone is active in the tadpoles’ cells.
When they exposed the tadpoles to pyriproxyfen, the green signal dropped dramatically. This showed that the pesticide blocks thyroid hormone action. One of the roles of thyroid hormone, two of the study’s authors explain in an article for The Conversation, is to generate a balanced amount of nerve cells and their supporting cells, known as glia, which together form the essential building blocks of the brain.
Since pyriproxyfen blocks normal thyroid hormone action, the researchers thought it might also affect the generation of neurons (nerve cells) and glial cells. To investigate this, they exposed stem cells cultured from mouse brains to increasing doses of pyriproxyfen.
The findings were clear: The higher the dose, the fewer cells were generated, and the more they died, producing an unbalanced proportion of nerve cells and glia.
The brains of the exposed tadpoles did not develop normally, making them behave unnaturally. Underlying these changes were altered expression patterns of a number of genes. The researchers infected exposed stem cells with the Zika virus and found that the transcription of key genes was altered compared to when they were infected with the virus alone and not exposed to the pesticide. Although they didn’t observe higher Zika infection rates, the authors suggest that the pesticide exposure could aggravate hampered brain development. That can worsen the impact the virus has on a child’s later-life intellectual capacities.
Zika and COVID-19
There is a striking parallel between the chorus of condemnation that was so keen to shout us down when we originally suggested that anything other than the Zika virus might be contributing to the unexpected outbreak of microcephaly birth defects, and the chorus of condemnation that greeted us when we started to draw attention to the lab leak hypothesis in relation to the virus behind the current pandemic. In both cases, these choruses were led largely by those with strong vested interests who were keen to invoke a supposed scientific consensus – before the evidence was remotely in – as a way of suppressing an exploration of alternative hypotheses.
A group of scientists recently wrote a letter to The Lancet, entitled An appeal for an objective, open, and transparent scientific debate about the origin of SARS-CoV-2. They stated: “We do not think that scientists should promote ‘unity’… science embraces alternative hypotheses, contradictory arguments, verification, refutability, and controversy. Departing from this principle risks establishing dogmas, abandoning the essence of science, and, even worse, paving the way for conspiracy theories.”
This has proven to be as true of Zika and microcephaly as of the origin of SARS-CoV-2.
*
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.
September 30th, 2021 by Center For Biological Diversity
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed today to remove 22 animals and a plant from the endangered species list because of extinction. They join the list of 650 U.S. species that have likely been lost to extinction.
Species being proposed for delisting include the ivory-billed woodpecker, Bachman’s warbler, Scioto madtom, San Marcos gambusia, eight species of Southeastern freshwater mussels, eight birds and a flower from Hawaiʻi, and a bird and bat from Guam.
“The Endangered Species Act has prevented the extinction of 99% of the plants and animals under its care, but sadly these species were extinct or nearly gone when they were listed,” said Tierra Curry, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The tragedy will be magnified if we don’t keep this from happening again by fully funding species protection and recovery efforts that move quickly. Delay equals death for vulnerable wildlife.”
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been exceedingly slow to protect species. A 2016 study found that species waited a median of 12 years to receive safeguards. Several of the species in today’s announcement went extinct during a delay in the listing process, including the Guam broadbill, little Mariana fruit bat, and the southern acornshell, stirrupshell and upland combshell mussels. In total, at least 47 species have gone extinct waiting for protection.
“We’re at risk of losing hundreds more species because of a lack of urgency,” said Curry. “The Endangered Species Act is the most powerful tool we have to end extinction, but the sad reality is that listing still comes too late for most species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service badly needs to reform its process for protecting species to avoid further extinctions, and it needs the funding to do so. We can’t let bureaucratic delays cause more extinctions.”
Nine months into his term, President Biden has yet to nominate a director for the Fish and Wildlife Service. He did request more than a $60 million increase for endangered species — the largest increase requested for the program in history — but the House Appropriations Committee undercut the president’s budget request by $17 million.
A 2016 study found that Congress only provides approximately 3.5% of the funding that the Service’s own scientists estimate is needed to recover species. Roughly 1 in 4 species receives less than $10,000 a year toward recovery.
Two bills moving through Congress would increase protection and funding for endangered species.
The Extinction Prevention Act (H.R. 3396) would create four grant programs that would provide $5 million per year to fund crucial conservation work for each of the most critically imperiled species in the United States, including butterflies, freshwater mussels, desert fish and Hawaiian plants.
The Extinction Crisis Emergency Act would direct President Biden to declare the global wildlife extinction crisis a national emergency. The legislation would spur action across the entire federal government to stem the loss of animals and plants in the United States and around the world.
“Extinction is not inevitable. It is a political choice. Saving species isn’t rocket science. As a country we need to stand up and say we aren’t going to lose any more species to extinction,” said Curry.
Species Background
Bachman’s warbler: Bachman’s warbler was a small yellow and black songbird that once bred in swampy thickets in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee and overwintered in Cuba, where it was seen for the last time in 1988. It was lost to habitat destruction and collection.
Bridled white-eye: A green, yellow and white tropical lowland forest bird from Guam that was 4 inches long, with a prominent ring around its eye. It became extinct because of predation from the invasive brown tree snake.
Ivory-billed woodpecker: The third largest woodpecker in the world, the ivory-billed woodpecker once flew in old-growth forests in 13 states, including Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas. It declined because of logging and collection, and the last verified sighting was in 1944 despite extensive searches.
Little Mariana fruit bat: Also known as a flying fox, the little Mariana fruit bat lived on Guam and foraged on tropical fruits. It was last seen in 1968 and went extinct because of habitat loss from agriculture and military activity, brown tree snake predation, and overharvesting for use as food. It had a 2-foot wingspan, gold on the sides of its neck and yellowish-brown fur on the top of its head.
San Marcos gambusia: The San Marcos gambusia was a 1-inch-long fish that ate small invertebrates and gave birth to live young instead of laying eggs like many species of fish. It lived in clear spring water from the headwaters of the San Marcos River in Texas. Last seen in 1983, its extinction is due to water overuse that depleted groundwater and spring flow.
Scioto madtom: The Scioto madtom was a small catfish found only in Big Darby Creek in Ohio. It was listed as endangered in 1975 but was last seen in 1957. It was lost because of silt accumulation from dams and runoff.
The eight freshwater mussels proposed for delisting include the flat pigtoe, green-blossom pearly mussel, southern acornshell, stirrupshell, tubercled-blossom pearly mussel, turgid-blossom pearly mussel, upland combshell and yellow-blossom pearly mussel.Freshwater mollusks are the most endangered group of organisms in the United States, with 36 mussels and more than 70 freshwater snails already lost.
Click here for background on the lost Hawaii species including eight birds and a flower.
Texas: ivory-billed woodpecker, San Marcos gambusia
Virginia: green-blossom pearly mussel
West Virginia: tubercled-blossom pearly mussel
*
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: Po’ouli. Photo by Hawai’i DLNR Division of Forestry and Wildlife
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The appalling Covid-19 vaccine agenda that humanity is now facing is not the only time that vaccines have been linked to mental disorders. According to the February 2017 Yale Daily News, the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry had just reported that a joint Yale University-Penn State study found that:
Patients diagnosed with neuropsychiatric disorders like obsessive-compulsive disorder and anorexia nervosa were more likely to have received vaccinations three months prior to their diagnoses.
That same month a Nexus Magazine article also weighed in on the eye-opening Yale study findings:
Those [children] who had been vaccinated were a shocking 80 percent more likely to be diagnosed with anorexia, and 25 percent more likely to be diagnosed with OCD than their non-vaccinated counterparts. Higher rates of anxiety disorders and chronic tics were also linked to vaccinations… The Yale-PSU study is not the first to find an association between brain-related disorders and vaccinations. And it most likely will not be the last one.
Ya think? Let me count the ways…
A press release from the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference held in late July 2021 found a direct connection between the so-called Covid-19 virus and subsequent cognitive deficits, Alzheimer disease pathology and symptoms:
In addition to the respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms that accompany COVID-19, many people with the virus experience short- and/or long-term neuropsychiatric symptoms, including loss of smell and taste, and cognitive and attention deficits, known as ‘brain fog.’ For some, these neurological symptoms persist, and researchers are working to understand the mechanisms by which this brain dysfunction occurs, and what that means for cognitive health long term.
Perhaps the fact that this information comes from an international consortium of scientists from nearly 40 countries led by the “technical guidance from the World Health Organization,” whose controlling benefactor is none other than billionaire Bill Gates, invites criticism that it’s simply more propagandized “fake science.” From a late January 2021 clinicaltrialsarena.comwebsite:
So far, some of the most concerning lasting effects of Covid-19 are continued loss of sense of smell or taste, memory or concentration problems, and other cognitive complications, because they indicate probable brain damage and increased risk of dementia such as Alzheimer’s disease. [My boldface emphasis]
Throughout the so-called pandemic, panic porn-mongering propagandists attempt to entice the global public to sign up for the lifesaving vaccine rollout, propagating the myth that a virus hardly different from the common everyday flu [that magically disappeared] was destined to infect and inflict brain damage on all those foolish enough to not get in line for their death jab.
While emphasizing everywhere that their fake virus causes brain damage, their killer vaccines are falsely advertised as completely safe. This doubled down premise has failed miserably.
A large segment of the population knows better than to swallow the lies. Clearly the kill shot is the brain damage culprit and this presentation will prove it.
The real pandemic gripping our planet is mental illness, rapidly diminishing our cognitive function and impaired judgment, diabolically driven by a weaponized death jab attacking our neurological brain and central nervous system, among numerous other vital organs such as the heart, lungs and liver, resulting in multiple organ failure and death as the mRNA spike proteins permanently alter our human DNA while producing toxic spike proteins that decimate our natural immune system. In Big Pharma vaccines, the Fauci et al genetically altered mRNA spike proteins operating within the human cardiovascular system, damage the heart and produce blood clot disorders, in the lungs causing pulmonary hypertension, and in the brain, stroke.
A mere month before the launching of the death jab at warp speed, on November 10, 2020 the Rothschild owned world news agency Reuters ran the headline “One in Five Covid-19 Patients Develop Mental Illness within 90 Days – Study.” Closing in on a year of lockdown and mask wearing mandate madness, the stay-at-home isolation amidst all the echo-chamber hype and craze of a fake pandemic with a near 100% cure rate, leave it to the Oxford University shrinks to announce results of their large study that 20% of the population was going bonkers. Not to be outdone, another study published in the May 2021 in the respected Lancet found up to a third of nearly a quarter million Americans who had Covid-19 within six months were exhibiting long-term symptoms that included anxiety and psychosis.
Just days after Reuter’s bad news, UK’s payday rollout for the highly touted Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine billed as “the vaccine of the world” was the next flop. By June 2021, Canada and most of Europe were already balking at a second jab. The Oxford study looked at 69,000 digital health records of Americans, including 62,000 cases that had tested positive for Covid-19, finding one in every five within three months of Covid-19 illness were diagnosed with depression, anxiety or insomnia. Also, this rather bleak finding naturally fell in synch with the notion that the “frightening” virus “can affect the brain and mind, increasing the risk of a range of psychiatric illnesses.”
All the scientific journals and academic studies swear that the Covid-19 virus in itself delivers “persistent neurologic symptoms and cognitive dysfunction.” The paradoxical irony is that only the fake virus can do brain damage as all those same “scientific” journals and studies backed up by MSM Rothschild controlled giant Reuters are emphatic in their denial that vaccines can ever do harm to the brain or neurological system.
My takeaway from all this is once you’re bombarded for a full year in 2020 by accumulated daily stress and fear building up from forced isolation and induced paranoia over a phantom illness, and then in 2021 add the weaponized spike protein jab into this by now unstable mix, literally attacking brain cells causing further cognitive impairment and mental deterioration, and the global genocide is most definitely underway and currently in full progress.
In the brain and CNS, the technocratic elite’s transhumanist AI/5G agenda is busily engaging in massive neuromodulation, influencing and interacting with the vaccinated’s tip of its spear bioweapon – the graphene oxide nanoparticles, often accompanied by lethal blood clotting and victims’ reduced mental capacity.
As a result, a huge spike in bizarre “accidents” have been observed at both the workplace and on the road. For instance, during the first six months of 2021, at 21,400, the number of US fatalities from vehicle accidents soared over 16.4% over the first half-year statistics from 2019, the last year prior to the phantom Covid-19 infestation, despite far less miles driven during the lockdown years. Meanwhile, during the first several months of the 2020 lockdown, prior to any death jab rollout, by late April the traffic fatalities were reportedly way up nationally with far less cars on the road, logically deducing that open roads invite pedal to the medal impulse, especially after being cooped up and isolated at home for so long.
But with the vaccinations in full swing for the first time in 2021, the alarming trend of spiking accidental deaths is more convincingly accounted for by the erratic effects that Big Pharma inoculations are having on the vaccinated. Bizarre episodes of public behavior, increasing violence and road rage in America are now off the charts. Clearly, we are witnessing rampantly growing evidence of the devastating effects resulting from severe impaired judgment and associated neurological damage increasingly acted out in direct response to the never-ending series of dangerous kill shots, growing more pervasive with each booster shot released.
In a very much related matter, Fort Rucker, Alabama Army flight surgeon Lt. Col. Theresa Long, MD, has just submitted a legal affidavit to her superiors, recommending that all vaccinated pilots under her medical care be grounded after three personnel suffered pulmonary embolisms within 48 hours of receiving their Pfizer death jabs, subsequently placing them at severe risk of cardiac arrest while in flight. Another pilot died shortly after his shot.
Dr. Long’s research also determined that Pfizer vaccines contain the known toxic antifreeze ingredient ALC 0315, known to cause myocarditis, particularly observed in young healthy males. Given the reality that forced vaccination of both US military soldiers as well as a high percentage of commercial airline pilots have already been poisoned with Covid-19 vaccination, this fact seriously endangers thousands of daily passengers traveling worldwide in airliners flown by vaccinated pilots. Additionally, with a weakened, compromised American military fighting force, defense of the United States from enemies both foreign and domestic becomes impossible, made far more dangerous by imposter Biden’s wide open border policy allowing millions of unvaxxed, unvetted illegals into the US. This senile puppet’s treasonously fulfilling his globalist role to destroy America in warp speed.
Another scientific study published in the journal Microbiology and Infectious Diseases earlier this year revealed that the Pfizer coronavirus mRNA vaccine carries potential detrimental health effects that include “ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease), Alzheimer’s, and other neurological degenerative diseases.”
This analysis examined “the potential to induce prion-based disease in vaccine recipients.” With prion-based neurogenerative diseases, this research study confirmed that the mandated Pfizer kill shots under contract with US Department of Defense, is harming every American soldier along with millions more victims across the planet causing severe brain damage. If the concocted by design breakdown of other vital organs doesn’t cause death first, the Pfizer vaccinated are or will be suffering from severe cases of dementia as well. The other mRNA vaccine manufactured by Moderna, also producing embedded spike proteins that irreversibly modify human DNA, is inflicting this same highly disturbing endgame result.
MRNA vaccines manufactured by the Big Pharma giants Pfizer and Moderna have been proven to cause ALS, Alzheimer’s and other neurological degenerative diseases, along with front temporal lobar degeneration in their hapless vaccine recipients.
As yet more concurring evidence continues linking Covid-19 vaccines to degenerative brain disorders, a July 21, 2021 Children’s Health Defensearticle states:
Immunologist and former NIH [National Institute of Health] scientist J. Bart Classen analyzed data on COVID vaccine adverse events reported to the UK’s Yellow Card system and found thousands of reports of multiple symptoms that are ‘clear signals’ of neurodegenerative disorders.
From the National Institute of Health’s own VAERS tracking system tasked with compiling the grim data of all adverse effects and deaths caused by Covid-19 vaccines in the US, as of September 17, 2021, 1,128 cases of jab victims have been diagnosed with the highly disabling neurodegenerative disorder Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS). In little more than just two months since July 9 when 449 was the tallied count, the total of Guillain-Barre victims has more than doubled. Though on the US National Institute of Health’s own website covering National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), it defines GBS as:
Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a rare neurological disorder in which the body’s immune system mistakenly attacks part of its peripheral nervous system—the network of nerves located outside of the brain and spinal cord…
Clearly per VAERS’ own records, with the rate more than doubling the number of GBS victims every couple months, resulting directly from harmful, deadly non-vaccines that don’t even work, currently being forced on every American citizen by top US public health authorities and illegit imposter president, this grave neurological disease can no longer be considered “rare.” Nor can democide, the government willfully killing its own citizens, even attempt to be denied at this point. The ruling elite has ordered puppet leaders around the globe to slaughter the human race as the cold hard facts that continue emerging speak for themselves. Again, quoting the ninds.nih.govwebsite:
[The GBS] affected person’s immune system begins to attack the body itself.
This is precisely what the Fauci-Gates funded gain-of-function vaccines were created to do as their Satanic bioweapon, using the spike prion proteins and lipid nanoparticles as activated poison ingredients to attack the vaccinated’s own vital organs and natural immune system to succumb to deadly blood clots, myocarditis (heart inflammation), cardiac arrest, multiple organ failure, autoimmune disease, miscarriages and infertility. In fact, a Post Covid Vaccine Syndrome emerged after the kill shot referring to cardiac, vascular, hematological, musculoskeletal, intestinal, respiratory or neurologic symptoms that have been identified despite overt MSM/social media suppression of the alarming evidence. Again, from the US government’s own medical website, in GBS patients, “the immune system mistakenly attacks the healthy nerves,” which is exactly what the Covid-19 bioweapon’s gain-of-function is programmed to do. Weaponized spike prion proteins turning on cells from its own vital organs are demonically leading to premature mass death on a ghastly, never before seen scale. The emerging evidence of premeditated global genocide is both overwhelming and irrefutable.
Excruciating pain, acute muscle weakness and often partial paralysis are also typical GBS symptoms. There is no known cure although after 6 months, 60-80% of victims are reportedly able to walk again and 70% fully recover, despite a 4-7% mortality rate. However, Guillain-Barré syndrome patients caused by the killer vaccines won’t be so fortunate. Although AstraZeneca as the other adenovirus vector vaccine, along with both Moderna and Pfizer vaccines all are additionally linked to causing GBS, so many recipients of the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) jab were diagnosed with Guillain-Barré syndrome that the FDA required J&J to update its vaccine label with a new warning:
Guillain-Barré Syndrome Reports of adverse events following use of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine under emergency use authorization suggest an increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during the 42 days following vaccination.
In June 2021, it was Pfizer and Moderna’s turn for the FDA to impose a warning on their vaccine labels admitting they’re known to cause heart inflammation.
Another statement from the official NIH website begs a corrective response to the actual truth:
In rare cases vaccinations may increase the risk of GBS.
With the prospect of perhaps millions of earth inhabitants being jabbed to death this year, the above gross understatement again proves the fallacy that vaccinations rarely increase the risk of contracting this highly debilitating GBS condition. The alarming number of victims, now well over a thousand, afflicted with this no longer “rare” neurological disorder is beyond question, caused by elites like Klaus Schwab’s Covid-19 murder weapon, specially created and deployed as a key steppingstone to their “Great Reset.” But knowing this, We the People are now pushing our own reset button, resolute in holding Klaus and company to account for their blatantly criminal atrocities against humanity.
Despite the criminal censorship of the internet monopolists by not permitting the public access to the truth that would have saved thousands of lives already, an array of videos circulating online document victims’ convulsions, involuntary spams and difficulty walking.
Vaccine-induced functional neurological disorder (FND) is a common agonizing neuropsychological condition manifesting as an adverse reaction to the killer vaccines. Symptoms of FND range from violent convulsions, limb weakness, gait problems, jerky movements, tremors and facial spasms. Neurologist and psychiatrist David Perez, MD, attempts to shed light:
The spread of these videos could fuel vaccine hesitancy by giving an overly simplistic impression of potential links between the vaccine and major neurological symptoms. Instead, these are symptoms of a real, brain-based disorder that sits at the intersection of neurology and psychiatry. Some people with FND have a heightened awareness of their body and increased state of arousal and threat, which may hijack normal neural networks controlling voluntary movements. FND teaches us quite a bit about the complexities of the human brain.
As a disruption in the brain’s capacity to control the body, Functional Neurological Disorder can be caused by physical or emotional events or a combination therein, resulting from head injury, a medical or surgical procedure or vaccination, impairing the capacity for motor control and bodily movement and function.
Though with moderate success this particular disorder may be treated with psychotherapy, physical rehabilitation and psycho-education, FND needs to be discretely and clearly differentiated between it and very real, permanent deficits and impairments attacking both brain and central nervous system functioning, often accompanied simultaneously by multiple vital organ failure, caused by extremely dangerous toxins – spike proteins and nano-particulate agents such as graphene oxide, diabolically unleashed to act as a lethal bioweapon within the global cabal’s giant genocidal arsenal. For upwards of millions or even billions of potential victims, it cannot be reduced to purely psychosomatic cause that bails out and obfuscates the criminal elite’s medical genocide.
A case in point is what happened when Canadian Dr. Charles D. Hoffe, a family physician working with mostly First Nations’ people in his rural British Columbian town of Lytton.
Eventually he went public after an initial Moderna dose caused a half dozen of his vaccinated patients within three days to begin suffering severe adverse neurological effects, including an additional couple of suspicious deaths weeks later.
Cognizant that the vaccine never underwent clinical test trials and that the vaccine could potentially be genetically contraindicated for his First Nations’ patients, the country doctor was shunned by the medical establishment with his license threatened should he persist in asking the “wrong” questions. Recognizing he needed to refer his patients to a neurologist, as soon as mention of the possibility of their medical condition might be vaccine-related, no specialist would even see his afflicted patients.
Simply honoring his Hippocratic Oath, Dr. Hoffe was motivated to learn how to assist and heal his patients, but for all his sincere efforts, he and his suffering patients were given the cold shoulder or worse.
Courageous whistleblowing doctors and nurses from the frontline attempting to speak truth to all the rampant lies perpetrated by government and media alike, at considerable risk daring to expose the murderous horror in our midst, have endured over-the-top censorship, harassment, threats of career retribution and smear campaigns to silence the truth and prevent saving lives. With so much criminal evidence growing by the day, it’s only a matter of time before those responsible for the evil must be held accountable in a criminal court of law. We the People who choose to remain human as sovereign citizens asserting our constitutional God-given rights, shall never consent to allowing insane, power hungry psychopaths to harm us or our children, and are fighting back to achieve justice in our resolve to resist, oppose and stop the brutality and madness.
*
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.
Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate, former Army officer and author of “Don’t Let the Bastards Getcha Down,” exposing a faulty US military leadership system based on ticket punching up the seniority ladder, invariably weeding out the best and brightest, leaving mediocrity and order followers rising to the top as politician-bureaucrat generals designated to lose every modern US war by elite design. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In Los Angeles he found himself battling the largest county child protective services in the nation within America’s thoroughly broken and corrupt child welfare system.
The experience in both the military and child welfare system prepared him well as a researcher and independent journalist, exposing the evils of Big Pharma and how the Rockefeller controlled medical and psychiatric system inflict more harm than good, case in point the current diabolically lethal pandemic hoax and genocide. As an independent journalist for the last 8 years, Joachim has written hundreds of articles for many news sites, particularly Global Research and lewrockwell.com. As a published author of a 5-book volume series entitled Pedophilia& Empire: Satan, Sodomy & the Deep State, Joachim’s books and chapters are Amazon bestsellers in child advocacy and human rights categories. His A-Z sourcebook series fully documents and exposes the global pedophilia scourge and remains available for free at Joachim’s blogsite at http://empireexposed.blogspot.com/ and https://pedoempire.org.
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).
Few, if any, world leaders will have a verb in their language named after them. Angela Merkel is an exception to this. ‘Merkeln’ in German youth vernacular, coined around a decade ago, means, according to the German dictionary publisher Langenscheidt,”to do nothing, make no decisions, issue no statements.”
Merkel’s reticence when it came to decision-making came to be a feature of her 16-year rule. For this she received criticism from many quarters, with journalists now assessing her legacy as one which although stable, was devoid of any really groundbreaking developments.
On a positive note, Merkel effectively steered Germany through various crises: the financial crash of 2008 and the economic problems which ensued; the exodus of refugees fleeing war-torn Syria in 2015 and the recent Covid pandemic. But the country is still lagging behind when it comes to technological innovation and digitalisation, with Merkel famously referring to the internet once as ‘uncharted territory’, for which she was ridiculed.
The reality is that Germany in the 21st century isn’t quite up to speed in the information age, with schools crying out for modern computers and health authorities still relying on fax machines instead of email. Unlike neighbouring European countries many council services are still not available online. In fact, an EU report this year ranked Germany 21st out of the bloc’s 27 member countries (plus the UK) for offering web online services to its citizens. The problem was highlighted during the Covid pandemic, as many schools were simply not set up for remote learning.
While Merkel’s careful approach may have generated criticism domestically, it proved to be a winning strategy in the field of geopolitics. The ultimate pragmatist, she was an expert at the art of diplomacy and had an irrefutable talent for maintaining productive working relationships with her global partners. This has been particularly evident in her ability to manage relations with both East and West; with the US but also with China and Russia. She visited China no less than 12 times during her tenure, more than any other European leader, and placed great importance on Sino-German relations, no doubt because of the interest German car manufacturers had in the Chinese market, which makes up around 38% of their global sales.
This pragmatism ensured that Germany was a country one could do business with; enabling Merkel to pursue her Nord Stream 2 project with Russia to bring gas straight to Germany (in fact to her home constituency). Despite considerable pressure from the United States to drop the scheme right up until its completion last month, Merkel was resolute in her determination that the pipeline should be built. In fact, throughout the highs and lows of the West’s relationship with Russia, Germany, unlike many of her western allies, kept diplomatic channels open, ensuring that dialogue would continue to take place. She always had a good working relationship with Vladimir Putin, with the two having more in common than other world leaders, both speaking German and having lived in East Germany.
Merkel and Putin, despite their differences on some issues, have a similar approach to international relations in that they are realists, and are principally concerned with the national interest. As Niall Ferguson, a historian from Stanford University has commented ‘Angela Merkel more than most western leaders was impressed by Putin, and accepted the logic of Putin’s argument that he was a source of energy that Europe could not do without.’
This refusal to take a harder line on Russia was of course, condemned by the US, but Merkel was not one to be pushed around, particularly after the phone-tapping scandal of 2013 which greatly undermined her trust in the US leadership. When it turned out that the NSA, under Barack Obama’s watch, had been monitoring Merkel’s mobile phone, it was clear that the Chancellor was not amused, stating that spying on one’s friends was ‘unacceptable’. Although she kept emotions out of politics, she was undoubtedly perturbed by the incident, and pursued a UN general assembly resolution calling for the right to privacy on the internet together with the then Brazilian leader Dilma Rouseff, whose country had also been targeted by the NSA.
With all these leadership skills of crisis management and diplomacy at her disposal, Merkel leaves behind her a large void to be filled. Whatever awaits Germany will likely be a period less stable than before, and less certain, with the new coalition government. We are entering a period of deeper divisions between East and West; will ‘Merkel’s successor’ be able to bridge that divide as she did? Or will he join western allies in pursuing a harder line towards China and Russia. One thing is for sure: Germany’s energy future is much more secure now with the Nord Stream 2 project, something that Germans only have Merkel to thank.
*
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.
Johanna Ross is a journalist based in Edinburgh, Scotland. You can follow the author on 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).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 26,041 fatalities, and 2,448,362 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.
A Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.
The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50. (There are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.)
So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured following COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.
The EudraVigilance database reports that through September 25, 2021 there are 26,041 deaths and 2,448,362 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:
From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,176,130) are serious injuries.
“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”
A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. It is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.
Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.*
Here is the summary data through September 25, 2021.
Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer – 12,362 deaths and 1,054,741 injuries to 25/09/2021
28,662 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 172 deaths
29,569 Cardiac disorders incl. 1,834 deaths
277 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 23 deaths
265,482 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,320 deaths
866 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 53 deaths
4,104 Immune system disorders incl. 25 deaths
26,800 Infections and infestations incl. 347 deaths
11,472 Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 153 deaths
22,152 Investigations incl. 129 deaths
11,805 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 77 deaths
151,690 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 76 deaths
536 Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 17 deaths
209,576 Nervous system disorders incl. 872 deaths
456 Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 11 deaths
164 Product issues incl. 1 death
18,858 Psychiatric disorders incl. 50 deaths
3,752 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 49 deaths
13,707 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
35,537 Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 654 deaths
46,297 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 40 deaths
1,328 Social circumstances incl. 7 deaths
1,199 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 24 deaths
24,833 Vascular disorders incl. 395 deaths
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson – 1,304 deaths and 78,774 injuries to 25/09/2021
737 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 32 deaths
1,315 Cardiac disorders incl. 129 deaths
26 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
687 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 1 death
47 Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
1,067 Eye disorders incl. 6 deaths
7,102 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 59 deaths
20,536 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 333 deaths
98 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 9 deaths
321 Immune system disorders incl. 7 deaths
1,943 Infections and infestations incl. 79 deaths
743 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 17 deaths
3,998 Investigations incl. 79 deaths
465 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 29 deaths
12,263 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 33 deaths
37 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 2 deaths
16,253 Nervous system disorders incl. 148 deaths
26 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
21 Product issues
1,059 Psychiatric disorders incl. 11 deaths
311 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 15 deaths
1,139 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 4 deaths
2,786 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 148 deaths
2,426 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 5 deaths
235 Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
572 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 43 deaths
2,561 Vascular disorders incl. 109 deaths
*
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.
Comments Off on 26,041 Deaths 2,448,362 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Union’s Database as Slovenia Suspends J&J Shot after Death of 20-Year-Old Student
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).
Pax Americana was always a minor character in a zombie apocalypse flick.
Pax Americana is actually The Eternal Return of the Living Dead. “Pax” was never in order; War Inc. rules. The end of WWII led directly to the Cold War. The unipolar moment was an arc from the First Gulf War to the bombing of Yugoslavia. 9/11 launched the Global War on Terror (GWOT), renamed Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) by Team Obama. We are now entering Cold War 2.0 against China.
What former CIA analyst Ray McGovern memorably describes as the MICIMATT (military-industrial-congressional-intelligence-media-academia-think tank complex) never did “Pax”. They do War, in unison, like The Knights Who Say “Ni!” – minus the comic flair.
Take this Knight for the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the heart of the establishment matrix. CFR specializes in Kissingerian Divide and Rule. Now that applies, in spades, to the Russia-China strategic partnership.
Knights overwhelmingly state the obvious: “Chinese power must be contained”. They sell the current, serial imperial debacle as “grand strategic moves”, in a quirky, lost in translation mixed salad of Gramsci and Lampedusa: a “new order” (engineered by the Empire) is being born via “everything must change so everything may remain the same” – privileging the Empire.
Other Knights even propose the ludicrous notion that the current POTUS, an actual zombie remote-controlled by a teleprompter, is capable of conceiving a “foreign policy for the middle class” , as if the MICIMATT would ever approve a scheme to “advance prosperity in the free world as a whole”. The “free world” has just been stunned by the “prosperity” offered to Afghanistan during 20 “bombing to democracy” years.
And then there are British Knights, who at least should have known their Monty Python by heart, carping about illiberalism and the “regimes created by Xi and Putin” , which will “crumble” and be succeeded by “anarchy and new despotisms.” Same old Anglo haughtiness mixed with piercing ignorance. Oh, those Asiatic “tyrannies” threatening the White Man’s civilizational drive.
We all live in an Aussie submarine
Now it’s all about AUKUS – actually U SUK A. Until recently, only the P5 – the five permanent UNSC members – possessed nuclear-powered submarines. India joined the club, and later rather than sooner, Australia.
Every major player knows the next American war will not be about remote Pacific islands. Taiwan, though, is a completely different ball game. U SUK A is mostly about Taiwan.
U SUK A was finalized at the G7 summit in Carbis Bay last June. That was an Anglo Boys Club affair, discussed exclusively by the Biden-BoJo-Morrison troika – and duly excluding Japan, even as Tokyo all but drew a samurai sword yelling its intent of supporting Taiwan.
The problem is there have been no leaks of the fine print contained in U SUK A. Only spin. Yet it’s already clear that U SUK A goes way beyond building Aussie nuclear subs. Canberra will also have access to Tomahawks, Hornets and even become part of American hypersonic missile research.
But then, in a slip, Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton gave away the game: U SUK A will allow the upgrading of “the infrastructure in Perth, that will be necessary for the operation of these submarines. I expect we will see…lease arrangements or greater joint operations between our navies in the future.”
Translation: Perth will be a forward base for nuclear-powered and nuclear weapon-carrying American subs.
Why U SUK A now? Let’s go back to WWII – and the same old cartoonish geopolitics of benign Anglo maritime island powers pitted against the “evil” Eurasian heartland.
WWII was the solution to simultaneously prevent Germany from dominating the Atlantic and Japan from dominating the Asia-Pacific (by the way, that’s the correct terminology: “Indo-Pacific” is Empire-speak).
Germany-Japan was all about an alliance that would be predominant across the Eurasian heartland. Now, the Empire of Chaos is being slowly but surely expelled from the Eurasian heartland – this time by the Russia-China strategic partnership.
Those with technical knowledge across the Beltway – not, not the Knights – are aware the US is not a match for hypersonic Russia. Yet the Americans believe they can make life unbearable for Beijing. The US establishment will allow China to control the Western Pacific over their dead bodies. Enter the instrumentalization of Australia.
A big question is what will be the new role of the Five Eyes. With U SUK A, the Anglo Club has already stepped beyond mere intel sharing and spying on communications. This is a military pact between Three Eyes.
Depending on the composition of its new government, Germany could become a Sixth Eye – yet in a subordinate role. With U SUK A, NATO as a whole, fresh from its spectacular Afghan debacle, becomes little else than a semi-relevant vassal. This is all about maritime power.
U SUK A in effect is a Quad Plus, with India and Japan, the Fifth Columnist Asians, only allowed to play the role of, once again, mere vassals.
War before 2040
Not surprisingly, the first, concise technical and strategic assessment of U SUK A is Russian, written by Alexander Timokhin and published in Vzglyad, closely linked to GRU intelligence. Here, provided by John Helmer, is an essential English translation.
The key points:
the extra subs will create a serious, additional threat; “the problem of combating enemy submarine forces will become quite acute for China.”
Geographically, “Australia can completely block the connection between China and the Indian Ocean.”
Australia will meet the deadlines only if it lays “more submarines a year than the Americans.”
It is “possible to quickly make Australia a country with a submarine fleet.” These “gigantic investments and sharp political turns are not carried out just like that. The hegemony of the Anglo-Saxons in the world is seriously shaken.”
And that brings us to the inevitable conclusion: “It is worth recognizing that the world is on the verge of war.”
Even before the Vzglyad strategic assessment, I had submitted the ravings of yet another Beltway Knight – widely praised as a sage – to an old school, dissident Deep State intel analyst. His assessment was merciless.
He wrote me, “the geopolitical logic is that the China-Russia alliance was determined to be against US interests, much as the Mao-Stalin alliance. SEATO and NATO are being replicated. The treaty between England, Australia and the US is part of the Pacific rebalancing, or a new SEATO. NATO is part of the offset against Russia-China in Europe.”
On what might lie ahead, he noted that “the coup against the US, Australia, England and NATO would be a French-Russian alliance to break up NATO and isolate Germany. Russia has unsuccessfully approached Germany, and now may approach France. The loss of France would effectively end NATO.”
He sees U SUK A all dressed up with nowhere to go: “As it stands now, China is in command of the Pacific and Australia and Britain mean nothing. Russia can overrun NATO in two weeks, our adversaries’ hypersonic missiles can destroy all NATO airfields within five to ten minutes and the battle for Europe would be over.”
He’s adamant that “the US cannot project power into the Pacific. Chinese submarine missiles would finish off the US fleet in short order. The Australian submarine issue is really irrelevant; if the CIA had an organization that was worth anything they would know that our adversaries already can spot and destroy our nuclear submarines without the slightest difficulty. The entire US Navy is obsolete and defenseless against Russian missiles.”
And it gets worse – at least for the cheerleading Knights: “The F-35 is obsolete. The Air Force is largely worthless, as Russian and Chinese missiles can finish off their airfields or aircraft carriers in short order. The woke US Army is more worthless than the French Army with their Maginot Line. The Joint Chiefs of Staff are paid less than 200k a year, and are second or third rate talent. The US is a sinking ship.”
Assuming that’s really the case, the – nuclear – war against China in the Western Pacific, projected in the Beltway to happen in the second half of the 2030s, would be over even before it started. Taiwan may even be part of China by then – an offshoot of Beijing always proposing economic exchanges to all, while Washington always “proposes” war.
One thing though will never change: The Knights Who Say “Ni!” singin’ the praise of Pax Americana to the utter indifference of the unruly plebs.
*
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.
Pepe Escobar,born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
In hundreds of films and TV shows, every single word and image has been closely scrutinized and signed off on by senior military figures, all in an effort to convince viewers into supporting deadly and grossly immoral campaigns around the world.
The (official) 20-year U.S. occupation of Afghanistan has come to a close, with the military beating a hasty and ignominious retreat. The puppet Afghan government NATO installed lasted fewer than two weeks on its own, with President Ashraf Ghani fleeing for the UAE, allegedly with around $169 million in cash.
If the occupation was so unpopular and weak, how was it able to last so long? The Afghanistan Papers — a trove of military documents leaked to The Washington Post — showed that high-ranking government officials knew that the war was unwinnable but were openly lying to the public about how it was going, all while NGOs and military contractors made billions.
But documents obtained by journalist Tom Secker under the Freedom of Information Act and shared with MintPress also show that Hollywood also played a significant role, knowingly collaborating with the Pentagon to produce pro-war propaganda about Afghanistan, ultimately helping to artificially buoy public opinion on the unwinnable campaign. This typically included giving the Pentagon direct editorial control over scripts and even removing any anti-war content or scenes that would show the military in a negative light. In exchange, the military offered its human resources, its bases as locations for filming, and its wide range of hi-tech vehicles to be used in movies. This quid pro quo effectively turned much of Hollywood, and the entertainment industry more generally, into cheerleaders for imperialism.
The military-industrial-media complex
Reading through the documents, what becomes clear is the sheer scale of the military’s involvement in the silver screen, and in pop culture more generally. For instance, between 2015 and 2017, the U.S. Army’s Office of the Chief of Public Affairs West (OCPA-W) — based just outside of Hollywood, CA — was generally working on between 40 and 70 entertainment media projects at one time. The OCPA-W is one of three Army regional offices, the others being in Chicago and New York City. The Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, CIA and other government organizations all have similar agencies and programs aimed at manipulating their image in mass media.
The OCPA-W’s weekly summary of its affairs for the week of December 22, 2016, for example, notes that it is involved in 63 working projects; 15 in pre-production, 26 in production and 22 in post-production. According to research by Secker and Matthew Alford for their 2017 book “National Security Cinema,” the Department of Defense has supported at least 814 movies and 1,133 separate TV shows, the majority of those in recent years.
Afghanistan is generally far from American minds. This is by design: few at the top of American society want the public to be scrutinizing U.S. actions there. When the country is portrayed on American screens, the military works extremely hard to present the war in a way most conducive to its interests. Hollywood has been a willing collaborator in this. Below is a selection of case studies of movies about or featuring the war in Afghanistan and a discussion about how the U.S. military has had those movies sanitized before they ever met the public eye.
12 Strong (2018)
“12 Strong” is a jingoistic action film based on a true story about a small unit of 12 U.S. Special Forces who invaded Afghanistan immediately after the September 11 attacks, thus being the first American boots on the ground of a two-decade campaign that cost the lives of an estimated 176,000 Afghans, displacing almost 6 million more.
The film entails the elite group attempting to capture the city of Mazar-i-Sharif before NATO forces arrive. The team, so they say, is outnumbered by “50,000 Taliban and Al-Qaeda forces,” as if the two were close allies. This is despite the fact that the Taliban immediately condemnedthe 9/11 attacks and that Western estimates put al-Qaeda’s global forces at the time at below 100 members. “If we don’t take that city, the World Trade Center is just the beginning,” says one of the heroes of the film, whose tagline is “twelve soldiers gave us a reason to hope.”
Documents show that the military was eager to help with such a nationalistic film, and matched what they called the production company’s “breathtaking” list of asks, including access to a number of military bases in New Mexico for shooting; army uniforms for actors; “target” vehicles they could blow up; the hire of a number of aircraft, including Chinook and Seahawk helicopters; and appropriate Soviet tanks for the enemy to use. They also aided the company in finding military extras to appear in minor roles.
Despite the movie’s strongly pro-war message, the OCPA-W, Air Force, and other military organizations still insisted on going through the script with a fine-toothed comb, removing even minor details it did not like. This included demanding that writers changed their plans to present the 12 soldiers as rugged men with full beards and tattoos. An email from OCPA read:
My other concern is that during the loadout sequences at Fort Campbell that occurred shortly after 9/11 our soldiers did not have full length beards and neck tattoos. That came later. I hope [REDACTED] guys are going to Shave for those sequences.
A few weeks later, the seemingly minor point had not been resolved. In a show of just how much control over creative direction the military had, the OCPA threatened to pull out of the movie, reminding the production company of the agreement they had signed up for:
The production company agrees to cast actors, extras, doubles, and stunt personnel portraying military men and women who conform to individual Military Service regulations governing age, height / weight, uniform, grooming, appearance, and conduct standards. DoD reserves the right to suspend support in the event that disagreement regarding the military aspects of their portrayals cannot be resolved in negotiation between the production company and DoD within the seventy-two hour cure-period. The DoD Project Officer will provide written guidance specific to each Military Service being portrayed.
U.S. Army.
(1) The depiction of Soldiers in the Continental United States prior to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks should be in accordance with U.S. Army Regulation 670-1, West and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia. Soldiers would meet height/weight standards, be clean shaven, with a well-groomed haircut and be wearing the Battle Dress Uniform (BDU). Load bearing equipment would be olive drab or the BDU pattern.
(2) The depiction of deployed Soldiers following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks would be in accordance with the tactical situation. Soldiers would still meet height/weight requirements (appear physically fit) with relaxed grooming standards for extended operations. The deployed Soldiers would be wearing the Desert Combat Dress Uniform (DCU) with olive drab or BDU pattern load bearing equipment.
The Department of Defense is well aware that the sort of assistance they offer (free equipment, filming locations, etc.) would be enormously expensive, if not impossible, to otherwise obtain. Therefore, they leverage their considerable influence into what amounts to control over every aspect of a movie or TV show they work on. This often even means jettisoning reality in favor of a relentlessly pro-war message.
Emails show that OCPA instructed the production company to change the minor criminal backstory of one of the 12 soldiers, despite the fact it was perfectly real. As one OCPA official wrote:
I told him our two biggest issues were the background story of Cpt [REDACTED]
being any FNG [“Fucking New Guy,” a derogatory military term for recruits] when he was actually a Team Leader for two years and the comment about Sergeant [REDACTED] having a choice between Jail and the Army.
According to the book the bar fight incident did happen, [REDACTED] attorney
was able to plea deal it down to a misdemeanor with a probation period. He
did lose his job as a school teacher and he started to work construction. I [sic]
period of time later, he decided to join the US Army.
Production quickly agreed to the changes, a few weeks later sending a new script for the OCPA and Air Force’s approval. “Here is a revised draft of Horse Soldiers,” they replied. “We changed [REDACTED]’s backstory per your suggestion. Please let me know if this works for you. [PERSON’s NAME REDACTED], would you send this draft to the appropriate Air Force personnel and let me know whom to follow up with?” (Cross referencing the documents with the book it is based on makes it clear that the sergeant in question is Sam Diller, one of the main characters in both book and movie).
None of the military’s demands appear to have caused much resistance from the company. Indeed, towards the end of filming, a senior member of the team even emailed the OCPA and the Office of the Secretary of Defense to offer his profound gratitude for their services:
[The] Army and the entire team have been absolutely fantastic and helped us achieve an amazing air-to-air shoot this evening. They are the utmost professional highly trained crew. We know if it wasn’t for your great efforts to make this movie badass we would have never gotten such a team. We promise to make the Army proud, so THANK YOU!!!!!
“Lone Survivor” is the largely true story of a Navy SEAL team that was discovered and attacked by the Taliban while carrying out a special operation to assassinate the organization’s commander, Ahmad Shah. The SEALs suffered devastating losses, leaving only one man — Marcus Luttrell — to tell the story.
The plot of the film revolves around the squad being discovered by local goat herders and their supposedly heart-wrenching decision on whether to kill the shepherds to cover their tracks, or let them go, the assumption being that the old man and two children in question would immediately alert the Taliban to their whereabouts. The group decided to let their captives go, which almost immediately turned out to be a deadly mistake.
The story is based upon the book by Luttrell, who is now a Trump-loving media anchor on Glenn Beck’s conservative TV network “TheBlaze.” At times, Luttrell’s book reads like the manifesto of a white-nationalist mass-shooter, and is peppered throughout with his seething hatred of liberals. Luttrell is extremely regretful that he went along with the decision to let the Afghans go and did not stick to his gut feeling and insist they murder an old man and two children (all unarmed). “It was the stupidest, most southern-fried, lamebrained decision I ever made in my life,” he wrote. “I’d turned into a fucking liberal, a half-assed, no-logic nitwit, all heart, no brain.” By way of explanation, he said that it was his certainty that the liberal media would betray the troops and side with the Taliban that made him release them, telling his fellow SEALs at the time:
Just so you all understand, their bodies will be found, the Taliban will use it to the max. They’ll get it in the papers, and the U.S. liberal media will attack us without mercy. We will almost certainly be charged with murder.
Apologizing for not carrying out what amounts to a war crime, he writes:
That situation might look simple in Washington, where the human rights of terrorists are often given high priority. And I am certain liberal politicians would defend their position to the death. Because everyone knows liberals have never been wrong about anything. You can ask them. Anytime.
The book is a glorification of supposedly righteous violence against a subhuman opponent. As he explains:
“In the global war on terror, we have rules, and our opponents use them against us. We try to be reasonable; they will stop at nothing. They will stoop to any form of base warfare: torture, beheading, mutilation. Attacks on innocent civilians, women and children, car bombs, suicide bombers, anything the hell they can think of. They’re right up there with the monsters of history.
The original script stayed close to Luttrell’s interpretation of events. Needless to say, however, the military demanded major rewrites. In the finished version, the Navy SEAL commander simply decides to let the goat herders go, with no arguments about whether to kill them and hide their bodies and certainly no long soliloquies about the treachery of the liberal media, as happens in the book.
The military often claims that they aid the film industry merely to ensure depictions of themselves are more accurate. Yet reading through 131 pages of declassified emails between them and production company, Film 44, it is clear that this is not the case. Indeed, Philip Strub, the Department of Defense’s chief Hollywood liaison, made this explicit, writing in a now-declassified email:
While maximizing historical authenticity is our mandate, we share responsibility for the reputations of the four SEALs and to their families’ memories of them.
What also becomes apparent after reading the documents is the level of intimacy between the movie industry and the military, and the latter’s fastidious attention to detail, poring over every single word of dialogue to ensure each frame is as pro-war as the film can get. Strub and his associates even insisted minor touches, like visible tattoos on the SEALs, be written out of the script. They also demanded the deletion of a scene in which Luttrell and another SEAL have a conversation about Power Bars, taunting each other, with Luttrell shouting “blow me, fag,” then loudly farting. This was presumably in an effort to ensure members of the Navy SEALs did not come across as uncouth as Lutrell does in his own book.
“I just learned from Film 44 (Sarah and Braden) that they are ready to submit Pete’s latest rewrite to us. They say that they have used our notes as a kind of check-list, and addressed all of our concerns. You’ll be receiving the watermarked script via email very shortly,” Strub wrote in an email that suggests that every draft script needed to meet the military’s exacting standards. Strub is one of the most powerful men in the entertainment industry. The list of movies and TV shows for which he is (publicly) credited is staggering, surely more impressive than virtually any other director or producer in Hollywood. Yet his name is all but unknown to the public.
The DoD’s chief Hollywood liaison, Phillip Strub, has had a hand in many of Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters
According to the documents, the military categorized their role in the movie into four parts: “script review and vetting,” “production department consulting,” talent training” and “on-set coaching.” In exchange for what amounts to total content control, the military provided “Lone Survivor’s” producers with the use of Kirtland Air Force Base in a rocky and sandy part of New Mexico that could easily pass for Afghanistan; the use of a multitude of expensive aircraft, including Black Hawk and Apache helicopters; and parachute jumpers and other general military personnel.
One reason for this continued involvement is obvious, and made explicit in the emails. “One of the criteria for DoD to support the movie is recruiting,” wrote an officer from U.S. Special Operations Command.
What is particularly noteworthy about this movie is that its entire premise — that if the SEALs chose not to kill the goat herders they would be found out — is demonstrably incorrect. Interviews with locals (including the man who hid and protected Luttrell, ensuring he was the lone survivor) establish that everybody in the area knew the SEALs were there, thanks to the elite unit’s own incompetence when it came to stealth. An enormous American helicopter landing in a remote part of rural Afghanistan was enough to raise suspicions among locals. If that was not enough, the SEAL team failed to dispose of evidence of their landing.
Unsurprisingly, Strub and his colleagues insisted this scene, which threatened to introduce a potential alternative reading of the movie — in which bungling Americans get caught, outmaneuvered, then slaughtered — was changed. This helped ensure the movie was as relentlessly pro-military as possible, despite the fact that it was telling the story of one of the deadliest U.S. military blunders of the entire war.
Charlie Wilson’s War (2007)
“Charlie Wilson’s War” tells the story of the eponymous Texas politician most famous for being the driving force behind Operation Cyclone — the CIA’s funding and training of the Afghan Mujahideen (an action that also turned the country into the world’s largest heroin producer).
The original script did not portray Wilson or his endeavors especially sympathetically, explicitly noting how he was supporting extremists like Osama Bin Laden’s al-Qaeda. One of these ultra-radicals was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a brutal warlord widely accused of starting the trend of throwing acid in women’s faces. Throughout the original script, 9/11 is presented as a foreseeable consequence of the U.S.’s decision to empower these violent fanatics. Indeed, the original end scene took place at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, with Wilson hearing the deafening screech of an airliner hitting the building.
However, all this — al-Qaeda, Hekmatyar, and the 9/11 scene — was cut from the script after the CIA reviewed it. Instead, the finished film ends with Wilson receiving a medal for his services to freedom in Afghanistan. Also removed was a scene discussing the Sabra and Shatilla Massacres, where Israeli-backed forces slaughtered hundreds, if not thousands, of Palestinian refugees.
Earlier versions of the script also portrayed the Soviets somewhat sympathetically, with one character noting that Soviet atrocities in Afghanistan included “forc[ing] them [Afghans] to learn to read and write.” This was also cut in favor of portraying Soviet soldiers as brutal and unthinking monsters slaughtering the local population.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot (2016)
The comedy-drama — which stars Tina Fey, Margot Robbie and Martin Freeman as Western journalists covering the Afghan War — was something of a flop at the box office. Still, it managed to reduce losses significantly by filming at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico (just as “Lone Survivor” did) and using real U.S. Marines as extras. In exchange, producers handed over significant editorial control of the story to the military, which insisted on changing a scene where a U.S. military truck crashed into a crowd of civilians. In the final movie, there are no images of this, and the incident is referred to only in a 20-second news segment that describes it merely as “a fatal traffic accident involving a coalition truck.”
The crash was a real incident. In 2006, the truck plowed through Kabul during rush hour, killing at least three civilians and injuring many others. “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” is based on American journalist Kim Barker’s memoir “The Taliban Shuffle.” The incident plays a major role in her book as the point where she finally understood how pointless and unwinnable the war was, how there was no accountability for the rich and powerful and no justice for the “have nots.” She described it and the following anti-U.S. riots as “a major breaking point in Afghanistan, the time when we first saw just how angry some Afghans were, just how ripe the country was for a Taliban comeback, just how leaderless Afghanistan really was.” Yet in the movie, the crash is mentioned only in passing, making the rioting Afghans appear irrationally angry and violent, a typical stereotype of Afghan War films.
Iron Man (2008)
The original “Iron Man” script was decidedly pacifist, with protagonist Tony Stark attempting to use his enormous manufacturing empire to battle against war profiteers and the military industrial complex. However, after the Pentagon got involved, with Philip Strub again acting as the military liaison, the tone of the movie was radically altered. Much of the fighting in the movie takes place in modern-day Afghanistan, with the U.S. military serving the role of the good guys. In this sense, the film’s stance on war was reversed.
In exchange, the production agreement notes that the military would allow the movie to be shot at Edwards Air Force Base, just north of Los Angeles; provide “approximately 150 extras at Edwards AFB to play military members from various services and Afghan nationals;” help produce around 100 uniforms; and provide the opportunity to use a range of expensive aircraft.
Tom Secker, when asked by MintPress to assess the U.S. film industry’s role in prolonging the Afghan war, responded:
Hollywood’s coverage of NATO’s war in Afghanistan has been notable by its absence, its silence, and its use of contextless microcosms which represent the war, rather than explore or explain it. “Iron Man” and “Lone Survivor” — two Pentagon-supported blockbusters — are both set during the U.S. occupation, but the scale of that occupation and the mess it was making of the country are ignored by both narratives, in favor of tightly-focused cinematic synecdoches which conveniently avoid the suffering of everyone involved.
Secker concluded:
In that sense, of course Hollywood has played a crucial role in perpetuating the war. They either failed to remind people that the war was still going on, or painted it in heroic, decontextualized colors that make it seem like a benevolent adventure halfway round the world, rather than the crushing, destructive geopolitical ratfuck it truly is.
A mediated war
It is not just big-budget Hollywood movies that the Pentagon works on, however. Practically every medium is used to spread a pro-war message. Declassified documents show that the Army flew Arnold Schwarzenegger to Afghanistan for the global-warming documentary TV series “Years of Living Dangerously.” This was, laughably, an effort to present the U.S. military — the single largest polluter in the world — as a force for good with regard to climate change, showing the former bodybuilder their supposed efforts to set up renewable energy systems across the Middle East.
Likewise, pop culture is full of strategically inserted pro-war messages. For instance, declassified documents show that the OCPA-W carefully placed uniformed service members in opportune spots in the audience of the game show “The Price is Right.” The military pays the National Football League millions of dollars to put troops on the field or fly aircraft over the stadium before big football games, turning the entire event into a recruitment drive. It also has a video-games team called “U.S. Army Esports,” helping to associate the military with fun in the minds of the children watching. They have also been accused of using the same grooming techniques pedophiles use, only to recruit children into joining the war machine.
Major General Frank Muth, head of Army recruiting & the Army eSports project, openly explains how their sinister strategy of having recruiters on Twitch—in a clandestine and subversive manner—groom teens into joining pic.twitter.com/rie8Xafy7l
Meanwhile, the music video for pop star Katy Perry’s song “Part of Me” was shot at Camp Pendleton Military Base in California, and shows Perry getting over a bad breakup by joining the Marines. The training process shows her finding herself again and growing as an individual. When Fox News asked Perry’s team if they had been paid by the military for the video, they refused to answer. The video currently has 887 million views on YouTube.
“The whole videography … is straight out of [Nazi film maker] Leni Riefenstahl: the same angled, heroizing upward shots, the same fetishization of physical power, of gleaming armaments, and of the rigor and mechanism of human beings cohering into living militarized units,” wrote feminist critic Naomi Wolf, who labeled the song “war propaganda.”
TV news is also filled with former high-ranking military officials who play the role of neutral expert while sticking, laser-like, to pro-war talking points, helping to give cable news coverage of the conflict a decidedly jingoistic bent.
What these documents ultimately underline is the deep interlocking connections between Hollywood and the national security state. Few Americans experience the war from close up. Even fewer realize that depictions of the conflict come heavily mediated through the military. In hundreds of films and TV shows, every single word and image has been closely scrutinized and signed off by senior military figures, all in the effort to convince viewers into supporting deadly and grossly immoral campaigns around the world. Long ago, the military realized the power of Hollywood. It is high time that Americans realized that, when watching movies and TV shows about war, all too often they are not seeing neutral works of art, but carefully constructed pieces of national security propaganda.
*
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).
YouTube will ban all “harmful vaccine content” from its platform, including claims that vaccines are ineffective at reducing disease transmission. The ban comes after a year of escalating censorship by the Google-owned company.
“We’ve steadily seen false claims about the coronavirus vaccines spill over into misinformation about vaccines in general, and we’re now at a point where it’s more important than ever to expand the work we started with Covid-19 to other vaccines,” YouTube said in a blog post on Wednesday.
The new rules prohibit content alleging that vaccines “cause chronic side effects,” that they “do not reduce transmission or contraction of disease,” and that they contain unlisted ingredients like fetal cells. The rules apply to all currently approved and administered vaccines, and not just Covid-19 shots.
At first glance, the rules are open to interpretation. YouTube’s moderators will have to decide, for instance, whether content discussing side effects strays beyond the “rare side effects that are recognised by health authorities.” Likewise, multiple studies and real-world data have suggested that Covid-19 vaccines are less effective at preventing transmission and infection than previously thought, and some suggest that this efficacy wanes with time.
And, while YouTube explicitly bans claims that vaccines contain fetal tissue or fetal cell lines, shots for various diseases – including Hepatitis A, Rubella and Chickenpox – are actually manufactured using cell lines started in aborted fetal tissue, but individual doses do not contain any of this tissue.
Content violating these new rules will receive a series of “strikes” from YouTube, with three strikes resulting in the termination of the offending channel.
The new policy adds to YouTube’s existing ‘Covid-19 medical misinformation policy,’ which sets out a wide range of forbidden topics regarding the coronavirus. These include videos “encouraging home remedies,” content claiming “that masks do not play a role in preventing the contraction or transmission of Covid-19,” and content “that recommends use of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine for the prevention 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.
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).
Forbes Magazine has confirmed that the US federal government will fine employers who violate Joe Biden’s Vax Mandate.
President Joe Biden didn’t just announce a Covid-19 vaccine mandate on companies employing 100 or more people, he plans to enforce it.
On Saturday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House quietly tucked an enforcement mechanism into their $3.5 trillion “reconciliation” bill, passed it out of the Budget Committee, and sent it to the House floor.
Buried on page 168 of the House Democrats’ 2,465-page mega bill is a tenfold increase in fines for employers that “willfully,” “repeatedly,” or even seriously violate a section of labor law that deals with hazards, death, or serious physical harm to their employees.
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 eachfine. 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.
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).
United Airlines is set to terminate 593 of its employees who have chosen to not comply with the company’s vaccine mandate, it confirmed to The Epoch Times on Sept. 29.
The company was the first U.S. carrier to mandate vaccines for all domestic employees, having announced its mandate in August. Employees were required to be vaccinated by Sept. 27 or they would be terminated by Oct. 2. Those who refused the vaccine would be terminated outright.
In a memo sent to employees on Sept. 28 and obtained by The Epoch Times, United Airlines Chief Executive Scott Kirby and President Brett Hart said the company would start the process of firing the employees who refused to be vaccinated against COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.
The United Airlines executives told staff that more than 99 percent of domestic employees “chose to get vaccinated, excluding those who submitted for an accommodation.”
“For the less than 1 [percent] of people who decided to not get vaccinated, we’ll unfortunately begin the process of separation from the airline per our policy,” the memo reads. “This was an incredibly difficult decision but keeping our team safe has always been our first priority. The pandemic is now killing more than 2,000 people per day—a 65 [percent] increase in just the past 30 days—and the most effective way to keep our people safe, is to make sure they’re vaccinated.”
Two major unions representing United Airlines workers, the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA and the Air Line Pilots Association, didn’t respond to requests for comment by press time. They had said in previous statements that they supported the mandates.
The memo noted that those applying for a medical or religious exemption have had “the deadline for implementing the accommodations” extended due to a pending court case.
United Airlines officials said people who applied for religious and medical exemptions account for less than 3 percent of the company’s workforce of 67,000 people. It was going to offer an “accommodation” of unpaid personal leave from Oct. 2. Doing so would mean that the employees would also forfeit their benefits, including medical coverage.
Six United Airlines employees filed a class-action suit against the airline last week, with attorneys arguing that the company’s handling of its vaccine mandates violates the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The attorneys for the employees announced on Sept. 28 that the company had agreed to pause its plan until Oct. 15 to apply so-called accommodation for about 2,000 of its employees who have applied for religious or medical exemptions.
They hailed the move as “a victory for employees seeking reasonable accommodations for personal medical decisions,” and condemned the “accommodation” that United Airlines had initially offered as “termination by another name.”
Texas Judge Mark Pittman is set to hear evidence and arguments in the lawsuit on Oct. 8.
A United Airlines spokesperson told Reuters that the company plans to hire about 25,000 people over the next few years and that COVID-19 vaccination is a condition of employment. The spokesperson stated that the company will also require students at its pilot training school to get vaccinated.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Mimi Nguyen Ly is a reporter based in Australia. She covers world news with a focus on U.S. news. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in optometry and vision science from the University of New South Wales. Contact her at [email protected].
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
People driving around the Texas cities of Houston, Austin, San Antonio, and Dallas over the last few days have seen new billboards along major highways encouraging them to resist the incessant bullying from politicians, media, schools, businesses, and employers related to the experimental coronavirus “vaccine” shots.
The huge billboards declare the messages “Make an Informed Choice!” and “DON’T BE BULLIED.” The billboards also display the image of a gloved hand holding a vial labeled “COVID 19 Coronavirus Vaccine.”
Source: The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity
Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom (CCHF) put up the billboards recently in Texas. CCHF had put up similar billboards in Idaho, Minnesota, and Wisconsin before it announced, on August 25, its billboards public outreach effort. In its press release announcing the billboards public outreach effort, CCHF declared it had “the intent of raising awareness and building resistance to the vaccination mandates that are currently being used as an effort to coerce Americans into submitting to the ‘jab’.”
More power to CCHF in its effort to directly communicate a contrary view to people who are relentlessly bombarded with propaganda promoting not just the taking of experimental coronavirus vaccines, but the imposing of vaccine passports and vaccine mandates as well. The big money media and social media, acting like bullies, seek to prevent people from hearing the arguments that counter the propaganda. It is thus important for people trying to counter the propaganda to use alternative means, billboards among them, to circumvent the information gatekeepers.
In Texas, newspaper and TV station news stories about the new billboards have predictably used the “reporting” to condemn the billboards’ message while again trumpeting the party line on the experimental coronavirus vaccine shots. Bullying, indeed.
*
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.
If this were a “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” it would be the unvaccinated who would be getting infected and dying in overwhelming numbers. This, however, is demonstrably not the case.
The unspoken truth is that the virus provides a pretext and a justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire World into a spiral of mass unemployment, bankruptcy, extreme poverty and despair.
Student at the Lycée Valabre de Luynes-Gardannem, Aix-en-Provence, Sofia Benharira passed away on September 21, 7 days after having received the deadly Pfizer vaccine. This is happening all over the World: Children and adolescents are dying.
What explains the Vaccine Mandates?It is known that the vaccine does not protect—thus masks and booster shots—but it does kill and maim.Why are they determined to kill and maim us?
An anonymous nurse whistleblower, ‘Sarah’, speaks to Stew Peters about what she’s seeing in the US hospital she works at regarding the injured patients coming in. Her general perception about who is injured and why confirms the impressions of UK funeral director John O’Looney that we reported on yesterday.
This article celebrates the amazing bravery of a physician and senior military officer attacking the evil stupidity and anti-science character of the public health establishment. Standing up to the coercive mandates to force COVID vaccine shots for large segments of the population that have far more risks than benefits from them.
The US Congress invited neoconservative regime-change strategists to discuss the next stage of hybrid warfare on Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, which will likely involve creating an economic blockade, refusing to recognize the legitimacy of President Daniel Ortega, and borrowing tactics the Trump administration used in its coup attempt in Venezuela.
This article examines issues related to COVID-19 inoculations for children. The bulk of the official COVID-19-attributed deaths per capita occur in the elderly with high comorbidities, and the COVID-19 attributed deaths per capita are negligible in children.
Excess deaths data tell us an incredible tale. Sweden has been largely open and free from any restrictions for 15 months and counting, and Stockholm has seen virtually *zero* excess deaths from the “deadly pandemic.”
In this interview with Brannon Howse, Dr. Ardis reveals to us shocking information. As early as October 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) knew that the COVID vaccines could lead to numerous side effects including Guillain-Barré syndrome, myocarditis/pericarditis, autoimmune disease, pregnancy and birth outcomes, thrombocytopenia, and vaccine enhanced disease.
Protests have finally erupted in Israel as it has slowly dawned on people there that the goalposts for vaccine passports keep being shifted by the government.
The Justice Centre has notified the Province that it will file a legal action should Ontario fail to halt its unconstitutional discrimination against those who have not yet chosen to receive the experimental vaccines.
A “Physicians’ Declaration” produced by an international alliance of physicians and medical scientists strongly condemns the global strategy to treat COVID, accusing policy-makers of potential “crimes against humanity” for preventing physicians from providing life-saving treatments for their patients and suppressing open scientific discussion.
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).
If there was any reason to halt a farcical train of legal proceedings, then the case against Julian Assange would have to be the standard bearing example. Since last year, the efforts by the US government to pursue his extradition to the vicious purgatory of American justice has seen more than a fair share of obscene revelations. While prosecutors for the US insist that the publisher must find himself in freedom land for having, incongruously, violated provisions under the Espionage Act of 1917, the broader political elements to this are impossible to shake.
From the moment classified US documents were released with daring aplomb on the WikiLeaks site, Assange was treated as a political target sneeringly condemned by Joe Biden (then Vice President) as a “cyber terrorist”. It did not matter that he had been granted political asylum by a foreign government, or that he had exposed the vicious nature of the US war machine in foreign lands.
The central strategy of the enraged in the face of such exposure is conventionally dull. Mock the publisher; redirect attention away from exposing the bloody mischief of empire. In the court of public opinion, such an individual can be queered and rendered indigestible, motives rubbished, intentions trashed. Cheeky public disclosure contrarians can be dismissed as cranks and discredited.
Once Michael Pompeo assumed the reins at the Central Intelligence Agency, WikiLeaks became something of an obsession, fascinating given Donald Trump’s sheer delight over its releases of those Democratic emails that holed Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016. “It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is,” he told an audience at the Center for Strategic and international Studies (CSIS) on April 13, 2017, “a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.”
Such a perspective led to brazen efforts by the Spanish private security firm UC Global, hired to furnish surveillance equipment to the Ecuadorian embassy in London, to spy upon Assange and his various colleagues and confidantes. The firm, through its chief executive David Morales, was knee-deep with the Central Intelligence Agency and delighted to be of assistance.
The extent of Morales’s zeal alarmed a few former employees of the company, a point they were unreserved in expressing in the Old Bailey proceedings in September last year. “Around June 2017, while I was sourcing providers for the new camera equipment, David Morales instructed that the cameras should allow streaming capabilities so that ‘our friends’ in the United States’, as Morales explicitly put it, would be able to gain access to the interior of the embassy in real time. This request alarmed me greatly, and in order to impede the request, I claimed that remote access via streaming via the camera circuit was not technically achievable.” That witness noted Morales’s wish to bug the entire embassy and suggested that the purpose of installing microphones had been at the behest of the United States to target Assange’s legal representatives.
This was merely the start. One of the witnesses (for convenience, called Witness 2), revealed how Morales had asked him to “steal a nappy of a baby which according to the company’s security personnel deployed at the embassy, regularly visited Mr Assange.” The act was designed to ascertain whether, in fact, it came from “a child of the asylee.” It was “the Americans”, Morales claimed, “who wanted to establish paternity.”
Frustrated by a lack of movement on expelling Assange from the embassy, US officials began teasing out options. According to the second witness, “the Americans were desperate [in December 2017] and that they had even suggested that more extreme measures should be employed against the ‘guest’ to put an end to the situation of Assange’s permanence in the embassy.” An “accident” was proposed, one that could be claimed for covering an operation “which would allow persons to enter from outside the embassy and kidnap the asylee”. And just in case such a scenario would not unfold, another, more final suggestion was put on the table: a handy poisoning.
As is often the nature of the modern news cycle, such damnable revelations are dips in what is otherwise a more substantive, disturbing story. It takes such reports as those of Yahoo!News to add a chilling confirmation. To the credit of the authors, much flesh is added to the narrative. A former Trump national security official is cited as claiming that the administration was “seeing blood” after WikiLeaks published the Vault 7 files, a set of hacking tools developed by the CIA. “This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred millions line of code,” crowed WikiLeaks in a press release at the time, “gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA.”
But the interest in gathering material on the organisation in the intelligence community began prior, inspired by the revelations of Edward Snowden in June 2013 about the warrantless and expansive surveillance programs of the National Security Agency. Within the CIA, the Office of Transnational Issues got busy establishing its own “WikiLeaks team”. The intelligence community was abuzz with efforts to give the publishing outfit a different designation as “information brokers”.
With the publication of leaked Democratic Party emails, the belief among some intelligence operatives that Assange “was acting in collusion with people who were using him to hurt the interests of the United States” became, according to the community’s senior lawyer Robert Litt, palpable. With Trump taking up residence in the White House, a counterintelligence official could only remark that, “Nobody in that crew was going to be too broken up about the First Amendment issues.”
The Yahoo report is also filled with the wet dreams of adolescent functionaries pondering how the Australian might have made a dash for it. One of these involved the prospect that Assange might be spirited away by Russian agents after being granted diplomatic status by Ecuador. Scenarios involved crashing into any vehicle transporting Assange, snatching him and shooting the tyres of any plane intended to carry him to Moscow. “It was going to be like a prison break movie,” one former senior administration official fantasised with relish.
Outside the embassy, the area got cluttered with spooks and operatives. “It got to the point where every human being in a three-block radius was working for one of the intelligence services – whether they were street sweepers or police officers or security guards.”
Within some channels of the US government, concerns were aired that the rendition and kidnapping enthusiasts were getting out of hand. The fairly obvious point was expressed by some NSC officials that any such operation would be illegal. “You can’t throw people in a car and kidnap them,” a former national security official warned.
In the spring of 2017, assassination made it to the front of the queue as a possible remedy. President Trump put out the feelers for some advice. “It was viewed as unhinged and ridiculous,” a former senior CIA official is reported as saying. Another claimed that those proposing the idea “were just spitballing”, all part of an atmosphere where Trump was just being Trump. The spit balls in question evidently lingered long enough for rough sketches to be drawn up contemplating Assange’s murder and WikiLeaks members with access to the Vault 7 trove.
Assange’s US lawyer Barry Pollack wishes that this grubby state of affairs will lead to a sensible conclusion. “My hope and expectation is that the UK courts will consider this information and it will further bolster its decision not to extradite to the US.” The US appeal against the refusal to extradite Assange will be doing its best to avoid such thorny, and telling, revelations. Assange’s defence team will be doing their best to foil such efforts.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
Featured image: Julian Assange in Belmarsh Prison in 2019 (Source: WSWS)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
Today in La Spezia the Minister of Defense Lorenzo Guerini inaugurates SeaFuture 2021, the military-naval exhibition sponsored by the main war industries. In the lead Fincantieri (“strategic sponsor”), Leonardo (“platinum sponsor”) and Mbda (European joint venture in which Leonardo has 25%) which participates as “gold sponsor”.
The “Future” has already been outlined in the “Directive for the industrial policy of Defense”, issued by Guerini on July 29: Italy must “have a military instrument capable of expressing the advanced military capabilities that the country needs to protect its national interests”, which ensures “its membership in the circle of technologically and economically advanced countries”. The Directive, overturning Article 11 and other constitutional principles with the silent consent of Parliament, establishes that Italy must increasingly arm itself.
At the same time it establishes that Italy must maintain and strengthen “the strategic relationship with the United States, to ensure the involvement in technological innovation that finds in the U.S. one of the main incubators, to facilitate access of Italian companies in the American market and to better position Italy in the European context.
The line traced by the Directive has already been operational for some time. Suffice it to recall: the boarding on the aircraft carrier Cavour, the Navy’s flagship, of the US F-35B short take-off and vertical landing fighter aircraft, for which the ship was certified at Norfolk in Virginia; the decision to arm Italian submarines and frigates with Cruise missiles with a range of at least 1,000 km; the decision to arm the Reaper drones, which Italy has purchased from the US. These and other armaments, with which our armed forces are equipped, are not for defense but for attack.
The Cavour armed with the F-35B becomes an advanced military base that, deployed in distant theaters of war, can attack and invade a country; the submarines and frigates can strike a country from a great distance with cruise missiles that, flying at very low altitude over the sea and along the contour of the land, escape anti-aircraft defences; the Reaper drones, remotely controlled from thousands of kilometres away, can strike human “targets” with Infernal Fire missiles and laser or satellite guided bombs. Italy is thus arming itself to participate in other wars under US/NATO command.
The “strategic relationship with the United States”, established by the Directive, is getting stronger every day. The Fincantieri group, 70% controlled by the Ministry of Economy, has three shipyards in the USA, where it is building ten multi-role frigates for the US Navy and four similar warships for Saudi Arabia. Leonardo – the largest Italian military industry, which derives over 70% of its turnover from armaments – supplies products and services to the US armed forces and intelligence agencies, and in Italy manages the Cameri plant for Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighters. The 30% of the shareholding of the Leonardo group belongs to the Ministry of Economic Development.
For this reason, at the military exhibition in La Spezia, alongside Minister Guerini of the PD, Minister Giorgetti of the League participates. Described as an “expert in accounts”, he is in charge of managing the 30 billion euros already allocated by the Ministry of Economic Development for military purposes and the other 25 required by the Recovery Fund. The 26 billion euros spent annually by the Ministry of Defence are no longer enough. It is necessary to pass to at least 36 billion per year, as requested by NATO and reiterated by the US.
Just to make a few figures, the aircraft carrier Cavour cost 1.3 billion euros, the 15 F-35Bs for the Navy cost 1.7 billion, and to these are added another 15 F-35Bs and 60 F-35As with nuclear capability for the Air Force. Then there are the operational expenses: one day of navigation of the Cavour costs over 200 thousand euros and one hour of flight of an F-35 over 40 thousand euros. Always with public money subtracted from the social species, invested in weapons and wars to “protect our national interests and belong to the circle of economically advanced countries.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.
Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The FDA ignored warnings before the vaccine was distributed that it would likely cause organ damage; data published before and after the program was initiated showed it was the spike protein that damaged the microvasculature
An analysis of 789 professional athletes with COVID-19 showed no adverse cardiac events in healthy individuals; however, the VAERS shows 11,793 people who had a heart attack or diagnosed with myocarditis or pericarditis after the jab
Data from a patient group treated by Dr. Vladimir Zelenko showed none of the 3,000 patients he treated within the first five day of the onset of COVID-19 went on to develop long-haul symptoms, including fatigue, brain fog or difficulty breathing
The list of people reporting adverse events from the jab is growing. To tell their stories, two websites have been created since social media platforms are routinely removing any information about adverse events
*
This video from the Front Line doctors White Coat Summit was published in mid-August. In it, pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole succinctly outlines many of the health challenges associated with the experimental genetic therapy injection program. He asks, after thousands of people have died from the injection, where are the autopsies to investigate this investigational program?
In July 2021, the U.S. military published a study in JAMA Cardiology1 in which they asked the question if myocarditis was a possible adverse event following a jab with mRNA COVID-19 injection. They identified 23 men who were diagnosed with myocarditis within 4 days of getting the shot. They determined that there was a diagnosis of myocarditis after “vaccination in the absence of other identified causes.”2
And yet, despite finding myocarditis in previously healthy individuals following the shot, the writers only recommended vigilance. The heart problems in 23 military men who had signed up to protect the citizens of the U.S., “should not diminish overall confidence in vaccinations during the current pandemic.”3
As of September 3, 2021, the vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS)4 had received 675,591 reports of adverse events following vaccination. Of these, there were 14,506 deaths, 6,422 heart attacks and 5,371 cases of pericarditis or myocarditis.
It is important to note that the VAERS has tracked adverse events since 1990. In 2019, there were 605 reports of deaths from all vaccines given. In 2021, there were 14,594 deaths reported in nine months.
Although these numbers are significant, a 2010 Harvard study commissioned by the Department of Health and Human Services revealed data demonstrating the VAERS likely only represents approximately 1% of those who are injured.5
In light of these statistics and knowing the new shot program was experimental, December 18, 2020, the Children’s Health Defense chairman and chief legal counsel, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, requested the Biden Administration consider establishing a “comprehensive, high integrity system to monitor adverse outcomes following vaccination.”6
In early 2020, many clinicians, scientists and other health experts warned that millions of people may experience potentially permanent or long-term injury or death after the shot. Interestingly, it is the call for greater surveillance of vaccine injury that has, in part, generated censorship from social media platforms through AI surveillance of your posts.
Spike Protein Damages Endothelial Cells and Hurts Heart
Dr. J. Patrick Whelan is a pediatric rheumatologist who warned the FDA of the microvascular injury the vaccine may cause to the kidneys, brain, liver and heart before it was released to the public. Whelan specializes in treating children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C), which is associated with coronavirus infections.7
He did not dispute the potential benefit the vaccine might have to arrest the spread of the virus, but instead cautioned that recipients may experience permanent damage to their microvasculature. At the time, his concern was based on data scientists and doctors were reporting after an infection with COVID-19 affected multiple organs beyond the lungs.
In March 2021, a research study was published in the American Heart Association’s journal Circulation.8 However, it is important to note that the study was preprinted online in December 2020,9 before the first vaccine was administered in the U.S.10
This is important, since the study demonstrated that the spike protein associated with SARS-CoV-2 damages endothelial function.11 In other words, before the emergency use authorization jab that injected instructions to create the spike protein was first administered, the CDC, FDA and NIAID were well aware the spike protein was likely causing damage to the endothelial cells lining the circulatory system.
This information was not discussed in the media and not considered by the FDA, and it continues to be buried as government agencies push for 100% vaccination in the U.S. In the study, the researchers created a pseudo-virus12 that contained the spike protein but did not contain the virus. Using an animal model, they showed that the virus was not necessary to create damage and inflammation.13
When the S protein attached to the ACE2 receptor it disrupted signaling to the mitochondria and caused damage and fragmentation. The alterations in mitochondrial function were confirmed as part of the inhibition of ACE2 signaling in the lab.
The results also revealed that the virus could induce endothelial cell inflammation and endotheliitis. The protein reportedly decreased ACE2 levels and impaired nitric oxide bioavailability.14 Co-senior scientist of the study, Uri Manor, explained in a press release from Salk Institute:15
“If you remove the replicating capabilities of the virus, it still has a major damaging effect on the vascular cells, simply by virtue of its ability to bind to this ACE2 receptor, the S protein receptor, now famous thanks to COVID. Further studies with mutant spike proteins will also provide new insight towards the infectivity and severity of mutant SARS CoV-2 viruses.”
Further Study Demonstrates the Effect of the Spike Protein
Then, a second paper16 was published online March 8, 2021, investigated the potential that the spike protein is an inflammagen, or an irritant that can trigger inflammation at the cellular level. The researchers sought to determine if the spike protein was the underlying cause of the hypercoagulation found with a COVID-19 infection.
Mass spectrometry showed the spike protein damaged fibrinogen, prothrombin and complement 3, all compounds used in coagulation. They suggested that the presence of the protein was contributing to hypercoagulation and may result in large microclots that have been observed in plasma samples from patients infected with COVID-19.
Again, science demonstrated that it wasn’t the virus causing endothelial damage that led to organ damage, such as was found in the heart, liver and kidney of COVID-19 patients. Rather, it was the spike protein that was also being injected in a genetic therapy shot program.
A third study published April 27, 2021, again demonstrated in an animal model that exposure to the spike protein alone was enough to induce severe lung damage.17 And yet, there was no move by governmental agencies to slow the distribution of this genetic experiment.
Researchers have continued to study how the spike protein affects the endothelial cells, and ultimately damages the heart muscle. A study published June 2021 in Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine18 demonstrated that the spike protein down regulates the expression of junctional proteins found in the arteries. They concluded:
“… these experiments reveal that Spike-induced degradation of endothelial junctional proteins affects endothelial barrier function and is the likely cause of vascular damage observed in COVID-19 affected individuals.”
Even as researchers identify the pathway the spike protein takes to damage the endothelial cells, it is patently ignored by the mainstream media, governmental agencies and many health experts who continue to push the public into vaccinating with a genetic therapy injection that does not effectively keep you from getting the disease or stop you from spreading the disease.
Infection Starts and May Stay in the Lungs
Interestingly, another study19 published in March 2021 questioned if the prevalence of inflammatory heart disease after COVID-19 infection in professional athletes would affect their ability to return to play.
The researchers evaluated 789 professional athletes who had COVID-19 and found no adverse cardiac events in those who underwent cardiac screening. In this group of healthy individuals, it appeared very rare for there to be systemic involvement of the spike protein.
However, in the VAERS reports September 3, 2021, there were a total of 11,793 individuals who suffered heart attack, myocarditis or pericarditis in the nine months that the vaccine had been administered.20 The effect of COVID-19 on the heart is well documented.21
In my interview with Dr. Vladimir Zelenko22 in February 2021, we discussed the treatment of COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine. At that point, Zelenko had treated 3,000 patients with symptoms of COVID-19 and only three of his high-risk patients had subsequently succumbed to the disease.
While the focus of the interview was on treatment protocols and the use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine, Zelenko shared an interesting statistic about his protocol. In the early months of COVID-19, Zelenko decided to treat his high-risk patients as early as possible, without waiting for severe symptoms. This turned out to be one key to his significant success.
His understanding of the mechanism behind hydroxychloroquine and zinc led to using the combination alongside azithromycin, to prevent bacterial pneumonia and other bacterial infections common with COVID.
What is interesting are the statistics for Zelenko’s patients with long haul symptoms. Data from the University of Washington in 2021 found 32.7% of outpatients with COVID-19 go on to experience persistent symptoms.23,24 However, Zelenko had treated 3,000 patients and none who received treatment within the first five days went on to develop long-haul symptoms. His data was from the same period as that of the University of Washington.
While he has had patients with persistent symptoms from COVID-19, they sought medical care after the first five days of symptoms, which meant the inflammatory process had advanced. From his experience, and the experience of the patients he treated, early intervention with the protocol nearly eliminated the risk of persistent symptoms.
Long Haul Symptoms May Be Related to Spike Damage
The symptoms that may last for weeks or months after a COVID-19 infection are referred to as long-haul symptoms. For some, this may be the result of vascular damage caused by the spike protein. The CDC25 reports that a combination of the following symptoms without an active COVID infection can appear weeks after the infection and last for months.
Scientists now know that the predominant pathophysiology of COVID-19 includes endothelial damage and microvascular injury, stimulation of hyperinflammation and hypercoagulability.26 A review in Physiological Reports27 examined how the capillary damage and inflammation from endotheliitis triggered by COVID-19 could contribute to the persistent symptoms by interfering with tissue oxygenation.
The combined effects of capillary damage in multiple key organs may accelerate hypoxia-related inflammation and lead to long-haul symptoms. Unlike Zelenko’s patients who did not have long-haul symptoms, participants in an online survey published in EClinical Medicine did not fare so well.28
The study revealed data from 3,762 participants with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 in 56 countries. For the majority, it took greater than 35 weeks to recover from all their symptoms. The data showed that people experienced an average of 55.9 symptoms across 9.1 organ systems. The most frequent symptoms six months after infection were cognitive dysfunction, fatigue and post-exertional malaise.
List of Vaccine Side Effects Is Growing
As the list of people reporting adverse events after the vaccine continues to grow, social media platforms are working just as hard to suppress any information about the list of side effects people are experiencing.
In order to tell their stories, people are posting videos, still photos and evidence of their vaccine injury at No More Silence29 and 1000 COVID Stories.30 One example is Sarah Green, a 16-year-old student who is experiencing debilitating symptoms. This is her story as told by her mother:31
“Within a few weeks, she developed a bad stutter and started experiencing uncontrollable head movements. She looked like someone who has Parkinson’s. She had never stuttered or had these tics before.
She was admitted to the hospital where she spent two nights and underwent numerous tests, before being discharged and told that it was a ‘nervous tic,’ and to see a mental health provider.
‘We asked several times if it could be the vaccine and we were ignored, until one doctor told us that he had no idea what it was, but it was ‘absolutely not the vaccine’ and we couldn’t blame everything on that.’
Her parents argued for a referral to see a neurologist, who diagnosed Sarah with Functional Movement Disorder, and told that it was “related to the vaccine, but not vaccine related.” They also said that it was an ‘extremely rare’ side effect, despite having seen several cases of it in their own practice over the past year.
Sarah had ended the last school year with a 4.7 GPA and was enrolled in an Early College program, on track to graduate with an Associates Degree. Given her current physical condition and limitations, she had no choice but to drop her college classes for this upcoming semester.
She has started her regular classes but has found it impossible to look down or write without triggering violent tremors and spasms. Her teacher will be typing her notes for her.
‘I am heartbroken because she has worked so hard and everything has changed for her — and I’m so damn mad! Our whole lives have changed, and for what what? A vaccine that doesn’t even work! My hope is that you, the reader, will be able to make an informed decision when deciding whether you get the vaccine or not. We were not afforded that opportunity.’”
It is crucial to report a vaccine injury or side effect to VAERS, as the data are essential in helping individuals, doctors and researchers make informed decisions. You can make your own report online or using a PDF by going to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.32 You’ll find more information about adverse events and how vaccines affect your health at the National Vaccine Information Center.33
*
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).
Author Edmond B. Paré has provided a careful and incisive review of vaccine injuries reported by Hospital Nurse Whistleblowers.
***
Hospital nurse whistleblowers are reporting that it is mostly the vaccinated, not the unvaccinated who are going to the hospital; and, their symptoms are not the symptoms of respiratory Covid-19 patients.
The symptoms these nurses name are those in the list that the FDA has been hiding from the public, as well as from these healthcare workers as well as from the recipients of the Covid-19 vaccine.
Thus, the FDA is in violation of FDA EUA requirements, as well as FDA approved vaccine informed consent requirements (once the Comirnaty jabs start).
For examples, please consider the following hospital nurse whistleblower interview statements:
Interview of a nurse who has worked with Covid patients since the start of the “pandemic”
At time = 6:43, this nurse whistleblower states, “The influx (of patients) I have seen is since the vaccination rollout and it’s more vaccination-related injuries, umm, blood clots, cardiac issues, neurological issues, balance issues, cognitive issues, aggressive behavior, encephalopathy, things like that that were, that are very different from the, the previous Covid.”
ICU Nurse: I would like to think they’re vaccine injuries. Um, again, these physicians will never acknowledge that. But, I have never seen so many spontaneous strokes, um, deadly strokes, mulitple strokes, um, bizarre rashes all over the body. I have never seen such young people come in with cardiac arrest. I have never performed so much cardiac arrest on young people with no, no reason.
Stew Peters: So, these are previously healthy people. All of a sudden they have heart issues; They’re having strokes.
Stew Peters: What about vaccine injuries? Are you seeing some of the things that have been reported, ah, we’re seeing, ah, young people with mycarditis, heart issues; we’re seeing a lot of strokes and antibody dependent enhancement. Are you seeing these things first hand in your hospital?
Nurse Whistleblower:We are seeing those things. We actually had a paramedic in our hospital die within seven days of receiving the vaccine. He had had a prior Covid infection and he had a massive heart attack within seven days of having the vaccine and, and, that, that hit home.
That was personal. And, um, yes, we are seeing the vaccine injuries, Stew. We’re seeing an increase in strokes, an increase in MIs, pulmonary embolisms, blood clots in the legs, cognitive decline – major cognitive decline in the older population, neurological symptoms. We’re seeing all of that, Stew. And, and it is, again, it is just criminal that their stories are not being told.
Interview of a 30-year nurse, currently at the Univ of Vermont Medical Center
Stew Peters: Sandy says that she has questioned at least three doctors about the huge amount of anomalies that they’ve encountered treating Covid patients. She says that she’s seen at least five patients who, in her view, are one hundred percent cases linked with the Covid vaccines. There’s a young woman, a diabetic, for example, who is suddenly hospitalized with her (Sandy’s) first case of hyperglycemia – in a decade; a man in his early thirties with cardiac issues out of nowhere; and, then, much weirder things. A twenty-something with head to toe rashes like she’s never seen before; a woman with circular rashes and bloated, purple genitalia, not terribly unlike a female version of Nicki Minaj’s cousin’s friend.
My summary of the remaining interview:
Shortly following the (December, 2020) Covid-19 vaccine rollouts, for the first time in this nurse’s experience, “tons” of patients began presenting themselves to her hospital not with normal cases characterized by common disease symptoms, but with symptoms she had never seen before, not even when working in cancer related cases, some of these symptoms being “absolutely bizarre”.
Apparently, the CDC has instructed physicians that they are not allowed to question new patients regarding their Covid-19 vaccination status;
And, this directive is then imposed as a mandate to be followed all hospital’s healthcare workers. The consequence, is that doctors are not reporting these cases to VAERS because they are frequently not in a position to establish whether these patients are vaccinated or whether the patients symptoms could be caused by the Covid-19 vaccine.
Nurses are having to beat around the bush to try to determine whether these patients have been vaccinated; but, apparently, they are successful in doing so.
*
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.
Comments Off on Hospital Nurse Whistleblowers on Vaccine Injuries: “Deadly Strokes, Bizarre Rashes, Cardiac Arrest, Blood Clots in the Legs, Neurological Symptoms”
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
This past week maneuvers within the Democratic party intensified over the content and magnitude of the two pending fiscal stimulus bills–the Infrastructure Bill (with $550B of net new spending) and the Reconciliation Bill ( with initial $3.5T ‘human infrastructure & climate change’ spending).
While the maneuvering appears as a deep difference of views between progressives in the US House and Senate demanding both bills pass simultaneously and Democrat Senators, Manchin and Senema in that body blocking both bills in current form, the actual conflict is really between the corporate wing of the Democratic party (in both the Senate and House) vs. the wing that sees passage of both bills in current corm as necessary to ensure a sustained economic recovery in 2022–and thus the Democrats retaining majorities in the House and Senate in the November 2022 midterm elections.
Manchin-Senema in the Senate and Cuellar and his ten associates in the House are really the point persons for the corporate wing. The differences and split within the Democratic party are not about individual Senators or Representatives; it’s about the corporate forces that dominate and control the majority of that party (as they have since 1990) and those same corporate interests intent on ensuring the two spending bills are not so large that taxes will have to be significantly raised in order to pay for them. More specifically, ensuring that the Trump $4.5T tax cuts of 2017 are not rolled back.
Those corporate interests in the Democratic party have already prevailed in rolling back the Infrastructure bill to a level of only $550B in new spending (from its original $2.3T) to ensure paying for the $550B is not done by raising any taxes on corporations, investors and wealthiest Americans. They already succeeded. Now the same fight is underway to prevent the Reconciliation bill requiring tax hikes on the same capital incomes. To ensure no tax hikes for that bill, spending will have to be significantly cut or delayed, or perhaps both.
In other words, the split in the party and fight is not just over stimulus spending; it’s over taxes and rolling back the Trump tax cuts. The corporate wing of the Democratic Party is as opposed to the tax hikes as are the Republican party & McConnell. To borrow a phrase from the 1990s: “it’s the tax cuts, stupid!”.
The next step in the corporate wing’s anti-tax hike offensive will occur in the US House early next week. Pelosi had promised weeks ago not to break out the two bills for separate votes, but vote on both at the same time. That was the promise made to the party’s progressive forces months back, in order to get Sanders and progressives in the Senate and the progressive caucus in the House to go along and remove trillions of dollars in spending on human infrastructure measures from the original Infrastructure bill and reduce that bill from $2.3T to only $550B in new spending on traditional infrastructure only.
That made the Infrastructure bill palatable to the corporate wing in the party since paying for it could now be done by ‘smoke & mirrors’ financing that involved no tax hikes. The corporate wing wants separate votes now on the two bills, the remaining Infrastructure bill first. Passing the watered down Infrastructure bill first would leave the $3.5T Reconciliation bill with weakened support and unable to pass–for certain in the Senate and maybe even in the House as well. Human infrastructure spending on Medicare, Education, Elderly-Child care, and climate change mitigation and prevention–and the tax hikes to pay for it–would be dead in the water.
The progressive caucus in the House and the Sanders-Warren faction in the Senate are demanding, however, that Pelosi honor her earlier pledge to vote on both bills at the same time. But will she? If she renegs on that promise and the House votes up both bills, the corporate wing in the Senate–represented by Manchin-Senema–will never vote for budget reconciliation (50 + 1 vote) to pass either of the two bills. The Senate likely will then vote on the Infrastructure bill and let the $3.5T Reconciliation bill die. That will put Pelosi and the House progressives behind the eight ball, as they say: refuse to vote for the Senate passed Infrastructure bill or take the heat in elections for refusing to pass anything. One can guess what the pragmatists will then do, including Pelosi.
So what are the possible scenarios in the House this coming week?
One will be for Pelosi to vote on both bills as promised. While possible, it is the least likely to happen, however.
A second is to reduce the $3.5T spending total dramatically. The progressive caucus won’t go along with that, however.
How then to ‘reconcile the reconciliation bill’?
A more likely compromise outcome may be to backload most of the $3.5T (or a reduced amount). That is, make the Reconciliation bill spending take effect over a ten or even fifteen year period, with most of the spending occurring five to ten years into the 10-15 year bill. So maybe spend $1.5T over the first five to 7 years (Manchin’s signal he might accept) and the rest not taking effect until 2027 or after. In turn, make the proposed tax hikes to pay for it to take effect in the latter years as well.
That way Pelosi can placate the progressive caucus and the Democrats can still say they passed a big ‘human infrastructure’ Reconciliation bill. Backloading might then satisfy Manchin, Cuellar, Senema, and the party’s corporate wing. They can say they ‘won’, since the spending and taxing is only on paper. Republicans and McConnell will later cut the backload spending and delete the tax hikes once they take over again. That scenario could satisfy the Democrats’ corporate wing.
Another scenario may be for Pelosi not to hold a simultaneous dual vote because her progressive caucus won’t support a breaking out of the votes and will vote against the Infrastructure bill if held separate. In this case, Pelosi and the Democrats will then revert to the tried and true Democrat party ‘fall back’ message saying they’ll return to the vote on both bills after the 2022 midterms. That means everyone should vote for more Democrats in 2022 in order to pass both bills in 2023. But that’s a high risk strategy, since it will clearly appear that Biden and the Democrats can’t deliver on their election promises–especially if the US economic recovery is not robust by fall of 2022 due to lack of fiscal stimulus in fall of 2021, which is very likely since the current summer 2021 rebound of the economy already appears to be slowing.
So summing up: the three scenarios in the House are: Pelosi votes both bills up same time and they both pass; Pelosi renegs and holds separate votes and progressives vote down both bills; Pelosi and progressives agree on a ‘smoke & mirrors’ compromise and backload most of Reconciliation bill spending and taxing.
The first scenario almost ensures Manchin-Senema will never compromise and vote for Senate budget reconciliation on either bills. The second means Biden and Democrats are ‘toast’ in 2022 midterms. Something like the third may therefore be the most likely outcome.
Whatever the scenario, it was already decided by party leaders last week when Biden called Shumer and Pelosi into his office, reportedly in a closed door meeting that no one else attended. Biden thereafter called in separately a group of progressives and then a group of ‘moderates’ (i.e. what the mainstream media calls the corporate wing). Reportedly both Shumer and Pelosi came out of the meeting smiling and upbeat. What did they agree to with Biden? Not even Democrat members in the House or Senate know, since Pelosi-Shumer aren’t even telling them.
It all should become clearer this coming week. But one thing is certain: the final $3.5T Reconciliation bill with its spending on human infrastructure and climate change will be either significantly reduced or backloaded into out years so that the spending & tax measures can be safely deleted.
The Democrat corporate wing is as adamantly opposed to the spending–and the tax hikes it would require–as are McConnell and his Republicans. Thousands of corporate lobbyists have invaded Washington D.C. in recent months, with the single purpose of demanding the Democrats don’t touch the Trump tax cuts. They have already convinced both Republicans and the Democrat’s corporate wing not to raise their taxes. So watch for ‘smoke & mirrors’ financing in a final, much reduced spending Reconciliation bill–just as the same was previously engineered with the Infrastructure bill.
*
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. Jack Rasmus is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from Matt Kenyon/Financial Times
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
In October 2019, in a speech at an International Monetary Fund conference, former Bank of England governor Mervyn King warned that the world was sleepwalking towards a fresh economic and financial crisis that would have devastating consequences for what he called the “democratic market system”.
According to King, the global economy was stuck in a low growth trap and recovery from the crisis of 2008 was weaker than that after the Great Depression. He concluded that it was time for the Federal Reserve and other central banks to begin talks behind closed doors with politicians.
In the repurchase agreement (repo) market, interest rates soared on 16 September. The Federal Reserve stepped in by intervening to the tune of $75 billion per day over four days, a sum not seen since the 2008 crisis.
At that time, according to Fabio Vighi, professor of critical theory at Cardiff University, the Fed began an emergency monetary programme that saw hundreds of billions of dollars per week pumped into Wall Street.
Over the last 18 months or so, under the guise of a ‘pandemic’, we have seen economies closed down, small businesses being crushed, workers being made unemployed and people’s rights being destroyed. Lockdowns and restrictions have facilitated this process. The purpose of these so-called ‘public health measures’ has little to do with public health and much to do with managing a crisis of capitalism and ultimately the restructuring of the economy.
Neoliberalism has squeezed workers income and benefits, offshored key sectors of economies and has used every tool at its disposal to maintain demand and create financial Ponzi schemes in which the rich can still invest in and profit from. The bailouts to the banking sector following the 2008 crash provided only temporary respite. The crash returned with a much bigger bang pre-Covid along with multi-billion-dollar bailouts.
The dystopian ‘great reset’ that we are currently witnessing is a response to this crisis. This reset envisages a transformation of capitalism.
Fabio Vighi sheds light on the role of the ‘pandemic’ in all of this:
“… some may have started wondering why the usually unscrupulous ruling elites decided to freeze the global profit-making machine in the face of a pathogen that targets almost exclusively the unproductive (over 80s).”
Vighi describes how, in pre-Covid times, the world economy was on the verge of another colossal meltdown and chronicles how the Swiss Bank of International Settlements, BlackRock (the world’s most powerful investment fund), G7 central bankers and others worked to avert a massive impending financial meltdown.
The world economy was suffocating under an unsustainable mountain of debt. Many companies could not generate enough profit to cover interest payments on their own debts and were staying afloat only by taking on new loans. Falling turnover, squeezed margins, limited cashflows and highly leveraged balance sheets were rising everywhere.
Lockdowns and the global suspension of economic transactions were intended to allow the Fed to flood the ailing financial markets (under the guise of COVID) with freshly printed money while shutting down the real economy to avoid hyperinflation.
Vighi says:
“… the stock market did not collapse (in March 2020) because lockdowns had to be imposed; rather, lockdowns had to be imposed because financial markets were collapsing. With lockdowns came the suspension of business transactions, which drained the demand for credit and stopped the contagion. In other words, restructuring the financial architecture through extraordinary monetary policy was contingent on the economy’s engine being turned off.”
It all amounted to a multi-trillion bailout for Wall Street under the guise of COVID ‘relief’ followed by an ongoing plan to fundamentally restructure capitalism that involves smaller enterprises being driven to bankruptcy or bought up by monopolies and global chains, thereby ensuring continued viable profits for these predatory corporations, and the eradication of millions of jobs resulting from lockdowns and accelerated automation.
“It retains all the cruelties of the free market for those who live and work in the real world, but turns the paper economy into a state protectorate, surrounded by a kind of Trumpian Money Wall that is designed to keep the investor class safe from fear of loss. This financial economy is a fantasy casino, where the winnings are real but free chips cover the losses. For a rarefied segment of society, failure is being written out of the capitalist bargain.”
The World Economic Forum says that by 2030 the public will ‘rent’ everything they require. This means undermining the right of ownership (or possibly seizing personal assets) and restricting consumer choice underpinned by the rhetoric of reducing public debt or ‘sustainable consumption’, which will be used to legitimise impending austerity as a result of the economic meltdown. Ordinary people will foot the bill for the ‘COVID relief’ packages.
If the financial bailouts do not go according to plan, we could see further lockdowns imposed, perhaps justified under the pretext of ‘the virus’ but also ‘climate emergency’.
It is not only Big Finance that has been saved. A previously ailing pharmaceuticals industry has also received a massive bailout (public funds to develop and purchase the vaccines) and lifeline thanks to the money-making COVID jabs.
The lockdowns and restrictions we have seen since March 2020 have helped boost the bottom line of global chains and the e-commerce giants as well and have cemented their dominance. At the same time, fundamental rights have been eradicated under COVID government measures.
Capitalism and labour
Essential to this ‘new normal’ is the compulsion to remove individual liberties and personal freedoms. A significant part of the working class has long been deemed ‘surplus to requirements’ – such people were sacrificed on the altar of neo-liberalism. They lost their jobs due to automation and offshoring. Since then, this section of the population has had to rely on meagre state welfare and run-down public services or, if ‘lucky’, insecure low-paid service sector jobs.
What we saw following the 2008 crash was ordinary people being pushed further to the edge. After a decade of ‘austerity’ in the UK – a neoliberal assault on the living conditions of ordinary people carried out under the guise of reining in public debt following the bank bail outs – a leading UN poverty expert compared Conservative welfare policies to the creation of 19th-century workhouses and warned that, unless austerity is ended, the UK’s poorest people face lives that are “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”.
Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty, accused ministers of being in a state of denial about the impact of policies. He accused them of the “systematic immiseration of a significant part of the British population”.
In another 2019 report, the Institute for Public Policy Research think tank laid the blame for more than 130,000 deaths in the UK since 2012 at the door of government policies. It claimed that these deaths could have been prevented if improvements in public health policy had not stalled as a direct result of austerity cuts.
Over the past 10 years in the UK, according to the Trussell Group, there has been rising food poverty and increasing reliance on food banks.
And in a damning report on poverty in the UK by Professor David Gordon of the University of Bristol, it was found that almost 18 million cannot afford adequate housing conditions, 12 million are too poor to engage in common social activities, one in three cannot afford to heat their homes adequately in winter and four million children and adults are not properly fed (Britain’s population is estimated at around 66 million).
Moreover, a 2015 report by the New Policy Institute noted that the total number of people in poverty in the UK had increased by 800,000, from 13.2 to 14.0 million in just two to three years.
Meanwhile, The Equality Trust in 2018 reported that the ‘austerity’ years were anything but austere for the richest 1,000 people in the UK. They had increased their wealth by £66 billion in one year alone (2017-2018), by £274 billion in five years (2013-2018) and had increased their total wealth to £724 billion – significantly more than the poorest 40% of households combined (£567 billion).
Just some of the cruelties of the ‘free market’ for those who live and work in the real world. And all of this hardship prior to lockdowns that have subsequently devastated lives, livelihoods and health, with cancer diagnoses and treatments and other conditions having been neglected due to the shutdown of health services.
During the current economic crisis, what we are seeing is many millions around the world being robbed of their livelihoods. With AI and advanced automation of production, distribution and service provision on the immediate horizon, a mass labour force will no longer be required.
It raises fundamental questions about the need for and the future of mass education, welfare and healthcare provision and systems that have traditionally served to reproduce and maintain labour that capitalist economic activity has required.
As the economic is restructured, labour’s relationship to capital is being transformed. If work is a condition of the existence of the labouring classes, then, in the eyes of capitalists, why maintain a pool of (surplus) labour that is no longer needed?
A concentration of wealth power and ownership is taking place as a result of COVID-related policies: according to research by Oxfam, the world’s billionaires gained $3.9 trillion while working people lost $3.7 trillion in 2020. At the same time, as large sections of the population head into a state of permanent unemployment, the rulers are weary of mass dissent and resistance. We are witnessing an emerging biosecurity surveillance state designed to curtail liberties ranging from freedom of movement and assembly to political protest and free speech.
In 2020, World Bank Group President David Malpass stated that poorer countries will be ‘helped’ to get back on their feet after the various lockdowns but such ‘help’ would be on condition that neoliberal reforms become further embedded. In other words, the de facto privatisation of states (affecting all nations, rich and poor alike), the (complete) erosion of national sovereignty and dollar-denominated debt leading to a further strengthening of US leverage and power.
In a system of top-down surveillance capitalism with an increasing section of the population deemed ‘unproductive’ and ‘useless eaters’, notions of individualism, liberal democracy and the ideology of free choice and consumerism are regarded by the elite as ‘unnecessary luxuries’ along with political and civil rights and freedoms.
We need only look at the ongoing tyranny in Australia to see where other countries could be heading. How quickly Australia was transformed from a ‘liberal democracy’ to a brutal totalitarian police state of endless lockdowns where gathering and protests are not to be tolerated.
Being beaten and thrown to the ground and fired at with rubber bullets in the name of protecting health makes as much sense as devastating entire societies through socially and economically destructive lockdowns to ‘save lives’.
It makes as much sense as mask-wearing and social-distancing mandates unsupported by science, misused and flawed PCR tests, perfectly healthy people being labelled as ‘cases’, deliberately inflated COVID death figures, pushing dangerous experimental vaccines in the name of health, ramping up fear, relying on Neil Ferguson’s bogus modelling, censoring debate about any of this and the WHO declaring a worldwide ‘pandemic’ based on a very low number of global ‘cases’ back in early 2020 (44,279 ‘cases’ and 1,440 supposed COVID deaths outside China out of a population of 6.4 billion).
There is little if any logic to this. But of course, If we view what is happening in terms of a crisis of capitalism, it might begin to make a lot more sense.
The austerity measures that followed the 2008 crash were bad enough for ordinary people who were still reeling from the impacts when the first lockdown was imposed.
The authorities are aware that deeper, harsher impacts as well as much more wide-ranging changes will be experienced this time around and seem adamant that the masses must become more tightly controlled and conditioned to their coming servitude.
*
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.
Renowned author Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization in Montreal.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
This article celebrates the amazing bravery of a physician and senior military officer attacking the evil stupidity and anti-science character of the public health establishment. Standing up to the coercive mandates to force COVID vaccine shots for large segments of the population that have far more risks than benefits from them. Notably children, those with natural immunity and healthy, young military personnel. This hero needs massive public support. She should become a shining example for all physicians to fight for both medical freedom and genuine science.
In this pandemic where truths are crowded out by propaganda and political insanity, it is critically important to credit a truly remarkable document by a courageous medical professional.
Here are highlights from such a document, well worth the attention of all those who genuinely have informed concerns about current COVID vaccines.
Physician and Army Lieutenant Colonel Theresa Long is a rare, courageous truth-teller willing to probably jeopardize a military career for the greater good. To try and steer the Department of Defense to policies that protect military personnel from dangerous and unnecessary COVID vaccines and defend our national defense.
Here is an initial observation: “Use of mRNA vaccines in our fighting force, presents a risk of undetermined magnitude, in a population in which less than 20 active-duty personnel out of 1.4 million, died of the underlying SARs- CoV-2.” Statistical truths are routinely ignored by government officials mismanaging the pandemic.
Dr. Long focused on a now widely recognized health impact of current COVID vaccines, saying “vaccination with mRNA increases the risk of myocarditis.” “Research shows that most individuals with myocarditis do not have any symptoms. Complications of myocarditis include dilated cardiomyopathy, arrhythmias, sudden cardiac death and carries a mortality rate of 20% at one year and 50% at 5 years. According to the National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, “despite optimal medical management, overall mortality has not changed in the last 30 years.’”
‘We must establish a screening program to identify those at increased risk of myocarditis, i.e., those that have, received mRNA vaccinations with [Pfizer] or Moderna, or have any of the following symptoms chest pain, shortness of breath or palpitations”
With regard to the Pfizer vaccine,
“One of the primary ingredients of the Lipid Nanoparticle delivery system is “ALC 1035.” This is a toxic material. It “comprises between 30-50% of the total ingredients.”
Among a number of serious possible effects is this reality: “Caution: Product has not been fully validated for medical applications. For research use only.” Also noted: “Other journals and scientific papers also denote that this particular ingredient has never been used in humans before.” The Colonel correctly notes
“My assessment is that ALC 1035 is a known toxin with little study, specifically restricted to ‘research only’ and effectively has no prior [medical] use history.”
Another ingredient in the vaccine is a known toxic chemical: “Polyethylene Glycol is the active ingredient in antifreeze.” There have been countless cases where people have been fatally poisoned with this chemical. This comment by the Colonel is especially impressive:
“I cannot discern what form of alchemy Pfizer and the FDA have discovered that would make antifreeze into a healthful cure to the human body.”
Another important point is that “Moderna’s key ingredient, SM-102… is significantly more dangerous than the Pfizer ALC 3015.” Noted is that “This Moderna ingredient is deadly.”
“I have also reviewed scientific data and peer reviewed studies that discuss, analyze results and conclude that natural immunity is at least as good if not far superior to any Covid Vaccine available at this time.”
Exactly correct. Noted is that “natural immunity provides a 13-fold better protection against Covid 19 infections than any currently available Covid 19 Vaccine.” The Colonel points out that the Department of Defense disinterest in recognizing that “a military member’s prior [natural] immunity to Covid 19; even where it may be demonstrated with a recent antibody test.”
Here is a detailed telling by the Colonel of recent empirical evidence she is personally informed about regarding the real health impacts of COVID vaccines on military people. It is truly worth reading:
“I personally observed the most physically fit female Soldier I have seen in over 20 years in the Army, go from Colligate level athlete training for Ranger School, to being physically debilitated with cardiac problems, newly diagnosed pituitary brain tumor, thyroid dysfunction within weeks of getting vaccinated. Several military physicians have shared with me their firsthand experience with a significant increase in the number of young Soldiers with migraines, menstrual irregularities, cancer, suspected myocarditis and reporting cardiac symptoms after vaccination. Numerous Soldiers and DOD civilians have told me of how they were sick, bed-ridden, debilitated, and unable to work for days to weeks after vaccination. I have also recently reviewed three flight crew members’ medical records, all of which presented with both significant and aggressive systemic health issues. Today I received word of one fatality and two ICU cases on Fort Hood; the deceased was an Army pilot who could have been flying at the time. All three pulmonary embolism events happened within 48 hours of their vaccination. I cannot attribute this result to anything other than the Covid 19 vaccines as the source of these events. Each person was in top physical condition before the inoculation and each suffered the event within 2 days post vaccination. Correlation by itself does not equal causation; however, significant causal patterns do exist that raise correlation into a probable cause, and the burden to prove otherwise falls on the authorities such as the CDC, FDA, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. I find the illnesses, injuries and fatalities observed to be the proximate and causal effect of the Covid 19 vaccinations.”
If only more physicians would have the good sense to make that last medically smart comment.
This statement is also important:
“I can report of knowing over fifteen military physicians and healthcare providers who have shared experiences of having their safety concerns ignored and being ostracized for expressing or reporting safety concerns as they relate to COVID vaccinations.”
And here are several correct observations on harmful vaccine impacts:
“None of the ordered Emergency Use Covid 19 vaccines can or will provide better immunity than an infection-recovered person [with natural immunity]. All [current] vaccines in the age group and fitness level of my patients, are more risky, harmful and dangerous than having no vaccine at all, whether a person is Covid recovered or facing a Covid 19 infection. Direct evidence exists and suggests that all persons who have received a Covid 19 Vaccine are damaged in their cardiovascular system in an irreparable and irrevocable manner. Due to the Spike protein production that is engineered into the user’s genome, each such recipient of the Covid 19 Vaccines already has micro clots in their cardiovascular system that present a danger to their health and safety. That such micro clots over time will become bigger clots by the very nature of the shape and composition of the Spike proteins being produced and said proteins are found throughout the user’s body, including the brain.”
See this detailed account of vaccine induced blood problems.
As to the vaccine dangers for the military personnel the Colonel is responsible for:
“Flight crews present extraordinary risks to themselves and others given the equipment they operate, munitions carried thereon and areas of operation in close proximity to populated areas.”
And most importantly:
“I hereby recommend to the Secretary of Defense that all pilots, crew and flight personnel in the military service who required hospitalization from injection or received any Covid 19 vaccination be grounded similarly for further dispositive assessment.”
The Colonel, like some other brave and honest medical professionals, also stressed this: “We must evaluate and immediately implement alternatives to mRNA vaccines, to include Ivermectin (FDA approved 1996) …and Hydroxychloroquine (FDA approved 1955).”
To sum up, we have a highly educated and credentialed senior military officer stepping up to tell those above her and the public about the major risks of COVID vaccines for military personnel.
This physician strongly needs public support in the fight for pandemic truths. What she has concluded is just as important for the public as for military leadership and personnel. She has revealed the evil idiocy of the current public health establishment mindlessly pushing COVID vaccines for everyone.
*
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. Joel S. Hirschhorn has a doctorate in engineering but has worked on health issues for decades. He is the author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles on the pandemics. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers. He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors. He has lectured at many universities, including the Army War College.
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).
On 22 September 2020, André Vltchek, quietly passed away – on a night-ride from the Black Sea in Turkey to Istanbul, accompanied by his wife, Rossie. He just fell asleep in the back seat of a chauffeur-driven car and didn’t wake up. His legacy is diverse, heavy in substance and revealing – revealing about the world, about the dark forces that command the world. He never really referred to them as “dark forces” because for him the wars he investigated, photographed, the conflicts he witnessed, the misery he experienced and filmed – was real. The “Dark Forces” came to the surface – no shade, no cover – but NO LIGHT.
André was always there where it was burning – or where there was great danger that soon it might burn – and the population blown apart.
We had some remarkable experiences together on the Greek island of Kos, following the refugee tracks. Refugees from Turkey – to Greece – to the European Union. Their sad fate in refugee camps with the most horrifying sanitary conditions – their patience – their HOPE – hope is what makes these refugees tick and breath. Not just those that come from the Middle East and Africa, to seek a better future mostly for their children in lush and wealthy Europe. Refugees all over the world live from hope. If we lose hope, life ends…
Similarly, we visited Puno in Peru, and from there to Rinconada – the world’s highest gold mine, a series of many small and large independent gold mines – controlled by a deadly mafia – some 5,100 – 5,400 m above sea level – indescribable conditions, of cold and misery – some 70,000 people are living there – in extreme destitution, but all on a voluntary basis, all in the hope to finally “hit the riches” – GOLD. They work for 29 days a month for free – and what they find on the 30th or 31st day – they may keep. That’s an old mining law that is still the rule for many of the Andean mines.
No heat, no running water – girls of all ages make a living as prostitutes to uncountable miners, who leave their families behind – well, in the HOPE to get rich. Huge fields of garbage – endless plastic waste – and ever-so-often in the midst of such mountains of waste – a cross protrudes – a grave.
These are some of the experiences André and I lived together. They created a bond – and throughout the years we knew each other from writing from exchanging ideas – – friendship in the virtual world, practiced in the real world – philosophizing during half a night in a cheap café in Athens – are unforgotten; their richness cannot be taken away – André, you are dearly missed.
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)
He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
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).
Multiple sources in The HighWire’s network of Frontline Physicians, have reported an alarming uptick in aggressive cancers post-Covid vaccination.
Could there be a link?
Pathologist Ryan Cole, MD, discusses the available science and his lab’s findings.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The Israelis Have Now Admitted the Impotence of the “vaccine” on TV news: see this.
If the “Covid Pandemic” is real, why have Denmark, Norway, and Sweden abolished all Covid restrictions and declared an end to the crisis? See this.
What explains the Vaccine Mandates?It is known that the vaccine does not protect—thus masks and booster shots—but it does kill and maim.Why are they determined to kill and maim us?
Three Thousand Doctors and Scientists want to know why they are being prevented from treating their patients with safe and effective medicines.
Over 3,000 Doctors and Scientists Sign Declaration Accusing COVID Policy-Makers of ‘Crimes Against Humanity’, see this.
The answer seems to be profit for Big Pharma and authoritarian control for government.
On ABC with George Stehanapoulos Pfizer CEO Albert Boula said henceforth normal life consists of annual booster shots. See this.
Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel agrees.He says there will be Covid booster shots forever. See this.
The gravy train is forever.
And so are the injuries and deaths from the vaccine.
45% of the FDA’s Annual Budget Comes from Big Pharma
The regulators are financially dependent on those they are supposed to regulate.Economist George Stigler pointed out decades ago that regulatory agencies are always captured by the industry they regulate. Regulators become facilitators and agents for the regulated.
Some New Yorkers Belatedly Wake Up and Protest Vaccination Mandate by Democrat Governor Who Has No Authority to Issue Mandates, see this.
Health Care Workers Who Have Witnessed Deaths and Disabilities from Vaccine Refuse The Death Shot
That should tell you something. Why do people take the Death Shot when health care workers have to be coerced into taking it? See this.
*
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.
Comments Off on Why Are Americans Being Coerced to Submit to Injection with a Dangerous Substance that Is Known Not to Protect Against COVID but to Cause Death and Serious Health Injuries?
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The US Congress invited neoconservative regime-change strategists to discuss the next stage of hybrid warfare on Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, which will likely involve creating an economic blockade, refusing to recognize the legitimacy of President Daniel Ortega, and borrowing tactics the Trump administration used in its coup attempt in Venezuela.
A House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on September 21 set out plans for the next phase of the United States’ hybrid warfare on Nicaragua, which aims to destabilize and ultimately overthrow the Central American nation’s leftist Sandinista government.
The event featured hardline neoconservative members of Congress, a senior State Department official, a prominent Nicaraguan regime-change activist, and the former president of Costa Rica.
The carefully staged spectacle made it clear that Washington will be expanding its brutal economic war on Nicaragua as the country’s general elections approach in November. This will take the form of more aggressive financial sanctions, through legislation called the RENACER Act. These sanctions could potentially expand into a de facto blockade modeled after the US embargo of Venezuela.
US officials stated explicitly that Washington will refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the November elections. The panelists also suggested that the Joe Biden administration may even refuse to recognize the legitimacy of President Daniel Ortega and the Nicaraguan government itself, and will pressure other countries in Latin America to cut diplomatic ties as well.
The hearing indicates that the Biden administration plans to repurpose many of the same tactics that the Donald Trump administration employed in the coup attempt it initiated against Venezuela in 2019, such as refusing to recognize the constitutional government of President Nicolás Maduro, appointing unelected US asset Juan Guaidó as supposed “interim president,” and broadening the sanctions initiated by the Barack Obama administration into a full-on economic blockade.
While the Biden administration is continuing the hard-line anti-Nicaragua posture taken by Trump, the State Department officials crafting these policies appear to know very little about the country.
As she spewed inflammatory rhetoric demonizing the Sandinista government as “authoritarian,” US Deputy Assistant Secretary Emily Mendrala comically referred to Nicaragua as an “island,” leading a member of Congress to correct her for apparently confusing the Central American nation with Haiti.
As she plotted ways to suffocate Nicaragua with sanctions and overthrow its Sandinista government, US State Department Deputy Assistant Secretary @EMendrala called it an "island"…
Other participants made similarly absurd comments, demonstrating their ignorance of the reality on the ground in Latin America. Congressman Juan Vargas, for instance, farcically insisted that Fidel Castro, who died in 2016, is still alive and in power in Cuba, and “he’s been there a long time.”
While the event represented a laughable display of colonial arrogance, the consequences of Washington’s emerging agenda are likely to have serious consequences for Nicaragua and its people. Indeed, the State Department has emphasized that the Biden administration is working closely with the European Union, Canada, Costa Rica, and the Organization of American States (OAS) to destabilize the Sandinista government.
Together, they plan to expel Nicaragua from the OAS and isolate it diplomatically. They also hope to cut off the country’s trade with the United States and starve it economically.
The overblown rhetoric spouted by the panelists was complemented with fear-mongering about Russia’s alliance with Nicaragua, which they referred to with classic colonial framing as “the US doorstep.”
The hearing also highlighted a growing and increasingly influential right-wing Nicaraguan-American lobby, and its direct coordination with extremist Cuban-American elements in Florida.
US Congress pledges more aggressive sanctions on Nicaragua
This 2021, the Nicaraguan government arrested a series of right-wing opposition activists who orchestrated a violent coup attempt that devastated the country’s economy and society in 2018.
During the failed putsch, extremists waged a campaign of terror in Nicaragua, hunting down Sandinista activists, injuring, torturing, and killing hundreds. For months, criminal elements erected dozens of barricades known as tranques, in various parts of the country, while waging a low-intensity civil war against the Sandinista government.
President Daniel Ortega recognized that the US-backed coup-mongers were intentionally stoking violence, and wanted to invite a government crackdown that they could use to justify international intervention – a strategy that Hong Kong separatists openly advocated in a similarly failed US-backed destabilization operation.
So Ortega ordered police not to leave their stations, which led the foreign-funded coup-mongers to besiege Nicaraguan police stations and try to kill as many security forces as possible.
The powerful political and economic figures behind this bloody coup attempt finally faced legal consequences in 2021, and were arrested by the Nicaraguan government.
Yet the US government was furious at these detentions, because Washington had cultivated, trained, and funded these coup leaders, over years and with millions of dollars.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on September 21, titled “An International Response to Ortega’s Destruction of Democracy in Nicaragua,” was occasion for the US government to announce its plans to punish the Sandinista government for arresting its Nicaraguan assets.
The meeting was hosted by Representative Albio Sires, a right-wing Cuban-American Democrat who had joined Florida’s neoconservative former Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen in writing the NICA Act, legislation that called for a de facto financial blockade of the Sandinista government.
Today, I held a @HouseForeign hearing on the corrupt Ortega regime’s actions to prevent competitive elections, eliminate the political opposition, and imprison anyone who stands in their way in #Nicaragua. See my opening statement:https://t.co/0n82YmCVVs
Sires and his neoconservative colleagues in the Congress are however not content with the economic warfare that Washington is already waging against Nicaragua. They want more.
In the September 21 hearing, he called for the US government and European Union to impose even more aggressive sanctions on Nicaragua and “begin preparing a number of severe diplomatic consequences,” including suspending the country from the Inter-American Democratic Charter and Organization of American States.
Sires is the co-sponsor of a follow-up to the NICA Act, known as the RENACER Act, which will expand the unilateral coercive measures targeting Nicaragua’s economy, while also ratcheting up US spy operations in the country.
In the Senate, the legislation has been spearheaded by Bob Menendez, another right-wing Cuban American Democrat who played a significant role in the US-backed coup in Bolivia in 2019, as well as Senator Marco Rubio, the Republican representative of far-right Cuban-Americans in Miami.
Menendez and Rubio have lobbied hard to expand US sanctions and increase aggressive tactics against Nicaragua, using the OAS to punish the country.
This June, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved the RENACER act, although it has yet to be officially voted on.
The September 21 hearing made it clear that, despite protests by peace activists in Washington, the RENACER will soon be rammed through Congress with little opposition, thus escalating the US economic war on Nicaragua.
Now at US Capitol, a protest against the Renacer Act, which aims to destabilize Nicaragua and remove its elected govt through economic warfare.
The sanctions build on the US-backed 2018 insurrection attempt that saw right-wing gangs target Sandinistas with torture & murder. pic.twitter.com/yzbwD3IAQg
Joined Sires in the meeting was committee ranking member Mark Green, a Republican representing Tennessee who is co-sponsoring the RENACER Act.
While Green was unable to pronounce the names of the US-backed Nicaraguan coup leaders he described as “political prisoners,” he revealed that members of the Foreign Affairs Committee “regularly meet” with figures from the right-wing anti-Sandinista opposition to coordinate tactics.
Florida Republican Congresswoman María Elvira Salazar, a Cuban-American representative of the most fanatical far-right forces in Miami, also held forth during the hearing.
Salazar insisted that Washington must intervene much more aggressively in Latin America, claiming, “The United States is not present in this hemisphere! Period.”
Salazar held up photos of Felix Maradiaga, Arturo Cruz, and Juan Sebastián Chamorro, US government-backed Nicaraguan regime-change activists who played a crucial role leading the violent 2018 coup attempt.
Far-right Florida Congresswoman María Elvira Salazar holding up photos of US-funded coup leaders Felix Maradiaga and Arturo Cruz at a hearing on Nicaragua
Representatives Joaquin Castro, a Democrat from Texas, and Juan Vargas, a Democrat from California, joined the chorus of condemnation as well.
Vargas lamented that US regime-change operations targeting Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua have repeatedly failed, complaining, “We do a whole lot of things to try to get rid of them, and we’re not very successful… We did a whole lot of damn things against all these guys, and they still seem to survive.”
In a comment that showed how little he actually knows about Latin America, Vargas then suggested that Fidel Castro, who died five years ago, is still alive and has “been there a long time. I mean we wanted to get rid of him for a long time. We’ve done lots of things to try to get rid of him, but we can’t get rid of him.”
US State Department vows escalation against Nicaragua
The deputy assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, Emily Mendrala, spoke proudly in the September 21 hearing about Washington’s political attacks on Nicaragua’s Sandinista government.
“We continue to work with governments throughout the region, through the OAS and otherwise, to continue” putting pressure on Nicaragua, she said. “We are also working closely with the EU, Canada, and the UK to coordinate additional targeted measures.”
Mendrala “welcomed the bipartisanship” in the campaign against Nicaragua, and boasted that the US government has maintained support for right-wing opposition activists and media outlets, stating, “Through USAID, we continue to support Nicaraguan civil society, independent media, and human rights defenders.”
She also revealed that the US State Department “launched a social media campaign in August” against the Sandinista government.
Mendrala went on to take credit for a June statement in the OAS condemning Nicaragua. “Through US leadership, we were we were able to secure a very important coalition of 26 member states” to support the anti-Nicaragua OAS resolution, she said.
Quoting Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Mendrala claimed that Nicaragua’s “electoral process, including its eventual results, has lost all credibility,” making it clear that Washington will not recognize them.
Reading closely from written statements accusing Nicaragua of using “Russian-inspired laws to carry out repression,” Mendrala’s comments reflected the neoconservative tenor of the Biden State Department.
Rep. Mark Green interjected to chastise Mendrala for insufficiently zealous rhetoric.
“I would encourage you to say ‘the Ortega regime,’ because I’m not sure that it’s really legitimate,” the Republican said. “In fact, I think it’s not, I’m convinced it’s not a legitimate government.”
At one point, Mendrala even mistakenly referred to Nicaragua as an “island,” raising questions about her knowledge of the region’s most basic geographical contours.
“You called Nicaragua an island a minute ago,” Rep. Andy Levin corrected Mendrala. “I think you’re referring to the poorest country in the atmosphere, Haiti.”
US President Barack Obama with Costa Rica President Laura Chinchilla in 2013
Costa Rica’s former president calls for escalating hybrid warfare on Nicaragua
The inclusion of Costa Rica’s neoliberal former President Laura Chinchilla in the Congressional hearing reflected the Biden administration’s close coordination with Nicaragua’s US-backed neighbor to destabilize the Sandinista government.
Chinchilla echoed the extreme commentary of her US counterparts, citing “Ortega’s military strategy of increasing cooperation with Russia” to dub Nicaragua “a threat to regional security.”
The Costa Rican leader said Nicaragua must be expelled from the OAS, and called for a de facto economic blockade, “in order to stop immediately the external supply of financial oxygen to the Ortega regime.”
She also called for targeting the military, noting that “the Nicaraguan army [is] a key player in the endurance of the regime.” This was a not-so-subtle hint that Washington should curry favor with Nicaraguan generals to try to overthrow President Ortega.
Drawing on a US strategy used against Venezuela, Chinchilla then suggested that Washington should charge top Nicaraguan government officials with “money laundering and drug trafficking,” a patently absurd accusation.
She also suggested Washington should “deny legitimacy to the government” of Nicaragua, again echoing the US tactic of refusing to recognize the legitimacy of Venezuela’s constitutional government.
Today, Chinchilla is co-chair of the influential DC-based lobby group the Inter-American Dialogue. This February, she participated in a panel of neoliberal Central American officials at the corporate-backed think tank. It was joined by Biden’s special envoy to the region, Ricardo Zúñiga, and convened to cement the administration’s Central America policy.
The February event had hinted at tactics Washington and its regional clients would use to destabilize Nicaragua, including potentially recognizing US government-funded multimillionaire oligarch Cristiana Chamorro as a Juan Guaidó-style “interim president.” (The Sandinista government foiled those plans by arresting Chamorro on charges on money laundering.)
Rubio tuvo el honor de reunirse con las esposas de @Jschamorrog y Felix @Maradiaga, quienes permanecen arbitrariamente desaparecidos por el régimen de #Ortega. Nos unimos a la lucha de estas valientes mujeres y su pedido para que liberen a sus esposos de inmediato. #SOSNicaraguapic.twitter.com/dVWDevyebO
— Senator Rubio Press (@SenRubioPress) July 20, 2021
Elite right-wing Nicaraguan regime-change activist lobbies for more aggressive actions
Also starring in the Congressional hearing was right-wing Nicaraguan activist Berta Valle, the wife of coup leader Felix Maradiaga, a US-trained political operative who played a major role in the failed 2018 coup attempt.
Maradiaga, who grew up and was educated in the United States, has long been cultivated by the US government with the goal of destabilizing the Sandinista government.
Although his support base in his homeland is tiny, and he is despised by Sandinista supporters who hold him responsible for destabilizing the country over three years ago, Maradiaga has remained a top US government asset.
Incubated in the bowels of elite corporate-funded neoliberal institutions like the World Economic Forum, Maradiaga has led a series of NGOs and think tanks, such as the Institute for Strategic Studies and Public Policy (IEEPP), which use plentiful funding from CIA cutouts to wage hybrid warfare against the Nicaraguan government.
US-funded Nicaraguan coup leader Felix Maradiaga and his wife Berta Valle at the World Economic Forum
Like her husband, Valle was trained by the World Economic Forum, a notorious symbol of the global financial oligarchy. Valle is a proud part of the WEF’s Global Shapers Community, an international initiative to create neoliberal leaders who then push right-wing policies around the world that benefit the large corporations and billionaire plutocrats who fund the WEF.
A privileged member of Nicaragua’s miniscule class of wealthy elites, Valle made her name as a media personality at the country’s major right-wing outlets, such as Vos TV.
In her testimony in the Congressional hearing, Valle acknowledged that the Nicaraguan “government is alleging that Felix [Maradiaga] and others were part of a global conspiracy to use foreign resources, including from the US Agency for International Development, the International Republican Institute, and the National Endowment for Democracy, to harm the interests of the nation.”
That they did this is undeniable; it is an objective fact. Public records show that the organizations led by Maradiaga, such as IEEPP, have received huge sums of money from these CIA cutouts.
Here is top USAID/NED "pro-democracy" grantee Felix Maradiaga (white shirt) at Nicaragua's UPOLI with fellow coup planners including Pio Arellano, accused member of Viper criminal network waving a pistol in the air. pic.twitter.com/uqigHnYqTu
It is quite ironic that Valle mentioned these charges as if they were ludicrous, because the Nicaraguan justice system’s accusations against Maradiaga and other US-backed coup leaders were in fact confirmed by what the State Department official, Mendrala, said in the very same hearing.
Moreover, the State Department itself boasted in a public statement on September 14 that “the U.S. Government continues to support civil society organizations, human rights defenders, and independent media” in Nicaragua. Valle’s husband Maradiaga has been one of the top recipients of this foreign material support.
In her remarks, Valle also revealed that she has been coordinating with top members of the US government, and insisted on more US meddling in Nicaragua.
In July, Valle and other right-wing Nicaraguans traveled to Washington to meet with members of Congress, including Marco Rubio.
Today, Valle lives in the United States, and, with the active support of the US government, has been working to construct an anti-Sandinista Nicaraguan-American lobby to complement the power of the anti-revolution Cuban political machine in Miami. Already, her efforts and those of her patrons in Washington are bearing fruit, with an escalated economic war on her country of birth.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with editor Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @BenjaminNorton.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The following article from Before It’s News features a 41-minute interview with Dr. Bryan Ardis, CEO of Ardis Labs.
In this interview with Brannon Howse, Dr. Ardis reveals to us shocking information. As early as October 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) knew that the COVID vaccines could lead to numerous side effects including Guillain-Barré syndrome, myocarditis/pericarditis, autoimmune disease, pregnancy and birth outcomes, thrombocytopenia, and vaccine enhanced disease. Despite knowing this, the FDA did not disclose this information to the public. Instead, the health agency only released information on minor side effects.
Some of the other points discussed in the interview include:
The media was underestimating the issue of blood clots following Johnson & Johnson vaccination. When the media was reporting only six cases, there were already hundreds recorded in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
Pfizer and Moderna had the same issues as Johnson & Johnson. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) did not raise the issue with Pfizer, even though it caused more blood clots compared to Johnson & Johnson, because it would risk raising concerns with Moderna which uses the same technology. In this way, Dr. Ardis said that the CDC sought to protect Moderna’s profit.
Note from COVID Call to Humanity: We took some time before publishing this video because we wanted to cross-check Dr. Ardis’ claims. And true enough, the contentious “slide 16” is still up on the FDA’s website. View the presentation being referred to by Dr. Ardis at https://www.fda.gov/media/143557/download or read the transcript of that meeting here https://www.fda.gov/media/143982/download. These two documents are also available for download below.
From these documents, especially “slide 16/17” it is clear that the FDA knew the extent of possible adverse effects that the COVID vaccines can cause, but chose to hide it from the public. While they say that these adverse events were “rare”, the public should have been told about these possible risks. Sanitizing this information, and telling people only about the “mild and more common” effects is a violation of informed consent.
There is only one reason why the FDA would choose to hide the “serious but less common” side effects: they didn’t want people to be afraid of the vaccines. They wanted as many people as possible to take it. But knowing that millions are already injured following vaccination, can we still say that hiding and denying this information was still in the best interest of the public? Why does it seem like it is our governments who are actually following the dictates of pharmaceutical companies? Why is our government using taxpayer’s money to advertise dangerous vaccines? Are they profiting from these efforts?
*
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).
Protests have finally erupted in Israel as it has slowly dawned on people there that the goalposts for vaccine passports keep being shifted by the government.
It is now expected to be announced that at least FOUR vaccinations will be needed to be considered ‘fully vaccinated’ and able to engage in society.
Over the weekend marches took place in the streets of Tel Aviv against the so called ‘Green Pass’:
As we recently noted, despite over 61 per cent of its population being fully vaccinated and having implemented a vaccine passport system, the Israeli Health Ministry has expressed concern about the fact that a recent downtrend in COVID-19 infections is reversing, potentially surpassing any levels previously seen.
Israeli health minister Nitzan Horowitz was caught on a hot mic admitting that vaccine passports were primarily about coercing skeptical people to get the vaccine and not for medical reasons.
*
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).
Back in July of this year we reported that Ohio-based Attorney Thomas Renz was filing a federal lawsuit in Alabama based on a “sworn declaration, under threat of perjury,” from an alleged whistleblower who claims to have inside knowledge of a cover-up of reported deaths filed with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
Attorney Renz spoke at an event in Colorado this past weekend, and stated that more whistleblowers have now come forward, and that the death rate with those taking the COVID-19 vaccines is much higher than they originally thought.
Presenting data that he claims comes directly from the CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) database, there have been 48,465 deaths among CMS beneficiaries within 14 days of a 1st or 2nd dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.
There are about 59.4 million Americans covered by Medicare, representing 18.1% of the population, so these are staggering numbers!
In his presentation, Renz states that they chose deaths within 14 days of vaccination, because the federal health agencies are no longer counting deaths within 14 days of a COVID-19 as a death among the “vaccinated,” but among “unvaccinated.”
Renz also presented very damning data on the drug Remdesivir, the new COVID-19 drug that was rushed to market while existing, safe and effective older drugs like Ivermectin are prohibited in hospital settings.
According to CMS data, almost 26% of people put on Remdesivir die. But it is a huge money maker for the government and Big Pharma.
By contrast, only 3.5% of people put on Ivermectin died, according to CMS data. But there are no longer any patents on Ivermectin, so it is not a money maker for the government and Big Pharma.
As attorney Renz states: “You’re being defrauded by your government!”
He also goes on to show what are allegedly documents from Pfizer that seem to suggest they knew that “shedding” occurred with their COVID-19 mRNA shots.
Here is the presentation. I have excerpted the key data he presented. This is from our Bitchute channel, and it will also be on our Rumble channel.
*
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.
“Is the Virus Fictitious”? Laboratories in US Can’t Find COVID-19 in One of 1,500 Positive Tests
Video: A Final Warning to Humanity from Former Pfizer Chief Scientist Michael Yeadon
Two Top Virologists’ Frightening Warnings About COVID Injections: Ignored by Government and Big Media
Video: #Yes, It’s a “Killer Vaccine”: Michel Chossudovsky
The Fake “Delta Variant” and the Fourth Wave: Another Lockdown? Upcoming Financial Crash? Worldwide Economic and Social Sabotage?
220,000 Military Service Members Say ‘No’ to Biden’s Forced COVID Injections: File Lawsuit Claiming They Already Have Natural Immunity
Local Detroit TV Asks for Stories of Unvaxxed Dying from COVID – Gets over 180K Responses of Vaccine Injured and Dead Instead
Stop the Covid Holocaust! Open Letter
The mRNA-Experimental Gene-Altering Poisonous Jabs
Bombshell: FDA Allows Whistleblower Testimony that COVID-19 Vaccines Are Killing and Harming People!
The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People
Digital Tyranny and the Rockefeller-Gates WHO “Vaxx-Certificate Passport”: Towards a World War III Scenario
80% of COVID-19 Deaths in August Were People Who Had Been Vaccinated According to Public Health Data
Never Has a Vaccine Harmed So Many
India State of 241 Million People Declared COVID-free after Government Promotes Ivermectin
The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”
Recognizing the Obvious: Hard Data from Israel Reveals Vaccine Failure
J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve
Shockingly, CDC Now Lists Vaccinated Deaths as Unvaccinated
The Conspiracy Theorists Were Right; It Is a “Poison-Death Shot”
Are We Human? Are We Free? Defeating the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’ before It Destroys Us
Nurses Speak Out at Minnesota Town Hall Meeting on COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries and Lack of Reporting to VAERS
“Shrink the World’s Population”: Secret 2009 Meeting of Billionaires “Good Club”
Video: Dr. David Martin on Canada’s Role in Producing the Weaponized “COVID” Injections Which Have Seriously Harmed and Killed Many
A Letter to the Unvaccinated
Microbiologist Explains COVID Jab Effects: Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi
Agenda ID2020 of the “One World Order”: The 101 to Understanding Its Implications
Bluetooth Vaccine? Does the Injected COVID “Non-Vaccine” Connect with Devices?
“Herd Stupidity”: The Manufactured Covid Crisis, the Gene-based mRNA “Vaccine” and “The Pinnacles of Wealth and Power”
Video: Covid-19, “What are They Doing to These Patients”. Dr. Bryan Ardis, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
Video: Why Vaccine Passports Are Illegal in Canada
Covid-19 Vaccines Lead to New Infections and Mortality: The Evidence is Overwhelming
Study: Fully Vaccinated Healthcare Workers Carry 251 Times Viral Load, Pose Threat to Unvaccinated Patients, Co-Workers
Trust the Science? CDC Counts People Dying Within 14 Days of Jab as “Unvaccinated”
Scandinavian Governments Announce “COVID Is Over,” Israel Announces the Vaccine Doesn’t Protect
20,595 Dead 1.9 Million Injured (50% Serious) Reported in European Union’s Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 Shots
The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis
Video: Sofia Benharira, 16 Years Old, Dies Following Pfizer “Vaccine”, Two Heart Attacks, Thrombosis. May She Rest in Peace.
Video: The Spike Protein Injection. No Such Thing as a “Delta Variant”. It’s a Fallacy
Video: Has Justin Trudeau Been Duly Vaccinated? Registered Nurse Expresses Doubt on Authenticity of Trudeau’s Vaccine Jab
A Letter to the Vaccinated
Video: Funeral Director John O’Looney Blows the Whistle on COVID
Pulmonary Nurse of 31 Years Testifies How He Followed the COVID Protocols, Unknowingly that They Could Result in the Deaths of Patients
Video: Ethics 101. Dr. Julie Ponesse, Professor of Ethics at the University of Western Ontario, Provides a Lesson in Courage and Integrity
Sucharit Bhakdi: COVID-19 Vaccination Is Greatest Threat Humanity Ever Faced
