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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The crazy, convoluted, mixed up messaging from the CDC – it’s been this way from the beginning of the pandemic until now – has taken yet another turn. Now the CDC is recommending masks not just for the unvaccinated but for the vaccinated too. This is supposedly because of the discovery that the variant known as Delta is making an end-run around the vaccines, causing not only infections but infectious spread. 

So we have an odd situation developing. The layperson’s understanding of a vaccine is that it protects a person against infection, like measles or smallpox. In other words, you won’t get Covid, exactly as President Biden accidentally and apparently inaccurately said in a press conference last week. That is apparently untrue in this case. That realization seemed to dawn on people only a few weeks ago, as reports from Israel revealed that half the new infections listed were with people who had been fully vaccinated.

I pity anyone who took a few weeks’ vacation from the news during this period. We went from believing that the whole point of the vaccines was to protect against infection to realizing that this was not the case. You can still get the bug. The point of the vaccines, we were newly told, is to protect against severe outcomes. Okay, that’s reasonable enough except that we know the demographics of severe outcomes, and hence the question presents itself: why is the policy priority near-universal vaccination?

None of this makes sense – if you are still looking for policies to make sense, which you probably gave up on long ago.

Now to the great mask conundrum. In May, Anthony Fauci showed up to a Senate hearing fully vaccinated but wearing a mask. Rand Paul lit into him, claiming that this was absurd. Fauci, he said, was undermining confidence in the vaccines. We need to give people a reward for being vaccinated, he said. If you can’t even take off your mask, why bother?

I suspect that the CDC listened carefully to his point. Senator Paul might just be one guy but he is positioned to impact policy because he has unusual access to the public, and to Fauci himself. Fauci is otherwise only on friendly terms with media who listen and adore every pronouncement. Paul has access by virtue of Senate protocol and therefore can make a dent in what’s actually happening out there in CDC land.

The CDC had become very aware that vaccination rates had flattened. They figured it was worth a try. So in early May, the agency did a messaging turnaround. It announced that people who are vaccinated no longer need to wear a mask. Fauci dutifully went on all the talk shows and invited the vaccinated to enjoy their privileges. He even smiled when saying so!

That was an interesting day for me because many of my anti-lockdown friends celebrated that the 16 months of living hell had officially ended. They correctly predicted that everyone, including the unvaccinated would now take off their masks and life could go back to normal. They were correct for everyone except the poor children who, because there is no vaccine for them, became permanently marked as wild-born disease carriers even though they are not.

Hey, the CDC had to be consistent, even when the results were cray cray, and therefore did not exempt children.

Well, how did vaccination rates respond? Far from incentivizing people to get the jab, everyone took off their masks and dared authorities to ask for their papers. This is because after a year and months of egregious restrictions on freedom, people were fed up and looking for some means by which they could pretend to go back to normal. Vaccination rates stayed stuck for the reason that everyone who wanted a vaccine already got it, while the rest possess natural immunity, are wary of the medicine, or were more than willing to accept the risks of exposure.

Now the CDC had a problem. The great goal of a 70% rate among all people was elusive, and infuriating the pandemic planners who demanded this based on the pharmaceutical definition of herd immunity. They embraced that definition because, for some reason that remains inexplicable for everyone not working for vaccine manufacturers, natural immunity has been thoroughly dismissed as primitive and irrelevant. Talk about ignoring the science!

Then on July 22, the influential Washington Post published the following:

So the CDC needs to state, as it should have in May, that unless there is a way to distinguish between the vaccinated and unvaccinated, indoor mask requirements should be reinstated…. The Biden administration has done many things right during the pandemic, but it made a grave error with its premature return to normalcy. It must hit reset and issue new guidance that addresses the escalating infections, waning interest in vaccination and unknowns of the delta variant. If it doesn’t, we could well be on our way to another national surge — and one that was entirely foreseen and entirely preventable.

The CDC seems more easily led by op-eds in political newspapers than actual scientific papers on the topic, of which there are many thousands now. They want digestible, clear instructions on what they should be doing. This piece in the Washington Post provided exactly that. Thus did the CDC reverse itself yet again.

But in doing so, it needed some rationale. This is when the agency jumped on the excuse of how the Delta variant often evades the vaccines, so therefore even the vaccinated need masks. It’s not clear whether and to what extent the CDC realizes that it has just once again undermined public confidence in the vaccines! The horns of the dilemma are obvious to anyone who is watching this clown show unfold. If the CDC removes the mask guidance, people don’t get vaccinated; if they add it back in, people have another excuse to avoid the jab. Masks in this case remain what they always were: a tool to prod the public into compliance with other mandates and dictates, purely a symbol of fear and its unrelenting trigger. And with fear comes obedediance. Maybe.

The real problem, conclude many, is this bogus freedom of choice. This is why there is more constant talk about  vaccine mandates, and why NPR gets breathless with excitement at every new directive – from the Department of Veterans Affairs, for example – of new mandates. What they are really pushing for is a society-wide mandate that would push the shot on everyone. Biden reportedly will impose this on the whole federal workforce.

The Department of Justice has paved the way by issuing an opinion that such mandates are perfectly in keeping with the law. More mayors are backing the idea. The public is warmed up day by day to accept what two years ago would have universally been considered an Orwellian nightmare of passports and papers for access to regular life. It’s completely unAmerican in every way, and wholly unnecessary. It is further proof that once disease panic gets underway, and governments use it to enhance their powers in shocking ways, it becomes extremely difficult to dial it back.

Remember when only the “conspiracy theorists” said that the real goal was a passport and eventually a China-style social credit score?

At this point, anything is possible. The Biden administration can’t even bring itself to lift Trump-era restrictions on flights from Europe, even though every strain circulating there has long been circulating here. The default motive of exposure avoidance has completely spun out of control, holding even basic freedoms in the balance. Today your human rights are wholly contingent on what the pandemic planners desire, whether it is stay-at-home orders, school closures, mask mandates, or compulsory jabs.

What ultimately may be our saving grace here are the furious parents who have just been told that they must once again strap a cloth on the kids’ faces this fall. These poor kids have been messed with enough as it is. Maybe this will be the last straw, the final discrediting of the CDC, and the moment at which the American people will demand that enough is way more than enough.

*

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

Jeffrey Tucker is author of Liberty or Lockdown (AIER, 2020).

Featured image is from Vaccine Injury News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The CDC’s Hysterical Delta Flip-Flop Might be Its Final Undoing
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This is the ninth of the regular round-ups of Covid vaccine safety reports and news compiled by a group of medical doctors who are monitoring developments but prefer to remain anonymous in the current climate (find the eighth one here). By no means is this part of an effort to generate alarm about the vaccines or dissuade anyone from getting inoculated. It should be read in conjunction with the Daily Sceptic‘s other posts on vaccines, which include both encouraging and not so encouraging developments. At the Daily Sceptic we report all the news about the vaccines whether positive or negative and give no one advice about whether they should or should not take them. Unlike with lockdowns, we are neither pro-vaccine nor anti-vaccine; we see our job as reporting the facts, not advocating for or against a particular policy. The vaccine technology is novel and the vaccines have not yet fully completed their trials, which is why they’re in use under temporary and not full market authorisation. This has been done on account of the emergency situation and the trial data was largely encouraging on both efficacy and safety. For a summary of that data, see this preamble to the Government’s page on the Yellow Card reporting system. (Dr Tess Lawrie recently wrote an open letter to Dr June Raine, head of the MHRA, arguing that: “The MHRA now has more than enough evidence on the Yellow Card system to declare the COVID-19 vaccines unsafe for use in humans,” a claim that has been “fact checked” here.) We publish information and opinion to inform public debate and help readers reach their own conclusions about what is best for them, based on the available data.

  • Norway has announced vaccine injury compensation for at least three claims following AstraZeneca vaccination. An Oxford man has called for a review of U.K. Government vaccine injury compensation after he developed Guillain-Barré Syndrome following AstraZeneca vaccination.
  • A 16 year old boy in Singapore suffered a cardiac arrest when exercising after his Pfizer vaccination.
  • Some new medical reports exploring endocrine issues following Pfizer vaccination: one looking at a case of necrotising pancreatitis following the second dose of vaccine, and two looking at the development of Graves’ disease in two health care workers in Mexico.
  • The U.K. VITT Organ Donor Study Group has published a report of an analysis of organ donation and transplantation from U.K. donors with VITT (blood clots) to understand the implications. It concludes that transplantation from VITT donors should only proceed with caution due to a variety of possible complications in multiple organs.
  • The Daily Mail reports that the MHRA has quietly added warnings on Moderna and Pfizer vaccines that they can cause heart damage in rare cases.
  • The Government has uploaded its Technical Briefing for Variants of Concern Number 18, which continues to show that despite rising cases the Delta variant is not currently causing as many fatalities or hospitalisations as the Alpha variant (case fatality rate 0.2% vs 1.9%).
  • Following a FOI request to the MHRA for all vaccine associated deaths between 2010 and 2020, the Daily Expose reports that deaths from Covid vaccines are 407% higher than all cumulative previously reported deaths from other vaccines.
  • ‘Breakthrough’ cases are being reported in Las Vegas, Wales and aboard HMS Queen ElizabethMyLondon reports that London Hospitals are refusing to provide this data.
  • The Daily Mail reports that Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are both seeking to modify their vaccines to reduce the incidence of life-threatening blood clots.
  • VAERS – the American version of the Yellow Card reporting system – released new data bringing the total to 463,457 reports of adverse events following Covid vaccines, including 10,991 deaths and 48,385 serious injuries between December 14th 2020 and July 9th 2021.
  • Suspected adverse events in the U.K. as reported in the media: Kent radio host Jules Serkin and Anthony Shingler (57).

Summary of Adverse Events in the U.K.

According to an updated report published on July 16th (covering the period up to July 7th), the MHRA Yellow Card reporting system has recorded a total of 1,059,307 events based on 314,043 reports. The total number of fatalities reported is 1,470.

  • Pfizer (19.7 million first doses, 11.6 million second doses) now has one Yellow Card in 357 doses, 2.8 adverse reactions per card. Deaths: 1 in 68,640 (456 deaths)
  • AstraZeneca (24.7 million first doses, 22.3 million second doses) has one Yellow Card in 214 doses, 3.6 adverse reactions per card. Deaths: 1 in 47,813 (983 deaths)
  • Moderna (1.1 million first doses) has one Yellow Card in 123 doses, 2.9 adverse reactions per card. Deaths: 1 in 157,143 (7 deaths). (This is a high rate of Yellow Card reports but lower fatal reports compared to the other two vaccines.)

Key events analysis:

  • Acute Cardiac Event – 3357 (Pfizer) + 8468 (AZ) + 210 (Moderna) + 26 (Unknown) = 12,061
  • Anaphylaxis – 428 (Pfizer) + 781 (AZ) + 26 (Moderna) + 1 (Unknown) = 1,236
  • Herpes – 1,407 (Pfizer) + 2,311 (AZ) + 39 (Moderna) + 12 (Unknown) = 3,769
  • Headaches – 18,629 (Pfizer) + 81,728 (AZ) + 1,303 (Moderna) + 215 (Unknown) = 101,875
  • Migraine – 2,006 (Pfizer) + 7,665 (AZ) + 147 (Moderna) + 26 (Unknown) = 9,844
  • Blindness – 72 (Pfizer) + 260 (AZ) + 5 (Moderna) + 3 (Unknown) = 340
  • Deafness – 148 (Pfizer) + 327 (AZ) + 8 (Moderna) = 483
  • Spontaneous Abortions – 181 + 8 stillbirth/foetal death (Pfizer) + 146 + 2 stillbirth (AZ) + 11 (Moderna) + 1 (Unknown) = 339 + 10 [NOTE – 6 (Pfizer) + 5(AZ) – fatalities that possibly indicate maternal death]
  • Vomiting – 2,740 (Pfizer) + 11,129 (AZ) + 241 (Moderna) + 40 (Unknown) = 14,150
  • Facial Paralysis incl. Bell’s Palsy – 563 (Pfizer) + 770 (AZ) + 28 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 1,365
  • Nervous System Disorders – 44,131 (Pfizer) + 168,034 (AZ) + 3,792 (Moderna) + 535 (Unknown) = 216,492
  • Strokes and CNS haemorrhages – 443 (Pfizer) + 1,822 (AZ) + 9 (Moderna) + 5 (Unknown) = 2,279
  • Guillain-Barré Syndrome – 41 (Pfizer) + 344 (AZ) + 2 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 391
  • Dizziness – 6938 (Pfizer) + 23,477 (AZ) + 843 (Moderna) + 78 (Unknown) = 31,336
  • Tremor – 1,059 (Pfizer) + 9,500 (AZ) + 76 (Moderna) + 38 (Unknown) = 10,673
  • Paraesthesia/dysaesthesia (chronic burning sensation, tingling nerve pain) – 4,665 (Pfizer) + 15,315 (AZ) + 441 (Moderna) + 43 (Unknown) = 20,464
  • Pulmonary Embolism – 284 (Pfizer) + 1,417 (AZ) + 4 (Moderna) + 7 (Unknown) = 1,712
  • Deep Vein Thrombosis – 180 (Pfizer) + 1,047 (AZ) + 5 (Moderna) + 8 (Unknown) = 1,240
  • Nosebleeds – 632 (Pfizer) + 2,121 (AZ) + 45 (Moderna) + 8 (Unknown) = 2,806
  • Seizures – 593 (Pfizer) + 1,790 (AZ) + 62 (Moderna) + 9 (Unknown) = 2,454
  • Paralysis – 234 (Pfizer) + 666 (AZ) + 18 (Moderna) + 3 (Unknown) = 921
  • Haemorrhage (All types) – 1,878 (Pfizer) + 4,261 (AZ) + 203 (Moderna) + 18 (Unknown) = 6,360 [Haemorrhage types – cardiac, ear, adrenal, eye, gastric, mouth, tongue, gums, intestinal, injection site, brain, wounds, stoma, bladder, kidney, vaginal, uterine, post-menopausal bleeding, ovarian, penile, lung, nasal]
  • Vertigo/Tinnitus – 2174 (Pfizer) + 5876 (AZ) + 174 (Moderna) + 18 (Unknown) = 8242

Source: Pfizer; Moderna; AstraZeneca; Unspecified. “F” denotes fatal.

*

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

Featured image is from The Daily Sceptic

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Deaths from COVID Vaccines Are 407% Higher than All Cumulative Previously Reported Deaths from Other Vaccines
  • Tags: ,

Video: Daraa’s Month-long Saga Comes to an End

July 29th, 2021 by South Front

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has besieged a part of Daraa city known as “Daraa al-Balad” since late June.

Syrian authorities have been pressuring former rebels in Daraa al-Balad to accept a new reconciliation agreement with more demands.

Damascus wants the former rebels to hand over their personal arms and wanted personnel as well as to allow search operations and the establishment of four permanent military posts inside Daraa al-Balad.

The new demands are meant to improve security in Daraa city and its outskirts. The SAA made a large deployment to exert more pressure, however, this is more a show of force than any actual threat of an operation.

Initially, the former rebels refused to give any concessions and conclude a new agreement.

According to the Horan Free League and other pro-opposition sources, Russia asked the former rebels in Daraa al-Balad, to hand over 200 pieces of personal arms on June 23rd. On June 25, warplanes of the Russian Aerospace Forces made a “warning pass” over Daraa.

Despite this, former rebels, represented by the Daraa al-Balad Committee, rejected the Russian request. Some said that their arms are meant for self-defense, while others claimed that carrying arms is just a part of their traditions.

That is when the SAA siege on the part of the city began.

The SAA move provoked former rebels in the northern Daraa countryside to attack a number of positions and checkpoints of the Syrian military and intelligence inside and around the town of Nawa. No losses were reported as a result of the attacks.

Ultimately, however, on July 25th, a new agreement was reached.

Under the agreement, the SAA will lift its siege on Daraa al-Balad which was imposed in mid-June. All roads leading to the area will be opened by July 28th

Furthermore, the army will establish three permanent military positions inside Daraa al-Balad.

On the other side, the former rebels will hand over a part of their personnel arms. Around 100 gunmen will also join the reconciliation process.

Leading up to July 28th, when the siege is to be lifted, SAA deployed a major reinforcement to Daraa. On July 25, several units of the SAA, including the elite units of the 4th Division, were also deployed in the governorate’s center.

Their deployment is reportedly aimed at helping secure the region and implement the new agreement in Daraa al-Balad.

Security does need improvement, as many of the former rebels refuse to fight against ISIS, and sometimes Russia is putting pressure on them withholding salaries it was paying for that specific purpose. As such extremism might be brewing.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Many a sinister conspiracy theory exists with regard to the true rulers of our world, but did you know that ownership of most of it can actually be traced to just FOUR huge corporations that you’re likely to have never even heard of?

People are slowly catching on to the fact that the world is controlled by perhaps 12 families, with the likes of the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, et al, often touted as having dominion over huge, covert empires whose true wealth and influence is expertly shielded from prying eyes.

So who actually owns the world? As always when it comes to such overarching questions, we need to follow the money. That involves looking at inventory, specifically at the world’s largest banks to establish who the shareholders are and thus who really calls the shots:

Bank of America Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR (Fidelity), Paulson, JP Morgan, T. Rowe, Capital World Investors, AXA, Bank of NY Mellon.

JP Morgan Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR, T. Rowe, AXA, Capital World Investor, Capital Research Global Investor, Northern Trust Corp. and Bank of NY Mellon.

Citigroup Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR, Paulson, Capital World Investor, JP Morgan, Northern Trust Corporation, Fairhome Capital Mgmt. and Bank of NY Mellon.

Wells Fargo Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR, Berkshire Hathaway, Capital World Investors, Wellington Mgmt, AXA, T. Rowe and Davis Selected Advisers.

Goldman Sachs Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR, Wellington, Capital World Investors, AXA, Massachusetts Financial Service and T. Rowe.

Morgan Stanley Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR, Mitsubishi UFJ, Franklin Resources, AXA, T. Rowe, Bank of NY Mellon e Jennison Associates. Rowe, Bank of NY Mellon and Jennison Associates.

Bank of NY Mellon Shareholders

State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, FMR, Davis Selected, Massachusetts Financial Services, Capital Research Global Investor, Dodge, Cox, Southeastern Asset Management.

As you can see, the pattern goes on and on. The upshot of all this is that the eight largest financial companies in the United States are controlled by just TEN shareholders with FOUR companies involved in every single decision that’s made. That’s without mentioning dealings in tax havens such as the Cayman Islands, Monaco or Liechtenstein. Even more shocking is the fact that the US Federal Reserve is comprised of 12 banks represented by seven board members, some of whom are representatives of the “big four”.

In other words, State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock, and FMR have a controlling influence on US monetary policy without oversight or democratic safeguards to speak of.

Here is a list of some of the companies controlled by the “big four”:

  • Alcoa Inc.
  • Altria Group Inc.
  • American International Group
  • AT&T Inc.
  • Boeing Co.
  • Caterpillar Inc.
  • Coca-Cola Co.
  • DuPont & Co.
  • Exxon Mobil Corp.
  • General Electric Co.
  • General Motors Corporation
  • Hewlett-Packard Co.
  • Home Depot Inc.
  • Honeywell International Inc.
  • Intel Corp.
  • International Business Machines Corp
  • Johnson & Johnson
  • JP Morgan Chase & Co.
  • McDonald’s Corp.
  • Merck & Co. Inc.
  • Microsoft Corp.
  • 3M Co.
  • Pfizer Inc.
  • Procter & Gamble Co.
  • United Technologies Corp.
  • Verizon Communications Inc.
  • Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
  • Time Warner
  • Walt Disney
  • Viacom
  • Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation
  • CBS Corporation
  • NBC Universal

The “big four” also happen to control the vast majority of European companies listed on the US stock exchange, and also have an influence over the largest financial institutions in the world such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. It goes without saying that the names of the families that control State Street Corporation, Vanguard Group, BlackRock and FMR never appear anywhere.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The “Big Four” Companies that Rule the World
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The UNESCO World Heritage Committee today urged the United States to stop border wall construction. The committee also called on the United States to work with Mexico to assess damage from the wall to a World Heritage site in Mexico and adjacent protected lands in the United States and recommend ways to restore the landscape and wildlife habitat.

Today’s resolution approved by the committee, the official decision-making body under the World Heritage Convention, follows a 2017 petition from conservation groups and representatives of the Tohono O’odham of Sonora, Mexico. That petition sought “in danger” status for El Pinacate and Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve on the U.S.-Mexico border. This 2,700-square-mile World Heritage site shares a border with Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge and Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument in the U.S.

“This is an important step toward repairing the devastation the border wall has done to communities and wildlife,” said Alex Olivera, a senior scientist and the Mexico representative for the Center for Biological Diversity. “We share a responsibility to protect wildlife in the Sonoran desert and reverse the horrific damage wall construction has inflicted on both sides of the border.”

In its resolution, the committee said the “negative impacts of the border wall on the biodiversity and conservation of the property is of utmost concern.” It urged the United States to halt border wall construction between the biosphere reserve, Organ Pipe and Cabeza Prieta, assess the damage and “develop appropriate measures to ensure the restoration of ecological connectivity.”

In 2013 UNESCO designated the El Pinacate Biosphere Reserve as a World Heritage site in recognition of the area’s outstanding biodiversity, including desert wildlife that evolved over millions of years freely crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. The border wall blocks essential movement and migration, fragments habitat and limits animals’ ability to search for food and water.

The wall also harms the Tohono O’odham people, who historically inhabited El Pinacate and Gran Desierto de Altar and whose traditional lands are split by the U.S.-Mexico border. El Pinacate is sacred to the Tohono O’odham, and the site is regularly used for ceremonial purposes, including a sacred salt pilgrimage across the border to the Gulf of California.

President Joe Biden signed an executive order his first day in office that paused border wall construction. In June the administration canceled wall projects paid for with diverted military funds.

Conservation groups have called on the Biden administration to immediately begin restoring more than a dozen ecologically sensitive and culturally significant areas damaged by wall construction, including areas bordering El Pinacate.

The coalition sent the administration and members of Congress a document detailing the criteria and specific areas in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas where the wall should come down and the land allowed to heal. These include wildlife refuges, sacred sites, wilderness areas, wildlife corridors and rivers.

“Restoring these fragile ecosystems must be a binational effort, and we’re grateful UNESCO has stepped up so powerfully to address this,” said Olivera. “We’re hopeful the Biden and Lopez Obrador administrations will work closely with border communities and tribal nations to repair all that’s been destroyed.”

*

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: Border-wall construction blasts through the Cabeza Prieta Wildlife Refuge and Pinacate Y Gran Desierto de Altar Biosphere Reserve. Photo credit: Russ McSpadden, 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

During the month of July, two heroic figures in the struggle against Jim Crow and race terror, Gloria Richardson Dandridge and Bob Moses passed away. 

Their lives intersected with the upsurge in the African American led struggle for full equality and self-determination centered in the southern United States while having a profound impact nationally and internationally.

Gloria St. Clair Hayes was born on May 6, 1922 in Cambridge, Maryland to a family of hard working independent African Americans. Several members of her family were known as fighters for racial justice.

Richardson’s (her first married name) earliest involvement in the antiracist movement took place in 1938 when she became active in protesting segregation in Washington, D.C. as a student at Howard University. She also protested conditions at the premier Historic Black College and University (HBCU) during her tenure as a student. She would later return to Cambridge where prospects for employment were limited despite her graduation from Howard.

Dandridge worked in a pharmacy owned by a member of her family. She strongly opposed the inferior segregated educational and public facilities made available to African Americans in Maryland.

Years after returning to Cambridge she became involved in the Civil Rights Movement in the early 1960s. A series of demonstrations in December 1961 in the eastern shore city resulted in the arrests of several high school students including the daughter of Richardson.

By 1962, Richardson had made contact with the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) attending their national conference in Atlanta. She would join the executive board of SNCC bringing a different perspective on organizing to Cambridge. The Cambridge Nonviolent Action Committee (CNAC) was founded as an affiliate of SNCC in that same year.

SNCC had been formed as a direct result of the outbreak of sit-ins and boycotts demanding an end to segregation beginning in February of 1960. Demonstrations rapidly spread throughout the South in cities such as Greensboro, North Carolina, Nashville, Tennessee, and many others. These actions were led by students and youth from the African American community seeking an immediate solution to the centuries-long system of national oppression and economic exploitation.

SNCC was formed at Shaw University in North Carolina in April 1960. The organization remained independent of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), headed by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Ella Baker, an organizer with decades of experience, served in 1960 as the executive secretary of SCLC. Baker encouraged the youth to form their own organization which they did. They would become the vanguard force in the broader struggle for Civil Rights and later Black Power.

An entry from the SNCC Digital Project on the contributions of Richardson, says that:

“The Cambridge Movement directed its work towards improving living conditions for the people of the Second Ward. Meanwhile, continuing militant CNAC protests angered not only the Kennedy administration nearby in Washington, D.C., but also national civil rights leaders. When the state of Maryland and federal negotiators, led by Robert Kennedy (then Attorney General under the John F. Kennedy administration), proposed voting for the right of access to public accommodations in 1963–a so-called “Treaty of Cambridge“–CNAC boycotted the vote. At a press conference, Richardson stated, ‘A first-class citizen does not beg for freedom. A first-class citizen does not plead to the white power-structure to give him something that the whites have no power to give or take away. Human rights are human rights, not white rights.’ The civil rights movement establishment was angered at her refusal.” (See this)

National Guard troops were deployed to Cambridge in the summers of 1963 and 1964 to quell protests and rebellions. Richardson and SNCC openly defied the occupation and were arrested on numerous occasions. During the protests, an infant and a senior citizen were killed as a direct result of police use of cyanogen (CN2), which is military grade crowd-control gas.

Cambridge Nonviolent Action Committee leader Gloria Richardson (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

It would take two years of persistent mass activity to break Jim Crow in Cambridge. Richardson would later remarry professional photographer Frank Dandridge and move to New York City.

Bob Moses and the Role of Local Leadership in the Civil Rights Movement

Robert Parris Moses was a leading figure in SNCC joining its staff in the early 1960s. He, like Richardson, was older than the majority of people in the student organization.

Born to a working-class family in New York City on January 23, 1935, Moses witnessed first- hand the impact of segregation and exploitation in an urban setting. He was committed to education and earned a B.A. from Hamilton College in 1956 and later a M.A. in Philosophy from Harvard in 1957.

Moses was teaching at the Horace Mann School in New York when Ella Baker sent him into Mississippi to organize a chapter of SNCC in 1960. He made contact with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) official Amzie Moore. Later Moses joined the staff of SNCC and became a full-time organizer in Mississippi.

He witnessed the violence which was pervasive in Mississippi and other southern states in response to Civil Rights organizers. One leader in the voting rights struggle in Amite County, Mississippi was Herbert Lee, a successful African American cotton and dairy farmer. Lee was a charter member of the Amite County NAACP and was a proponent of defying the segregation laws prohibiting the majority of African Americans from voting in the state. (See this)

Moses worked with Lee in building up a campaign to encourage disenfranchised Black people to register and vote. On September 25, 1961, Lee was shot to death in broad daylight outside a cotton gin in Liberty, Mississippi by a white State Representative E.H. Hurst. After a grand jury indictment, Hurst was acquitted after a verdict of justifiable homicide was declared.

Later an eyewitness to Lee’s assassination, Louis Allen, also an agricultural producer and small businessman, informed federal law-enforcement personnel in 1964 that his testimony in the trial of E.H. Hurst was given under duress as armed white men were present in the courtroom. A day prior to Allen leaving the state of Mississippi in 1964, he was shot to death. No one was ever indicted for his murder after several investigations pinpointed the killer.

SNCC formed an alliance with the Congress on Racial Equality (CORE) and the Mississippi NAACP under the direction of state Vice President Amzie Moore, initiating the Council of Federated Organizations (COFO) in 1961, under whose banner that the Summer Project of 1964 was carried out. The project recruited hundreds of students and lawyers from other regions of the U.S. to come to Mississippi and assist with a massive voter registration effort.

On June 21, 1964, three youthful Civil Rights workers, Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman and James Chaney went missing near the town of Philadelphia, Mississippi in Neshoba County. Many of the students were still going through orientation in Ohio when word of the missing Civil Rights workers became national news. The three young men were found 44 days later, after a federal manhunt led by the FBI uncovered them buried in an earthen dam.

During the Freedom Summer project, scores of volunteers and local people were subjected to beatings and arrests. During that summer, the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP) recruited residents to attend the Democratic National Convention (DNC) being held in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The MFDP delegation demanded they be seated as the genuine representatives of the state since the segregationist Democrats excluded African Americans from voting.

The then President Lyndon B. Johnson was seeking election because he had inherited the position as a result of the assassination of John F. Kennedy in November 1963. When Ms. Fannie Lou Hamer of SNCC and the MFDP spoke before the Democratic National Convention credentials committee, Johnson called a press conference to preempt Hamer from gaining a national audience over television. The MFDP delegation was denied the right to replace the segregationists and instead were offered two seats at-large at the DNC. MFDP rejected the offer and returned to Mississippi after exposing the hypocrisy of the Johnson administration in regard to Civil Rights implementation. The 1964 Civil Rights Act had just been signed into law that same summer, yet African Americans could not be seated as the legitimate representatives of the people of Mississippi along with other southern states.

Two years later, Moses would leave the U.S. to live and teach in the East African state of Tanzania for a decade, then a center of the national liberation movements and socialist construction throughout the continent. His most recent formidable contribution was the development of the Algebra Project which focused on the teaching of mathematics to secondary school students in urban areas. Moses would later return to Harvard to earn a Ph.D.

Significance of the Civil Rights Struggle in 21st Century

Individuals such as Gloria Richardson Dandridge and Bob Moses along with other SNCC comrades should be studied by youth organizers in the 21st century. Their selfless sacrifices and fearlessness are two of the required characteristics among those seeking to build movements and organizations aimed at transforming society.

SNCC organizers Bob Moses with Martha Prescod and other activists in Mississippi during 1963 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Both of these pioneers utilized their formal education to serve the oppressed and working people in the U.S. and around the world. The work which they embarked upon remains incomplete as the forces of racism, capitalism and imperialism continue to rule the U.S. and many geo-political regions around the globe.

*

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

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of Pan-African News Wire. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: USA. 1963. Gloria RICHARDSON. (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Julian Assange: Secrets, Sedition and the State

July 29th, 2021 by Megan Sherman

All Global Research articles 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.

***

When, conspicuously shortly after the breaking of the “Collateral Murder” and ‘Cablegate’ scandals, senior US security state officials hijacked the micromanagement of PR for Assange, it became their duty as Machiavellian imperialists to suppress the rising star of Wikileaks, a pacifist research institute with a record for 100% accuracy.

This they did with bitter, belligerent rigour, heinously spreading the rumour that Assange was a cyberterrorist-cum-rapist. By that gesture, which quickly turned Assange into a pariah on the justice warrior left, the national security state only reinforced its reputation for aspiring for total social control and world domination governed from the Washington power nexus. The rape smear was an ignominious lie, puritanical, messianic propaganda that seemed to have the media and wider public under its spell.

Researching Assange’s life recently, for the purpose of backing up a dispassionate, objective analysis of his contributions to politics and diplomacy, I discovered that there are myriad myths about him, the lies of the media their own effluence, in dire need of an enema. As a socially conscientious hacker, Assange’s most proud contribution to society was actually his Rubberhose encryption software, which predates Wikileaks but shares its mission to inaugurate the presence of ethical software. Nobody in politics, their realpolitik worldviews and perceptions conditioned in the corridors of Ivy League universities and then neoliberal think tanks, actually understands Assange. He has been turned into a one-dimensional, useful symbol of villainy, with the public capitulating totally to the narrative of elites.

Once the preserve and exclusive class privilege of national security elites with classified access to special diplomatic data, state secrets, many of which are embarrassing to governments, are now exchanged in public, thanks to Wikileaks. Equally as important as the liberation of information is the revolutionary atmosphere it produces, with citizen pioneers commanding an internet through which elites retaliate by censoring revolutionaries and treating it as a realm for their exclusive use. Vast swathes of masses, especially youth coming of age, were radicalised by Wikileaks, which turned them into anti-imperial renegades. Then comes the backlash, a piece of Machiavellian theatre redolent of the tsars. Last, we find the tormented, emaciated figure of Assange, subject to calculated, premeditated torture and physical neglect.

On this last act in the tragic saga of Assange appears the historical spectre of Nelson Mandela, he too a formidable evangelist for justice who harnessed the power of thunder. It definitively, without doubt, demonstrates the empire’s longstanding, ongoing compulsion to harass, imprison and silence critics of an iniquitous regime. Meanwhile, other activist voices who share Wikileaks’ mission are industrially being killed off. Fascism is within sight of liberal democracies that write critics off with nefarious, gruesome endings, making free and fair debate an anachronism.

Assange is a political artefact, coveted either for romance or the electric chair. Whilst his morals are not for sell (he tells the truth because it paid not to put one’s soul up for trade) he was traded by the new neoliberal Ecuadorian government for IMF and Goldman Sachs bailouts, at best a politically dishonest triumvirate that sold Ecuador’s human rights standards down the river, at worst the purposeful brutal evisceration of an anti imperial activist through strategic countermeasures.

At various points throughout his reign of publicity – notably in a very well received Ted talk but also on his popular, now deplatformed Twitter – Assange gave us an account of his motives. With fathomless moral fortitude he instanced a conviction that transparency is the method and justice the goal; his love for technology as a liberating force, and his commitment to coding democracy; and his desire to advance the cause of humanity against technocratic fascism. He seeks to defend history from whitewashing and facts from obliteration.

As someone who was brought up to be sceptical of – distinctly reactionary – mainstream media, which represents the unified class interests of the 1%, I made the decision right away to pledge my solidarity to Assange. His commitment stoked my own, a powerful reinforcement of mission and philosophy. Approached, studied with care, Assange’s legacy, beginning in his teenage hacker days and ending in his imprisonment, could have multiplying benefits for democracy. He is the master of the raw material of data, at one with the rhythms of cyberspace, and the enemy to mechanized murder machines with their governance steeped deep in technology.

It appears to be an open question if the weight of civil liberties will overpower the tendency of the US prosecutors towards tyranny, because the conflict is still ongoing. But time will be an assistance to Assange, not a hindrance. He himself knows that illusions aren’t as powerful as pretended, that the exigencies of truth triumph over lies. Ultimately the persecution of Assange is the degradation of US public morality, not the degradation of himself.

*

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The world has recently been swept up by waves of propaganda promoting the idea that a “Great Reset” of the world system is in order to prepare society for a new “post-COVID’ world order.

When one reviews the nature of those reforms on the World Economic Forum’s websites, or from the words of the former Governor of the Bank of Canada Mark Carney (who has recently returned to Canada to run the post-COVID reset team alongside fellow technocrat Chrystia Freeland), it becomes crystal clear that this Great Reset is just the Green New Deal under another name.

Just as the Green New Deal has been the effect of decades of tireless propaganda designed to convince credulous people that it is a good idea to deconstruct industrial civilization by eliminating all activities which either increase carbon dioxide into the atmosphere or disrupt supposedly pristine states of nature (which ivory tower mathematicians suppose exists in stasis), the Great Reset agenda is driven by very similar objectives and assumptions.

When compared with reality, the WHO/Gates-funded narrative justifying the total shutdown of global economies falls apart like a house of cards as outlined perfectly by the Swiss Propaganda Research Institute’s Facts of COVID-19.

Yet in spite of all of the evidence, it is worth asking: How have so many seemingly educated people become persuaded that COVID-19 or climate change are so existentially dangerous that we must shut down the world economy to somehow save ourselves from their apocalyptic effects?

The answer is to be found in the sleight of hand which occurred gradually over the 20th century which replaced actual scientific thinking for something called “predictive computer modelling”.

The Global Coup: Predictive Models Take Over Actual Thinking

The age of “predictive doomsday models” in many ways grew out of the 1972 Limits to Growth study funded by the Club of Rome which popularized the technique of tying temperature increases to carbon dioxide and projecting economic variables like population, resource losses, and “pollution growth” into the future in order to scare the hell out of their incredulous victims and intimidate nations to drastically modify their collective behavior.

This use of skewed, under-defined statistics, projected into the future in order to “act preventatively on future crises” became a hegemonic practice for the next 40 years and has been used by neo-Malthusians consistently to justify the increased rates of war, poverty and disease across the world.

Paul Ehrlich’s influential 1968 book the Population Bomb used similar models to cast trends of geometric population growth into the future which would result in a global crisis of unimaginable proportions as oil would dry up, arable lands dry away and resources disappear by the year 2000.

In 1968 his book, Ehrlich stated his misanthropic view in the following words:

A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people… We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”

Obama and his science czar John Holdren

Ehrlich’s protégé John Holdren, who led in the shutdown of NASAs manned space systems and fusion program as Obamas science Czar went further when he wrote on p.942 in his 1977 book Ecoscience:

“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international marketThe Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.”

Under this heartless logic, nation states simply had to be converted into tools for imposing depopulation programs rather than naively endeavoring to end colonialism, poverty and war as foolish statesmen like John Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Enrico Mattei or Martin Luther King attempted.

Kissinger’s National Security Study Memorandum 200 (1974) outlined this new objective for America stating: “Assistance for population moderation should give emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is a special US and strategic interest”. Among those developing nations targetted for population reduction, NSSM-200 listed birth control and the withholding of food as primary tools. Kissinger coldly wrote: “is the US prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can’t/won’t control their population growth?”

Throughout the 1970s, the Trilateral Commission/Council on Foreign Relations cabal under the direction of Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski completely took over American foreign policy and launched a new economic program which Trilateral Commission member Paul Volcker called “the controlled disintegration of the economy”.

Upon attaining chairmanship of the Federal Reserve in 1979, Volcker put this policy to work by raising interest rates to 20% and kept them there for another two years- destroying America’s small and medium agro industries while leaving only a highly cartelized corporate behemoth capable of surviving such draconian rates. Real growth plummeted, long term planning was forgotten and deregulation ushered in vast speculation which replaced the formerly dirigistic capitalism that made the west great.

All investments into scientific and technological progress were shut down. Fusion energy research was systematically destroyed as fast as the space program. Infrastructure investments dried up and America’s age of nuclear power construction was shut down.

In true Pygmalion fashion, the oligarchy was able to “scientifically justify” their misanthropic view of global governance by first breaking humanity’s kneecaps and then arguing that we were never meant to run.

In today’s language, this practice of ‘predictive modelling’ is reflected in the central banking high priest Mark Carney’s calls for a new financial system to promote a decarbonized society by 2050 since ‘predictive models’ state that the world will heat 1.5 degrees according to a presumed connection to carbon dioxide emissions which can only be corrected if we monetize carbon and put a profit on shutting down human industrial activity.

As it turns out, when compared to the real data, not only does one quickly find that the post 1977 warming trend ended in 1999, but the actual temperature falls well below all computer projections produced by the IPCC (which is to environmental policy what the WHO is to health policy).

This hysterical prediction is also seen in Prince Charles’ recent warning that the world has 18 months to save itself before ‘predictive modelling’ says that global warming becomes unstoppable and the earth burns in a dystopic inferno!

Charles is the son of the same Prince Philip who infamously gushed over his wish to be reincarnated as a deadly virus “in order to solve overpopulation” making it more than a bit ironic that Charles announced his contraction of COVID-19 on March 25. In a 1988 interview with Deutsche Press Agentur, Prince Philip said:

The more people there are, the more resources they’ll consume, the more pollution they’ll create, the more fighting they will do. We have no option. If it isn’t controlled voluntarily, it will be controlled involuntarily by an increase in disease, starvation and war. …In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.

One should not make the mistake of separating Philip’s misanthropic statements with his active role in co-founding the global ecology movement alongside Bilderberg group founder Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands. This includes their joint role as co-founders of the World Wildlife Club in 1961, their founding of the 1001 Nature Trust in 1970 or their joint management and funding of global climate science throughout the 20th century.

As I outlined in my 2019 lecture, it was this organization that was caught red handed organizing the murder and coverup of John F. Kennedy.

Prince Bernhard and Philip’s powerful lackey Maurice Strong (who served as WWF vice-president under Philip from 1976-78), let the cat out of the bag in a 1990 interview saying:

“What if a small group of world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the Earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no’. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” [1]

This is exactly what Carney and his fellow central banking ideologues are talking about when they speak of “Green New Deals“.

The Failure of the Collective Green Suicide Pact

After five decades of tireless panic and propaganda, the oligarchy has had to conclude that this whole plan hasn’t really worked out too well. Many nations were more than a little reticent to shut down the basis of their existence just because some Malthusian technocrats said their computer models required it to be so.

Many inquiring minds noticed that those same computer models never proved in the first place that carbon dioxide actually causes temperature changes and others noticed that in longer waves of history, carbon dioxide actually follows temperature changes… implying that the true causes of climate change has less to do with CO2 and more to do with astrophysical effects like the sun and cosmic radiation (which recent studies by Professor Svensmark have proved seeds clouds and plays a much more direct role in shaping climate change than statisticians wish to admit).

Others were bothered by the fact that linear computer projections fail to take into account such non-linear processes as human creative reason and morality which allows mankind the freedom to leap beyond our “limits to growth” through the discovery of new principles in the universe and the application of those discoveries to the economy in the form of constant leaps in scientific and technological progress.

Try as they might, linear models cannot map non-linearity (except in the form of logarithms that seek chaotic randomness in the form of a Jackson Pollack painting), but not real creative DIRECTED progress.

What made this “Controlled disintegration agenda” additionally frustrating was the rise of China’s Belt and Road Initiative which demonstrated what REAL nation states can accomplish when they want to get rid of pollution, raise their populations out of poverty and “go green” at the same time [1].

In total opposition to the doomsday ‘predictive models’, China has lifted 800 million people out of poverty by forcing the monetary system to obey human needs rather than conforming to the statistical models used by the World Bank or IMF. China, Russia and other nations working within the BRI Framework have transformed the definition of “green” in recent years by investing massively into carbon free energy like 3rd and 4th generation nuclear power, fusion research, hydroelectricity and greening deserts.

On this last point, NASA recently announced a surprising 10% increase of global biomass due entirely to China and India’s development strategies which not only bring water into deserts, but also produce carbon dioxide which plants and trees actually treat as… FOOD!

Then Trump got elected and the Malthusian de-carbonization goals collapsed even further as an America long held under the control of a deep state changed its character and in so doing, revived both a lost sense of nationalism while also rejecting green suicide under a technocratic global dictatorship.

So something new had to happen.

New Lipstick. Same Pig.

Luckily, computer modelling doomsday scenarios are not hard to come by for British intelligence assets working through London’s Imperial College and Bank of England who settled on a new strategy… if only a virus could be blown into global pandemic proportions through a systemic skewing of data and centralized control of data management through the Michael Bloomberg School of Public Policy at Johns Hopkin and World Health Organization… then perhaps nations will finally learn how to shut down their economies.

After COVID-19 was announced as a global pandemic by the World Health Organization, the COVID-19 Response Team at London’s Imperial College wasted no time in using the same predictive modelling techniques that failed so miserably on climate catastrophe projections to begin forecasting end times scenarios for the coronavirus outbreak.

March 17, 2020 models projected over 500 000 UK deaths and 2.2 million American deaths over the coming months. These numbers were quickly taken up by the WHO and spread across international media to justify the study’s “remedy” of a full “shut down of major aspects of society for over a year.”

Despite the fact that these models were adjusted to predict only 20,000 UK deaths and 100,000 US deaths a week later, the calls to keep the world economy shut down for 12-18 months continued by Dr. Fauci, Gates, Soros and leading experts from the WHO, some of whom were caught on camera advocating breaking into homes to separate family members who have COVID.

For those paying attention, Michael Bloomberg isn’t only a famous billionaire corporatist who paid $500 million to get his ass kicked on public television, but is also Mark Carney’s green bosom buddy who acted as United Nations Special Envoy for Climate Change from 2018-2019 until Carney took over the position.

Bloomberg also chairs Carney’s Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures which is a keystone piece of the new green cathedral of anti-growth economics which will punish all “climate offending” companies by cutting them from credit while rewarding “green zero carbon” companies which accelerate human population collapse.

Bloomberg’s School of Public Health just so happened to co-sponsor the October 19, 2019 Global Pandemic Exercise Event 201 alongside the Bill Gates & Melinda Gates Foundation, and World Economic Forum which ran computer simulations under the theme of a novel coronavirus pandemic killing 60 million people.

Over the years while taking over economic, foreign policy and environmental policies of formerly industrial advanced nations of the western alliance, the neo-Malthusian movement also took over medical research through a gradual co-opting of funding of the World Health Organization by private foundations which have increasingly replaced the role of nation over the past 4 decades.

Today the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has become the primary financier of the WTO (taking the top spot with Trump’s recent announcement of America’s exit from it’s supporting role). With their interests so intertwined with Big Pharma, and the Five Eyes intelligence agencies, medical practice and medical policy has been put firmly under the control of an elite cadre of “scientific experts” who play god with the human race in ivory towers “untouched by politics” beholden only to the cold hard numbers of ‘predictive models’.

Both Gates and Bloomberg are among the top five world billionaires who run “The Giving Pledge”– which is a foundation made up of “good” plutocrats who pledged to donate half their wealth to charities. What are billions after all, when you know the system you parasitically exploited is designed to collapse? As Carney stated last year, those “that anticipate these developments will be rewarded handsomelythose that fail to adapt will cease to exist.”

Those industrial interests whom Carney threatened in his speech include those “dirty” (see “productive”) agro-industrial interests who are generally unhappy about the idea of being sacrificed on the alter of Gaia and would rather join China’s multi-trillion dollar Belt and Road Initiative, as the crisis continues to move closer to the inevitable collapse of the $1.2 quadrillion bubble economy.

As this future collapse point accelerates towards the present, the oligarchy knows that nations enmeshed in the west’s monetarist net will gladly jump into the Multipolar Alliance as an alternative to their total destruction if for no other reason.

The Multi-Polar Alliance Re-asserts the Hegemony of the Human Mind over Computer Modelling

The beauty of the new Multipolar Alliance guided by the associated Belt and Road Initiative Framework is this new system’s reliance upon the non-linearity of human creative thought. By defining future states of humanity not as a crisis caused by human cancer cells killing Gaia, the new system approaches the future from the standpoint of creative change.

By investing in space exploration, asteroid defense, lunar mining, fusion and fission development and large scale infrastructure the Multipolar Alliance is bringing mankind back into harmony with the demands for boundless scientific and technological progress within creation.

Speaking to the CPC central committee in 2016, President Xi said:

“Coordinated development is the unity of balanced development and imbalanced development. The process from balance to imbalance and then to rebalance is the basic law of development. Balance is relative while imbalance is absolute. Emphasizing coordinated development is not pursuing equalitarianism, but giving more importance to equal opportunities and balanced resource allocation.”

In an earlier speech, Xi developed this concept even further:

“We must consider innovation as the primary driving force of growth and the core in this whole undertaking, and human resources as the primary source to support development. We should promote innovation in theory, systems, science and technology, and culture, and make innovation the dominant theme in the work of the Party, and government, and everyday activity in society… In the 16th century, human society entered an unprecedented period of active innovation. Achievements in scientific innovation over the past five centuries have exceeded the sum total of several previous millennia. . . . Each and every scientific and industrial revolution has profoundly changed the outlook and pattern of world development. . . . Since the second Industrial Revolution, the U.S. has maintained global hegemony because it has always been the leader and the largest beneficiary of scientific and industrial progress.”

In a 2019 speech calling for Russia’s prioritization of fusion power as a replacement to the fossil fuel economy, President Putin expressed similar insights saying:

“It may seem strange at first, but fusion energy, which in fact is similar to how heat and light are produced in our star, in the Sun, is an example of such nature-like technologies.

“Potentially we can harness a colossal, inexhaustible and safe source of energy. However, we will only succeed in fusion energy and in solving other fundamental tasks if we establish broad international cooperation and interaction between government and business, and join the efforts of researchers representing different scientific schools and areas. If technological development becomes truly global, it will not be split up or reined in by attempts to monopolize progress, limit access to education and put up new obstacles to the free exchange of knowledge and ideas.. With their help, scientists will be able to literally see nature’s creation processes.”

So when Putin or Xi come out calling for a new economic order to replace the currently collapsing one, this is the spirit of the system he is talking about. They are talking about a system that rejects ‘predictive modelling’ using linear equations in favor of the REALITY of human creative mentation as a non-linear YET intelligible geological force of change bringing humanity into ever greater harmony with the laws of creation.

*

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

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Climate Change” and the “Great Reset”, From COP26 to COVID19: The Fallacy of Predictive Models and a Return to Real Thinking
  • Tags: , , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Lebanese parliament concluded consultations on Monday on the appointment of ex-Premier Najib Mikati to head a fully-fledged government to tackle the country’s economic collapse, while Tunisians celebrated the dismissal by President Kais Saied of Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi and 30-day suspension of parliament. Saied also announced plans to strip legislators of their immunity and take over the office of state prosecutor.

Lebanon has boasted a sectarian-power-sharing quasi-democracy since securing independence from France in 1943, while Tunisia gained independence in 1957 under revolutionary autocrat Habib Bourguiba, who was overthrown in 1987 by Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. He was toppled during the 2011 Arab Spring and replaced by a semi-presidential representative democratic republic.

Lebanon has 4.5 million citizens and 1.5 million Syrian and other foreign residents. Tunisia has 11 million people. Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, both countries have exported nationals seeking their fortunes elsewhere.

Both Western-leaning Lebanon and Tunisia have educated populations, well-developed but troubled economies stricken with high unemployment, mismanagement and corruption. Both are heavily dependent on tourism, foreign aid and remittances from citizens living abroad. Both are widely afflicted by COVID, which has deepened the miseries of their people.

Lebanon has been brought low by the most critical economic crisis suffered by any country since the middle of the 19th century; Tunisia by decades of underinvestment in infrastructure, agriculture, industry and job creation.

Unlike Tunisians, Lebanese did not rise up in 2011 but waited until October 2019 to pour into the streets demanding effective governance, the ouster of the political elite, and an end to the sectarian system of governance. Since then, the politicians have refused to grant the demands of the people and clung to power, driving the country to the brink of ruin.

Tunisians believed their troubles would diminish and, perhaps, be resolved after Ben Ali’s departure, free and fair elections were held, and democrats took charge, but they failed to deliver the populace from graft and want.

While Tunisia remains a restive state, Lebanon never really attained statehood.

Tunisia’s uprising was the first and only Arab Spring movement to adopt democracy. But after 57 years of post-independence autocracy under Bourguiba and Ben Ali, Tunisian politicians have been unable to make democracy work. There have been eight prime ministers in 10 years. In 2020, as the economy contracted by 9 per cent, the international community ignored Tunisia, the country was compelled to pay debts incurred during the authoritarian regimes and foreign banks refused to seize and repatriate ill-gotten funds of former rulers. The government dickered with the International Monetary Fund over a $4 million loan.

Consequently, the past two decades have been characterised by multifactional political wrangling which has prevented the country from addressing its most urgent problems. The president’s “coup” followed the government’s failure to deal with rising COVID cases and continuing economic decline due to a collapse of tourism and fundamentalist attacks. After the 2011 uprising in Syria, alienated Tunisians swelled the number of takfiris seeking to overthrow the Damascus government, making the Tunisian nationals the largest group among the thousands of fighters from 50 countries.

By contrast with Tunisia’s long experience with autocracy, Lebanon’s politico-economic life has, essentially, been a free-for-all which has been exploited by sectarian and clan politicians to secure power, pelf and privilege.

The country has been frozen in the pre-independence regime imposed by France, under which the president is always a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni and the parliamentary speaker a Shia. The French also intended to make the Maronites the most powerful community in Lebanon by faking a census in 1932 which showed Christians, dominated by Maronites, were 50 per cent of the population. Sunnis, Shias and Druze were meant by France to follow the Maronite lead. While this imbalance was adjusted under the Taif accord which ended the second Lebanese civil war (1975-90), oligarchs and warlords who emerged from the conflict inherited the sectarian system, established patronage networks and the unregulated economy.  Since the 2019 mass protests, the political elite has united to jeopardise the very existence of Lebanon to protect its interests.

Tunisian President Kais Saied and Lebanese putative Premier Najib Mikati also pose an interesting contrast. Saied, 63 is a constitutional law professor and jurist who entered politics in the 2019 presidential election on a anti-corruption platform.  Following the transition to democracy, he provided advice in the drafting of the new constitution which, unlike most other constitutions does not mandate a separation of powers, but shares power among the presidency, parliament and prime minister.

A populist, who was elected by a 70 per cent majority, Saied favours radical change in the Tunisian system by cancelling the national  parliament and empowering local councils. His suspension of the assembly and sacking the defence and justice ministers could be a first step in implementing his programme. Having tasted the complexities and uncertainties of democracy, many Tunisians may welcome a return to some sort of autocracy.

Telecom billionaire Najib Mikati, who served as premier twice, is seen by most of Lebanon’s the ruling elite as a safe bet. He was endorsed by 72 members of Lebanon’s 128 member parliament while 42 abstained, notably the two main Maronite parties — President Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement and the Lebanese Forces which have a combined total of 40 seats. During consultations over the formation of a Cabinet, Aoun is likely to complain that Mikati cannot be prime minister because he does not have the support of the “Christians”. Aoun relied on this argument when he blocked efforts by former prime minister-designate Saad Hariri to cobble together a cabinet which would have credibility with the international community and release $21 billion in financial aid.

Mikati is no populist or reformer. He is the richest man in the country and hails from its poorest city, the northern port of Tripoli. While he has said he cannot produce the miracle needed to rescue Lebanon from bankruptcy and ruin, he has vowed to observe the French roadmap when assembling “specialist” independents for his Cabinet. Hariri tried and failed due to Aoun.

A politician few Lebanese want as premier, Mikati is likely to be met with protests in the street, particularly in his hometown, Tripoli, which has become the “hub of the revolution” that aims of throw out the sectarian system and establish a secular democracy.

*

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

California will require millions of health care workers and state employees to show proof of a COVID-19 vaccination or get tested weekly, announcing a broad measure Monday to try to slow rising coronavirus infections in the nation’s most populous state, mostly among the unvaccinated.

The new rule, to take effect next month, is the latest example of California and politically progressive cities nationwide cracking down on a virus that has upended life since March 2020. New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio announced a similar plan Monday that requires 340,000 city employees, including teachers and police officers, to show proof of vaccination or undergo weekly testing.

Los Angeles County, the nation’s most populous, has reimposed an indoor mask mandate, regardless of vaccination status, and San Francisco announced it would require its 35,000 employees to get inoculated, get an exemption or lose their job.

California’s order goes even further by dipping into the private sector. Medical professionals applauded Gov. Gavin Newsom’s new policy, saying it’s legal, ethical and necessary given a national surge driven by the highly contagious delta variant.

“He’s really showing leadership to strengthen the case for vaccination, which the entire country is trying to make,” said Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious diseases professor at the University of California, San Francisco.

The new rule would apply to an estimated 246,000 state employees, according to the governor, and at least 2 million health care workers and long-term care workers in the public and private sectors.

To Read Complete article click Here

*

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

One of the ways the global cabal is attempting to implement The Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution is by putting global supply chains at risk to bring the economy to its knees. I warned about this looming threat in my article What the Future Portends: 10 Predictions for 2021 and Beyond.

The narrative being sold to the public goes like this. The new wave of COVID-19 infections caused by various Greek-letter variants, major disruptions due to natural disasters (attributed to climate change), and cyber-attacks targeting key industries are causing worker shortages and the inability for ships and other major transport systems to reach their destinations. This “shortage” of workers and goods such as food and computer chips plays right into globalist stooges hands. As prices skyrocket, the economy will further deteriorate and panic will rule the day. People desperate for basic necessities will turn to looting and violence which will give governments a new excuse to lockdown and subdue their populations.

The true narrative points to global forces using these unfolding calamities as the perfect convergence of manufactured “problem-reaction-solution” scenarios. These “existential” crises are deliberately put in motion to move the world towards global governance based on the UN (Agenda 2030) Sustainable Development goals, a new blockchain based financial system, and a China-like surveillance state.

Pandemics, climate change, cyber terror, and manufactured supply shortages are trojan horses used to remove individual rights, destroy nations and governments, and push people into a new technocratic society. All of these events allow governments to implement “emergency” measures while consolidating more power. As these scenarios play out, control mechanisms such as biometric surveillance, smart technology, social credit, Universal Basic Income, mandatory vaccination, and digital ID/wallet systems are steadily materializing.

A new article in the Insurance Journal provides details to the changes rapidly taking place as the global supply chain is threatened. The article states:

Events have conspired to drive global supply chains towards breaking point, threatening the fragile flow of raw materials, parts and consumer goods, according to companies, economists and shipping specialists.

The Delta variant of the coronavirus has devastated parts of Asia and prompted many nations to cut off land access for sailors. That’s left captains unable to rotate weary crews and about 100,000 seafarers stranded at sea beyond their stints in a flashback to 2020 and the height of lockdowns.

Meanwhile, deadly floods in economic giants China and Germany have further ruptured global supply lines that had yet to recover from the first wave of the pandemic, compromising trillions of dollars of economic activity that rely on them.

Manufacturing industries are reeling.

Automakers, for example, are again being forced to stop production because of disruptions caused by COVID-19 outbreaks. Toyota Motor Corp said this week it had to halt operations at plants in Thailand and Japan because they couldn’t get parts.

Buckling supply chains are hitting the United States and China, the world’s economic motors that together account for more 40% of global economic output. This could lead to a slowdown in the global economy, along with rising prices for all manner of goods and raw materials.

Ports across the globe are suffering the kinds of logjams not seen in decades, according to industry players.

The China Port and Harbour Association said on Wednesday that freight capacity continued to be tight.

A cyber attack hit South African container ports in Cape Town and Durban this week, adding further disruptions at the terminals.

If all that were not enough, in Britain the official health app has told hundreds of thousands of workers to isolate following contact with someone with COVID-19 — leading to supermarkets warning of a short supply and some petrol stations closing.

Richard Walker, managing director of supermarket group Iceland Foods, turned to Twitter to urge people not to panic buy.

“We need to be able to supply stores, stock shelves and deliver food,” he wrote.

Another recent article from The Conversation details how extensive the shortages are, stating:

It expands to include a whole range of products like lumber and other building materials, tools, foodstuffs, seeds, furniture, cleaning supplies, aluminum cans, jars, pools and pool equipment, chemicals, bicycles, camping gear, household appliances and replacement parts of all kinds.

In many cases supply chains have been simultaneously squeezed on both ends — supply and demand.

The empty store shelves that dotted the landscape at the beginning of last year’s plandemic is only a taste of what is to come. Manufactured famine would be the perfect way to introduce complete control of the food supply. The ultimate goal is to eliminate meat-eating and increase consumption of GMO crops and synthetic food as only a few major corporations would control the entire world’s food supply. This is why Bill Gates is now the largest landowner in the U.S.

Recently there have already been major “cyber attacks” by mysterious hacker groups on a major U.S. gasoline pipeline (Colonial) and global food supplier (JBS). The power grid failure in Texas this past February created shortages of water, food, and heat for short periods, but caused much devastation and even death. In March, a container ship blocked both lanes of the Suez Canal and kept vessels from crossing for an entire week leading to inflated oil prices and long shipping delays. Current drought conditions in the western United Statesexacerbated by wildfires and extreme high temperatures are ruining vegetation and impacting the water supply.

These events along with a “cyber pandemic” could easily trigger a worldwide crisis. World Economic Forum frontman and globalist stooge Klaus Schwab has warned of an event to come that could make the coronavirus “pandemic” seem like a small disturbance. The World Economic Forum sponsored Cyber Polygon events have been creating simulations of massive cyber-attacks that could completely disrupt finance, global trade, power grids, and life as we know it. Will these simulations go live in the near future?

If you’re reading this you are ahead of the curve as most people are still marching along like sheep to the slaughter. But don’t wait! Take action now and stock up on needed goods and supplies before it is too late. Discuss these scenarios with your loved ones and formulate a plan that can help you stay above water if and when calamity strikes.

*

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.

Jesse Smith is an independent journalist who operates the Truth Unmuted website. Truth Unmuted is dedicated to exposing the lies, motives, and methods of the global cabal trying to force humanity into a new world order. The website covers issues such as technocracy, globalism, transhumanism, politics, health, and other relevant topics that tie into global agendas. 

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Julian Assange’s long, contentious relationship with Ecuador is officially over: According to Associated Press, the nation has chosen to revoke his citizenship effective immediately.

The WikiLeaks founder famously took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012 after Swedish prosecutors issued an international arrest warrant (later dropped) on counts of rape and sexual misconduct, saying that the case was a pretext to extradite him to the U.S. on espionage charges. Ecuador granted Assange—who had leaked troves of U.S. military, intelligence, and diplomatic secrets via WikiLeaks—political asylum and later citizenship. Official Ecuadorian citizenship was intended to pave the way for Assange to assume a diplomatic role with immunity to prosecution, but the relationship reportedly soured as Assange proved a frustrating, expensive, and politically inconvenient guest over the course of his seven-year stretch in the embassy.

Ecuadorian officials enraged that Assange was continuing to operate WikiLeaks from within the embassy (including leaking files stemming from a hack of Democratic Party servers during the U.S. presidential election in 2016) cut off his internet access in 2018 and stripped him of asylum status in 2019, allowing police to enter and take him into custody. Since then, Assange has been convicted of bail evasion in the UK and spent much of his time desperately trying to avoid extradition to the U.S., which is seeking revenge for the humiliating leaks by slapping him with a slew of hacking and espionage charges.

Assange won the initial round, citing the near certainty he would be tortured by solitary confinement in U.S. custody like WikiLeaks source Chelsea Manning, but the U.S. government is appealing the decision. Assange’s case has raised serious issues about freedom of the press and whether his activities should be protected by the First Amendment. But don’t worry, the U.S. has pinky swornnot to do the whole torture thing so long as nothing happens that causes it to change its mind and has issued assurances that he could potentially serve his sentence in Australia that are full of legal caveats.

Julian Assange’s long, contentious relationship with Ecuador is officially over: According to Associated Press, the nation has chosen to revoke his citizenship effective immediately.

The WikiLeaks founder famously took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2012 after Swedish prosecutors issued an international arrest warrant (later dropped) on counts of rape and sexual misconduct, saying that the case was a pretext to extradite him to the U.S. on espionage charges. Ecuador granted Assange—who had leaked troves of U.S. military, intelligence, and diplomatic secrets via WikiLeaks—political asylum and later citizenship. Official Ecuadorian citizenship was intended to pave the way for Assange to assume a diplomatic role with immunity to prosecution, but the relationship reportedly soured as Assange proved a frustrating, expensive, and politically inconvenient guest over the course of his seven-year stretch in the embassy.

Ecuadorian officials enraged that Assange was continuing to operate WikiLeaks from within the embassy (including leaking files stemming from a hack of Democratic Party servers during the U.S. presidential election in 2016) cut off his internet access in 2018 and stripped him of asylum status in 2019, allowing police to enter and take him into custody. Since then, Assange has been convicted of bail evasion in the UK and spent much of his time desperately trying to avoid extradition to the U.S., which is seeking revenge for the humiliating leaks by slapping him with a slew of hacking and espionage charges.

Assange won the initial round, citing the near certainty he would be tortured by solitary confinement in U.S. custody like WikiLeaks source Chelsea Manning, but the U.S. government is appealing the decision. Assange’s case has raised serious issues about freedom of the press and whether his activities should be protected by the First Amendment. But don’t worry, the U.S. has pinky swornnot to do the whole torture thing so long as nothing happens that causes it to change its mind and has issued assurances that he could potentially serve his sentence in Australia that are full of legal caveats.

In another blow, albeit one which will have little practical impact on Assange’s fate moving forward, Ecuadorean officials now appear to have decided there were irregularities in the WikiLeaks founder’s naturalization process.

The Guardian reported that in a letter filed in response to a claim by the Ecuadorean foreign ministry, the Pichincha court for contentious administrative matters has confirmed that Assange’s naturalization has been annulled. Issues cited by Ecuadorean authorities included inconsistencies and different signatures in naturalization documents, unpaid fees, and the implication some paperwork may have been modified, the paper wrote.

A likely factor in the about-face is that Assange was originally granted citizenship under the tenure of ex-President Rafael Correa. His successor, Lenín Moreno, made a hard break with Correa’s legacy, including by evicting Assange and turning him over to UK police. Moreno’s successor, in turn, right-wing politician Guillermo Lasso, had also called for the removal of Assange, highlighting how his tenure in the embassy and general relationship with Ecuador had become a political liability.

As the Register noted, Ecuador has shown almost no public support whatsoever for Assange during his current extradition proceedings in the UK. In fact, the opposite has occurred, as Ecuador reportedly cataloged Assange’s possessions and shared troves of data with U.S. prosecutors despite the ongoing nature of the extradition fight.

According to the Guardian, Ecuador’s foreign ministry denied that political pressure played a role in the decision to axe Assange’s citizenship and that it “acted independently and followed due process in a case that took place during the previous government and that was raised by the same previous government.”

*

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

#Yes, It’s A “Killer Vaccine”. They are Killing our Children

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 28, 2021

#Yes, It’s A Killer Vaccine. That message should be loud and clear. Our children are being killed. We call on our readers and all humanity to question this diabolical “vaccine consensus” imposed by our governments, Big Pharma, the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation. And the mainstream media is complicit.

Study on Electromagnetism of Vaccinated Persons

By Mamer and Amar Goudjil, July 28, 2021

It was found that vaccinated individuals do give off an electromagnetic field and that the earlier the individuals were vaccinated, the stronger the field they gave off. This sensation and appraisal, which is purely a tactile experience when the shoulder magnet is applied and removed, should be verified much more accurately with much more precise equipment.

Covid-19 Vaccines Lead to New Infections and Mortality: The Evidence is Overwhelming

By Gérard Delépine, July 28, 2021

This article demonstrates unequivocally that mortality and morbidity has increased dramatically as a result of the vaccine. The incidence of Covid positive cases has also increased.

Forced Vaccination and the Road to “Digital Tyranny”: Agenda ID2020 Revisited

By Peter Koenig, July 28, 2021

The directors of the world, the Merkels, Macrons and other compromised world leaders, plus their nameless tiny elite-bosses way above them – are calling for tightening the screws again. To use Madame Merkel’s terminology of what she decided to do with the German people a few months ago. She has hardly loosened the screws since.

Nanotechnology-derived Graphene in Face Masks — Now There Are Safety Concerns

By Andrew Maynard, July 28, 2021

Face masks should protect you, not place you in greater danger. However, last Friday Radio Canada revealed that residents of Quebec and Ottawa were being advised not to use specific types of graphene-containing masks as they could potentially be harmful.

At FDA Urging, Pfizer and Moderna to Include Thousands More Children in Clinical Trials

By Children’s Health Defense, July 28, 2021

Citing concerns about the risk of heart inflammation associated with the vaccines, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration asked Pfizer and Moderna to expand the number of children in their clinical trials.

Why Germany Has Won and Italy Has Lost

By Manlio Dinucci, July 28, 2021

German Chancellor Merkel – writes Alberto Negri (il manifesto, July 23) – has resisted the pressure of three U.S. administrations – Obama, Trump and Biden – to cancel North Stream 2, the pipeline that flanks the North Stream inaugurated ten years ago, doubling the supply of Russian gas to Germany.

“Learning to Loath GMOs”: Genetic Engineering, Genetic Modified Plants, Biotechnology and Big Agriculture

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null, July 28, 2021

The Times article makes an effort to advance the flawed agro-chemical mantra of “substantial equivalence” without citing the term.

The Corona “War on Reality”. School Closures and the Hardships of Our Children

By Alex Gutentag, July 28, 2021

“Public health” and “the safety of our children” came to mean students Zooming from homeless encampments, experiencing severe abuse, regressing academically, falling into depression, going hungry, struggling through catastrophic learning loss, and, in the saddest cases, not making it through the year alive.

British Government Adviser Who Warned of 200,000 COVID Cases a Day Faces Scrutiny after Dramatic Fall in UK Infections

By Paul Joseph Watson, July 28, 2021

Professor Neil Ferguson, the controversial epidemiologist who predicted there would be as many as 200,000 COVID cases a day in the UK if restrictions were lifted, is facing scrutiny after infections continued to drop for the 6th day in a row.

Video: No Scientific Reason to Vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2: Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi

By Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, July 28, 2021

Dr. Bhakdi explains clearly, based on new scientific evidence, why he believes your immune system is your best defence against SARS-CoV-2, and indeed all coronaviruses.

Pentagon Chief Calls for Southeast Asian, Asia-Pacific Military Alliance Against China

By Rick Rozoff, July 28, 2021

In accusing China of “genocide and crimes against humanity,” he used the exact language used by NATO to justify waging its air wars against Yugoslavia and Libya.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: #Yes, It’s a “Killer Vaccine”. They Are Killing Our Children
  • Tags:

The Same Shady People Own Big Pharma and the Media

July 29th, 2021 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published on June 15, 2021

Big Pharma and mainstream media are largely owned by two asset management firms: BlackRock and Vanguard

Drug companies are driving COVID-19 responses — all of which, so far, have endangered rather than optimized public health — and mainstream media have been willing accomplices in spreading their propaganda, a false official narrative that leads the public astray and fosters fear based on lies

Vanguard and BlackRock are the top two owners of Time Warner, Comcast, Disney and News Corp, four of the six media companies that control more than 90% of the U.S. media landscape

BlackRock and Vanguard form a secret monopoly that own just about everything else you can think of too. In all, they have ownership in 1,600 American firms, which in 2015 had combined revenues of $9.1 trillion. When you add in the third-largest global owner, State Street, their combined ownership encompasses nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms

Vanguard is the largest shareholder of BlackRock. Vanguard itself, on the other hand, has a unique structure that makes its ownership more difficult to discern, but many of the oldest, richest families in the world can be linked to Vanguard funds

*

What does The New York Times and a majority of other legacy media have in common with Big Pharma? Answer: They’re largely owned by BlackRock and the Vanguard Group, the two largest asset management firms in the world. Moreover, it turns out these two companies form a secret monopoly that own just about everything else you can think of too. As reported in the featured video:1,2

“The stock of the world’s largest corporations are owned by the same institutional investors. They all own each other. This means that ‘competing’ brands, like Coke and Pepsi aren’t really competitors, at all, since their stock is owned by exactly the same investment companies, investment funds, insurance companies, banks and in some cases, governments.

The smaller investors are owned by larger investors. Those are owned by even bigger investors. The visible top of this pyramid shows only two companies whose names we have often seen …They are Vanguard and BlackRock.

The power of these two companies is beyond your imagination. Not only do they own a large part of the stocks of nearly all big companies but also the stocks of the investors in those companies. This gives them a complete monopoly.

A Bloomberg report states that both these companies in the year 2028, together will have investments in the amount of 20 trillion dollars. That means that they will own almost everything.’”

Who Are the Vanguard?

The word “vanguard” means “the foremost position in an army or fleet advancing into battle,” and/or “the leading position in a trend or movement.” Both are fitting descriptions of this global behemoth, owned by globalists pushing for a Great Reset, the core of which is the transfer of wealth and ownership from the hands of the many into the hands of the very few.

Interestingly, Vanguard is the largest shareholder of BlackRock, as of March 2021.3,4 Vanguard itself, on the other hand, has a “unique” corporate structure that makes its ownership more difficult to discern. It’s owned by its various funds, which in turn are owned by the shareholders. Aside from these shareholders, it has no outside investors and is not publicly traded.5 As reported in the featured video:6,7

“The elite who own Vanguard apparently do not like being in the spotlight but of course they cannot hide from who is willing to dig. Reports from Oxfam and Bloomberg say that 1% of the world, together owns more money than the other 99%. Even worse, Oxfam says that 82% of all earned money in 2017 went to this 1%.

In other words, these two investment companies, Vanguard and BlackRock hold a monopoly in all industries in the world and they, in turn are owned by the richest families in the world, some of whom are royalty and who have been very rich since before the Industrial Revolution.”

While it would take time to sift through all of Vanguard’s funds to identify individual shareholders, and therefore owners of Vanguard, a quick look-see suggests Rothschild Investment Corp.8 and the Edmond De Rothschild Holding are two such stakeholders.9 Keep the name Rothschild in your mind as you read on, as it will feature again later.

The video above also identifies the Italian Orsini family, the American Bush family, the British Royal family, the du Pont family, the Morgans, Vanderbilts and Rockefellers, as Vanguard owners.

BlackRock/Vanguard Own Big Pharma

According to Simply Wall Street, in February 2020, BlackRock and Vanguard were the two largest shareholders of GlaxoSmithKline, at 7% and 3.5% of shares respectively.10 At Pfizer, the ownership is reversed, with Vanguard being the top investor and BlackRock the second-largest stockholder.11

Top 10 Owners of Pfizer Inc

Keep in mind that stock ownership ratios can change at any time, since companies buy and sell on a regular basis, so don’t get hung up on percentages. The bottom line is that BlackRock and Vanguard, individually and combined, own enough shares at any given time that we can say they easily control both Big Pharma and the centralized legacy media — and then some.

Why does this matter? It matters because drug companies are driving COVID-19 responses — all of which, so far, have endangered rather than optimized public health — and mainstream media have been willing accomplices in spreading their propaganda, a false official narrative that has, and still is, leading the public astray and fosters fear based on lies.

To have any chance of righting this situation, we must understand who the central players are, where the harmful dictates are coming from, and why these false narratives are being created in the first place.

As noted in Global Justice Now’s December 2020 report12 “The Horrible History of Big Pharma,” we simply cannot allow drug companies — “which have a long track record of prioritizing corporate profit over people’s health” — to continue to dictate COVID-19 responses.

In it, they review the shameful history of the top seven drug companies in the world that are now developing and manufacturing drugs and gene-based “vaccines” against COVID-19, while mainstream media have helped suppress information about readily available older drugs that have been shown to have a high degree of efficacy against the infection.

BlackRock/Vanguard Own the Media

When it comes to The New York Times, as of May 2021, BlackRock is the second-largest stockholder at 7.43% of total shares, just after The Vanguard Group, which owns the largest portion (8.11%).13,14

In addition to The New York Times, Vanguard and BlackRock are also the top two owners of Time Warner, Comcast, Disney and News Corp, four of the six media companies that control more than 90% of the U.S. media landscape.15,16

Needless to say, if you have control of this many news outlets, you can control entire nations by way of carefully orchestrated and organized centralized propaganda disguised as journalism.

BlackRock/Vanguard Own the Media

If your head is spinning already, you’re not alone. It’s difficult to describe circular and tightly interwoven relationships in a linear fashion. The world of corporate ownership is labyrinthine, where everyone seems to own everyone, to some degree.

However, the key take-home message is that two companies stand out head and neck above all others, and that’s BlackRock and Vanguard. Together, they form a hidden monopoly on global asset holdings, and through their influence over our centralized media, they have the power to manipulate and control a great deal of the world’s economy and events, and how the world views it all.

Considering BlackRock in 2018 announced that it has “social expectations” from the companies it invests in,17 its potential role as a central hub in the Great Reset and the “build back better” plan cannot be overlooked.

Add to this information showing it “undermines competition through owning shares in competing companies” and “blurs boundaries between private capital and government affairs by working closely with regulators,” and one would be hard-pressed to not see how BlackRock/Vanguard and their globalist owners might be able to facilitate the Great Reset and the so-called “green” revolution, both of which are part of the same wealth-theft scheme.

BlackRock and Vanguard Own the World

That assertion will become even clearer once you realize that this duo’s influence is not limited to Big Pharma and the media. Importantly, BlackRock also works closely with central banks around the world, including the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is a private entity, not a federal one.18,19 It lends money to the central bank, acts as an adviser to it, and develops the central bank’s software.20

BlackRock/Vanguard also own shares of long list of other companies, including Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Alphabet Inc.21 As illustrated in the graphic of BlackRock and Vanguard’s ownership network below,22 featured in the 2017 article “These Three Firms Own Corporate America” in The Conversation, it would be near-impossible to list them all.

In all, BlackRock and Vanguard have ownership in some 1,600 American firms, which in 2015 had combined revenues of $9.1 trillion. When you add in the third-largest global owner, State Street, their combined ownership encompasses nearly 90% of all S&P 500 firms.23

Network of ownership by the Big Three in listed US firms

A Global Monopoly Few Know Anything About

Watch the video here.

To tease out the overarching influence of BlackRock and Vanguard in the global marketplace, be sure to watch the 45-minute-long video featured at the top of this article. It provides a wide-view summary of the hidden monopoly network of Vanguard- and BlackRock-owned corporations, and their role in the Great Reset. A second much shorter video (above) offers an additional review of this information.

How can we tie BlackRock/Vanguard — and the globalist families that own them — to the Great Reset? Barring a public confession, we have to look at the relationships between these behemoth globalist-owned corporations and consider the influence they can wield through those relationships. As noted by Lew Rockwell:24

“When Lynn Forester de Rothschild wants the United States to be a one-party country (like China) and doesn’t want voter ID laws passed in the U.S., so that more election fraud can be perpetrated to achieve that end, what does she do?

She holds a conference call with the world’s top 100 CEOs and tells them to publicly decry as ‘Jim Crow’ Georgia’s passing of an anti-corruption law and she orders her dutiful CEOs to boycott the State of Georgia, like we saw with Coca-Cola and Major League Baseball and even Hollywood star, Will Smith.

In this conference call, we see shades of the Great Reset, Agenda 2030, the New World Order. The UN wants to make sure, as does [World Economic Forum founder and executive chairman Klaus] Schwab that in 2030, poverty, hunger, pollution and disease no longer plague the Earth.

To achieve this, the UN wants taxes from Western countries to be split by the mega corporations of the elite to create a brand-new society. For this project, the UN says we need a world government — namely the UN, itself.”

As I’ve reviewed in many previous articles, it seems quite clear that the COVID-19 pandemic was orchestrated to bring about this New World Order — the Great Reset — and the 45-minute video featured at top of article does a good job of explaining how this was done. And at the heart of it all, the “heart” toward which all global wealth streams flow, we find BlackRock and Vanguard.

*

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

Notes

1, 6 SGT Report May 6, 2021

2, 7, 20, 24 Lew Rockwell April 21, 2021

3, 18 Reuters January 30, 2021

4 Stockzoa.com BlackRock Investors

5 Investopedia June 22, 2019

8 Fintel Rothschild

9 Fintel Edmond De Rothschild

10 Simply Wall Street February 3, 2020

11 Twitter Peter Dunne May 30, 2021 Top 10 Owners of Pfizer screenshot

12 Global Justice Now, The Horrible History of Big Pharma

13 Harvard University New York Times May 11, 2021

14 Twitter Peter Dunne May 30, 2021

15 Reddit Media Controlled by Just Six Companies

16 Global Issues Media Conglomerates January 2, 2009

17 Investigate-Europe.eu May 2018

19 Wall Street on Parade June 4, 2020

21 Holdings Channel BlackRock Stock Holdings

22, 23 The Conversation May 10, 2017

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Fingerprints on Terrorism Aimed at China-Pakistan Economic Corridor

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

.

A group of “citizens” of the Andromeda Galaxy, the closest to our Milky Way, but still about 2.5 million light years away from planet Earth – People of Peace – wanted to visit Mother Earth, the beautiful blue planet. They must have heard lots of good things about our planet, many light years back. The Andromeda people’s nutrition is love. When they landed on earth, they first were thrilled – the breathtaking landscape, mountains, lakes, still fresh air, forests – though rapidly diminishing. They ignored the latter, because of the beauty of the former. But gradually they started starving – they had to leave. They found no love on Earth….

***

Lost Love. The Gladiator Games are over, the soccer players went home, both in South America and in Europe, to continue celebrating without masks and without social distancing – and the Olympics in Japan will be taking place in virtual mode, arenas without live spectators. The infection case numbers are on the rise, a scaringly rapid rise, the Delta Variant and Wave Four are at the doorstep, actually they are knocking at the door – in some US States at least, and soon in Europe – to give you a last chance to get the wonder jab.

The directors of the world, the Merkels, Macrons and other compromised world leaders, plus their nameless tiny elite-bosses way above them – are calling for tightening the screws again. To use Madame Merkel’s terminology of what she decided to do with the German people a few months ago. She has hardly loosened the screws since.

The populace has had their summer fun. They have enjoyed their Gladiators.

Now reality sets in again. Preparation for the Fourth Wave. New lockdowns.

Imagine we are only in year 2021, There are another almost ten years left in the UN Agenda 2030 to accomplish the nefarious objectives of the Great Reset – if We, the People, don’t stop it.

The tyrants, first in disguise, then in semi-disguise – and now with the Fourth Wave coming, they show their true face – wide open. No scruples. They have been given their quota of vaxxing by the higher masters, and god-forbid, they may not reach their targets.

The Presidents of Tanzania and Burundi, they did not want to jab their people with poisonous mRNA inoculations. They knew about and had natural remedies to heal. While there is no firm evidence, they died mysterious deaths. Just a few months ago. And nobody dares to investigate them.

Source Al Jazeera, January 21, 2021

The President of Haiti, Jovenel Moïse (A right wing president who was the object of mass protests), on 7 July 2021, was assassinated in the middle of the night in his bed, by a well-organized group of 28 mercenaries, they say.

He too, said there was no need to jab Haitians. They were free of masks, and they were free to hug and socialize. No social distancing. And Haiti’s “case numbers” and deaths were very low. Proportionately much lower than the artificially blown out of proportion, fear-inducing “cases”, disease and death numbers of the obedient tyrannical West. (See Open Democracy)

Haiti was the only country in the Western Hemisphere which refused to implement the mRNA vaccine.

In a bitter irony, immediately following Jovenal Moise’s assassination, President Joe Biden sent half a million vaccine doses (and more to come) (courtesy of Uncle Sam) which were promptly delivered to Port au Prince (six days later) on July 14.

 

Remember Agenda ID2020?

See this and this.

What we are living today, is the Lockstep Scenario, according to the infamous 2010 Rockefeller Report, confirmed by Klaus Schwab’s (WEF) “The Great Reset”.

These Rockefeller Report’s four scenarios (Lock Step; Clever Together; Hack Attack; and Smart Scramble), have been on the drawing board for decades. Ever so often we were told and warned about the deadly actions they had in store for us.

This is part of their cult. They have to tell people. And they did on numerous occasions.

But nobody listened. For example, by publishing the 2010 Rockefeller Report which was never a secret. Not even now. See this. (p. 34)

Have you noticed, the scenario “Hack Attack” is being tried out, in plain sight?

The highly propagated blame and breach of cyber security is on Russia and China. And hardly anybody is linking it to the openly displayed chapter “Hack Attack” of the 2010 Rockefeller report (p 34).

How come? Are we so blind or brain-brushed and brain-washed to ignore the open warnings we receive?

Then almost simultaneously, Bill Gate’s TedTalk in February 2010, in Southern California, where he says “If we are doing a real good job, we could reduce world population by 10% to 15%”; see this, called “Innovating to Zero”.

And then there is this “Luciferian” Swiss Gotthard tunnel inauguration in June 2016.

People say Switzerland is one of the cults main hubs. All of the European government “leaders” and other hot shots were sitting in the front line to watch this nefarious spectacle – that just coincidentally starts with a “lockstep scenario” – watch this 6 min very revealing youtube (below). Also see this.

Event 201

As if this is not enough, there was Event 201 that took place on 18 October 2019, in NYC, just a few weeks before the “start” of the pandemic, what turned out to be a plandemic. It was sponsored by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (funded by the Rockefeller Foundation) in partnership with the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, with the participation of WHO, UNICEF, other UN agencies, and – of course, the World Bank, the IMF and many more.

The event portrayed a simulation of things to come, a corona virus à la SARS (China 2002 / 2003), thus called SARS-CoV-2, later renamed by WHO to Covid-19 (the disease), a simulation of what we are living since the beginning of 2020. The simulated virus caused 65 million deaths in 18 months, destroyed the world economy and left humanity in chaotic shambles. See this.

Surely, there were many more such introductory demonstrations on what “they” intend to do with us. Even though, they played out right in front of our eyes, we largely ignored them all.

This profoundly immoral and criminal endeavor has been on the drawing board for years. The final and formal decision to go ahead NOW, albeit planned, was taken in January 2020 at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos – behind closed doors, of course. The Gates, GAVI (an association of vaccination-promoting pharmaceuticals), Rockefellers, Rothschilds et al, they are all behind this decision – the implementation of Agenda ID2020 – see links above.

The key points and predictions of these Agenda ID2020-linked articles, were published by GR on 12 March 2020.

The Coronavirus Vaccine: The Real Danger is “Agenda ID2020”. Vaccination as a Platform for “Digital Identity”By Peter Koenig, March 12, 2020

These key points are the following:

(i) “Force vaccination, under police and / or military surveillance. Those who refuse may be penalized (fines and / or jail – and force-vaccinated all the same);”

(ii) “People really don’t know what kind of cocktail will be put into the vaccine, maybe a slow killer, that acts-up only in a few years – or a disease that hits only the next generation – or a brain debilitating agent, or a gene that renders women infertile …. all is possible – always with the aim of full population control and population reduction. In a few years’ time, one doesn’t know, of course, where the disease comes from. That’s the level of technology our bio-war labs have reached (US, UK, Israel, Canada, Australia…);” – See this.

(iii) “Along with the vaccination – if not with the first one, then possibly with a later one, a nano-chip may be injected, unknown to the person being vaccinated. The chip may be remotely charged with all your personal data, including bank accounts – digital money. Yes, digital money that’s what “they” are aiming at, so you really have no control any more over your health, and other intimate data, but also over your earnings and spending. Your money could be blocked, or taken away – as a ‘sanction’ for misbehavior, for swimming against the stream. You may become a mere slave of the masters. Comparatively, feudalism may appear like a walk in the park.”

Lo and behold, precisely this is happening. We thought forced vaccination is anti-constitutional and could never happen. But it is just in the process of being imposed. Why is it possible? Because the constitutional democratic rights of people throughout Europe and most of the Western World, have quietly been overtaken by “Health Martial Laws” that were quickly passed through the respective Parliaments, with most people not even noticing.

And as to what’s in the vaccines, mostly nefarious organ destroying toxins, mostly graphene oxide. See also Spanish research team report  entitled “Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension”.

This means, our Constitutional Human and Civil Rights have been suspended. The governments can do whatever they want, in the name of health. They can storm your house, arrest you, fine you, put you in jail, or even in a mental hospital. All has already happened, with the mainstream media hardly reporting on it.

Keep one thing in mind though – and that is very important keeping always before your eyes and in your mind: Tyrants don’t create tyranny; people do – by their obedience.

Keep also in mind, all the mainstream media are bought by governments and by the order-giving cult, above the governments.

As an example, in tiny Switzerland with 8.4 million people, the Government had just a few weeks ago decided to increase the “subsidies” to the (mainstream) media by another 120 million Swiss francs (about US$ 132 million), to an annual aggregate total of close to half a billion Swiss francs, or about 550 million dollars. That sum “obliges”.

Imagine, what sums are being dished out to the media in the rest of Europe, the US and most of the all-coerced 193 UN member countries!

Forced Vaccination announced in France on Bastille Day

Now comes the BREAKING: On 13 July, a day before the French National Independence Day, the Bastille Day, the very day celebrating the French Revolution – 14 July 1789, when the French broke loose from Royal feudalism, when they gave an example for others to follow – on that very occasion, French President Macron announced forced vaccination, to begin with all health services employees; no attending of public events, taking public transportations, a ban on movie theatres, restaurants and even shops – and of course no flying – for unvaxxed people. See this.

This was foreseeable, as Germany, Greece, Canada and others have passed similar laws. Others are to follow – probably the Netherlands, Italy and Spain. Boris Johnson, UK, may join the gang later.

As of 19 July he declared the UK totally free of any covid restrictions. Maybe he has fulfilled his vaxx-quota? And gives people – or rather the economy – a little reprieve, before the cult cracks down on him and other coopted-coerced leaders (sic) again. There is a lot to be done to complete the UN Agenda 2030 – and, foremost Agenda ID2020.

On 14 of July 2021, French Bastille Day – instead of celebrating the French prowess of freeing themselves from feudalism and aristocratic oppression 232 years ago, millions took to the streets in Paris and major French cities to demonstrate against Macron and his abject dictatorship. What they will achieve remains to be seen. The mainstream media hardly covered the protests. Of course, not. They are paid not to incite people to bond in solidarity.

Apropos solidarity, a little anecdote. Swiss citizens, as a step towards a direct democracy, have, since the Constitutional Revision of 1891, the right to launch a referendum against a law. It takes 50,000 validated signatures. As somewhat a surprise, on 7 March 2021 a people’s referendum rejected a law governing a proposed electronic identity system, the so-called e-ID Act, i.e., Agenda ID2020, by more than two thirds majority. The Swiss ID2020 would have connected everything to everything on personal data.

The key reason for such a clear rejection was most likely the Swiss government’s intent to privatize the data handling and management of ID2020. Can you imagine, a bank or insurance company handling your very sensitive personal data, possibly even selling it to marketing companies or to foreign secret service agencies! Well, that didn’t pass.

In September 2020, the Swiss Parliament quietly passed a law giving the government “martial powers” over matters concerning Covid-19. This Health Martial Law would be valid until 2031. An Association of “Friends of the Constitution” was formed, launching a referendum against this law. On 13 June, the referendum was rejected by the people and the law prevailed.

However, after the law passed Parliament, a small but significant amendment was introduced into the Covid-19 law. The Friends of the Constitution launched immediately a new referendum. This time in less than 5 weeks, 187,000 signatures were collected, an all-time record for a referendum in the 130 years of the Swiss Right to Referendum. The new Referendum will be voted on in November 2021. Let’s wait and see, whether this time people will reject the Swiss Health Martial Law.

The 187,000 signatures are a clear sign of a growing anti-covid, anti-oppression movement, or awakening, in Switzerland. When “Friends of the Constitution” was created in the summer 2020, they counted a few dozen people. Now, a year later, their membership has grown to over 10,000.

In most other European countries, a covid martial law was passed by Parliament or by government decree, with no saying by the people.

The key in a situation like the one the world faces today, where a small cult of evil, but dirty rich people, attempt to take control of the world, of the population, of the financial system, of the manufacturing and infrastructure apparatus – peoples’ solidarity in spirit and in actions, is key.

We are 99.999 %, they are 0.001% or less. We shall overcome their nefarious tyrannical attempt to rule the world, attempt to do away with sovereign nation states – and convert a drastically reduced world population into a One World Order – OWO, or a New World Order. They shall not succeed.  But we must remain peaceful, non-aggressive – but in solid solidarity, steadily moving forward, like a flowing stream, gathering ever more momentum and strength – towards a mankind and sovereign states with a shared future.

*

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. He is also a non-resident Sr. Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Featured image is from Zero Hedge

Dear Readers,

We are in the midst of an unprecedented global crisis. In an increasingly polarized and crazy world, truly independent news and analysis is a vital tool which sustains democratic values worldwide.

We are currently facing an unprecedented threat to the independent media and freedom of expression on the internet.  

The ultimate goal is the silencing of any voice of opposition to the mainstream narrative.

To ensure the longevity of Global Research, we need your help! Our content will always be free, but your donations and membership subscriptions are essential to the functioning of our website. Free content involves some very real costs. We cannot meet these costs without your support. Please click below to make a donation or become a member now.

Click to donate:

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation


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

Click to view our membership plans


Thank you for supporting independent media.

The Global Research Team

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Threat to Independent Media and Freedom on the Internet: Support Global Research!
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

According to a Spanish research team, graphene oxide is also contained in the Covid mRNA vaccine vial.

For Further details, click here

First published by Global Research on July 12, 2021

***

UPDATE April 2, 2021: Health Canada have issued an advisory asking people not to “use face masks labelled to contain graphene or biomass graphene.” More information here.

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

Featured image is from OffGuardian


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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Citing concerns about the risk of heart inflammation associated with the vaccines, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration asked Pfizer and Moderna to expand the number of children in their clinical trials.

Pfizer and Moderna will increase the number of children in their COVID vaccine clinical trials prior to seeking Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) told the vaccine makers the size and scope of their pediatric studies, as initially envisioned, were inadequate to detect rare side effects.

The rare side effects cited by the FDA include myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, inflammation of the lining around the heart, multiple people familiar with the trials told The New York Times.

Moderna’s shot is authorized for emergency use in people 18 and up, and Pfizer’s vaccine is authorized for children as young as 12. No COVID vaccines have yet received EUA approval for children younger than 12.

Expanding the pediatric trials means thousands more children as young as 6 months old may soon be recruited and enrolled in COVID vaccine trials.

According to the Times, the FDA asked the companies to include 3,000 children in the 5- to 11-year-old group, the group for whom results were expected first.

One person, granted anonymity by the Times to speak freely, described that figure as double the original number of study participants.

Moderna researchers had intended to test the vaccine in about 7,000 children, with some as young as 6 months, according to ABC News, but the company told the news outlet today in an email they never decided on how many kids would be added to the trial.

Pfizer began testing its vaccine in children ages 5 to 11 on June 8, with those younger than 5 being included as of June 21. The study will involve up to 4,500 subjects from the U.S., Finland, Poland and Spain, according to the Wall Street Journal, which also reported the company declined to say whether the recent request from the FDA will change the timing of any authorization submissions.

Last month, Pfizer and Moderna said their vaccines for children 5 through 11 could be ready as early as September. Pfizer, which is on a faster timetable than Moderna, may be able to meet the FDA’s expectations on a bigger trial size and still file a request for expanded EUA by the end of September, the Times reported.

A federal official, who spoke to the Washington Post on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, predicted authorization of a COVID vaccine for children 5 through 11 might come by late October or early November.

The government is not expecting it will be a big problem to enroll more children because so many parents are eager to get their children vaccinated, the official said.

Heart inflammation in teens raises red flag

Moderna spokesman Ray Jordan told the Post the goal is “to enroll a larger safety database which increases the likelihood of detecting rarer events.”

According The Washington Post:

“The FDA wants to be particularly careful about the possibility of children developing myocarditis, or heart inflammation, after receiving a coronavirus vaccine. Adolescents who receive the vaccines are more likely to develop myocarditis than adults — though the risk remains small — and officials want to increase the chances that the trials will indicate whether there is increased incidence of heart inflammation in children.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in June acknowledged 1,200 cases of heart inflammation in 16- to 24-year-olds, and said mRNA COVID vaccines should carry a warning statement. The FDA followed by adding the warning.

According to the latest data available, the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System has received 383 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis in vaccine recipients between the ages of 12 and 17 years old, with 379 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

For all age groups during the same period, 1,848 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis were reported to VAERS, with 1,176 cases attributed to Pfizer, 606 cases to Moderna and 62 cases to J&J’s COVID vaccine.

The data reflects reports received between Dec. 14, 2020 and July 16, 2021. The FDA first authorized Pfizer’s vaccine for 12- to 15-year-olds in May of this year.

Despite the known cases and the FDA warning, the CDC said the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risk.

Doctors weigh in on ill-advised rush to vaccinate kids

The authors of an op-ed published earlier this month in The BMJ argued that even if one assumes the vaccine provides protection against severe COVID, given its “very low incidence in children,” an extremely high number would need to be vaccinated in order to prevent one severe case.

Meanwhile, a large number of children with very low risk for severe disease would be exposed to vaccine risks, known and unknown, they said.

They wrote:

“In the clinical trial underlying the authorization of Pfizer-BioNTech’s mRNA vaccine in children aged 12 to 15, of the close to 1000 children who received placebo, 16 tested positive for COVID-19, compared to none in the fully vaccinated group.

“Given this low incidence, the fact that COVID-19 is generally asymptomatic or mild in children, and the high rate of adverse events in those vaccinated (e.g. in Pfizer’s trial of 12-15 year olds, 3 in 4 kids had fatigue and headaches, around half had chills and muscle pain, and around 1 in 4 to 5 had a fever and joint pain), a comparison of quality-adjusted life-years in the trial would very much favor the placebo group.”

Doctors for COVID Ethics, an EU-based international alliance of hundreds of concerned doctors and scientists, said COVID vaccines are not only “unnecessary and ineffective,” but also “dangerous for children and adolescents.”

Three of the group’s founding signatoriesDr. Michael Palmer (Canada), Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, (Germany) and Stefan Hockertz, Ph.D. (Germany) — assembled in one document powerful expert evidence that highlights the Pfizer vaccine’s “catastrophically bad” safety profile in both adults and adolescents.

In an open letter to the EU’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, more than 40 doctors, medics and scientists in the UK said children are more vulnerable to the potential long-term effects of COVID vaccines.

Vaccinating kids for COVID is “irresponsible, unethical and unnecessary,” they said.

The letter warned against vaccinating people under 18 because evidence shows the virus poses almost no risk to healthy children. The risk of death from COVID in healthy children is 1 in 1.25 million, the authors wrote.

COVID vaccines, however, are linked to strokes due to cerebral venous thromboses in people under 40 — a finding that “led to the suspension of the Oxford-AstraZeneca children’s trial,” the authors said.

The doctors wrote:

“Children have a lifetime ahead of them, and their immunological and neurological systems are still in development, making them potentially more vulnerable to adverse effects than adults.”

According to the latest available data for 12- to 17-year-olds, between Dec. 14, 2020 and July 16, 2021, VAERS received a total of 14,494 reports of adverse events related to COVID vaccines, including 871 rated as serious and 17 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.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

What this article fails to acknowledge is that Neil Ferguson’s “Mathematical Model” was generously funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The unspoken objective was to spearhead the fear campaign as well as provide a pretext and a justification to impose the March 2020 lockdown which resulted in the near closing down of the national economies of 190 member states of the United Nations, creating economic, social and political chaos Worldwide. 

This was “fake science” in support of powerful financial interests. To put it mildly, the scrutiny should also apply to the sponsors of  the lockdown

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research. July 28, 2021

***

Professor Neil Ferguson, the controversial epidemiologist who predicted there would be as many as 200,000 COVID cases a day in the UK if restrictions were lifted, is facing scrutiny after infections continued to drop for the 6th day in a row.

The day before so-called ‘freedom day’ in England, where most mask mandates and social distancing restrictions were lifted, Ferguson was asked by the BBC’s Andrew Marr where the country was heading as a result.

“It’s very difficult to say for certain, but I think 100,000 cases a day is almost inevitable,” said Ferguson, adding, “The real question is do we get to double that or higher? We could get to 200,000 cases a day.”

The professor went on to warn of “major disruption” to the NHS and the interruption of elective surgeries.

Ferguson is being proven wrong by the statistics once again, which today showed there were 24,950 new coronavirus cases, the sixth consecutive daily fall.

“Lockdown zealots will attribute this decline to the vaccines, but that begs the question of why they weren’t confident the vaccines would prevent cases from surging when they predicted armageddon last Monday?” asks Toby Young.

As Christopher Snowdon highlights, the scientists who claimed England’s unlocking represented “a threat to world” are also being proven spectacularly wrong. SAGE government advisers who claimed that relaxing restrictions was “a dangerous and unethical experiment” also face embarrassment.

The issue once again begs the question; Why does the government continue to follow advice given by arch-lockdown advocates who have got it wrong time and time again?

Don’t forget that it was Ferguson who infamously warned that half a million Brits would die without a draconian lockdown, despite the fact that countries like Sweden which didn’t impose lockdown had similar waves and infection rates.

Not only has Ferguson repeatedly proven himself to be totally unreliable (after having already disgraced himself during the 2001 foot and mouth outbreak), but he infamously betrayed what he really thought about the severity of the pandemic via his own behavior.

During the first lockdown, when Ferguson himself was predicting up to half a million deaths, the professor took the threat of the virus so seriously, he allowed his mistress to violate the rules by traveling back and forth across London to continue the pair’s sordid affair.

“It’s OK when we do it!”

*

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

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In its July 19th issue, the New York Times Magazine published, in our opinion, a brilliant piece of twisted pseudo-scientific propaganda. The essay, entitled “Learning to Love GMOs,” is truly stunning. Its author, journalist Jennifer Kahn, takes readers who would have little to no understanding of genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms (GMO) through a fictional labyrinth of out-dated and conflated GMO similitudes to an end point where readers might believe GMOs are really cool and there is nothing to be frantically worried about.

Kahn spins the story of Cathie Martin’s research to develop a genetically engineered purple tomato high in the anti-oxidant anthocyacin as the work of a solo humanitarian to improve consumers’ health by providing nutrient-rich GMO produce. What is missing from Kahn’s equation is that the research was conducted at one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious independent centers for plant science, the Johns Innes Centre (JIC) in the UK. The Centre, which is registered as a charity, lists over 500 employees and is funded by some of the largest proponents of genetic-modified plants, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council. JIC’s website includes purple tomatoes as one of its projects that combines “transcription factors, biosynthetic genes and iRNA [interference RNA] with the availability of natural tomato mutants.”  iRNA, or Post-Transcriptional Gene Slicing, is a method to silence certain genes that researchers desire to curtail their expression.

The Times article makes an effort to advance the flawed agro-chemical mantra of “substantial equivalence” without citing the term. Substantial equivalence is a metaphysical belief that natural foods and crops can serve as a basis for determining the safety and nutritional profiles for foods engineered by genetic biotechnological methods. The early acceptance of GMOs was largely based upon the unproven hypothesis of “substantial equivalence.” The USDA’s adoption of this concept during Bill Clinton’s first term in the White House gave GM seed companies a free pass to avoid submitting trial evidence to prove the environmental and health safety of genetically modified crops. Since the ruling claims that GMOs genetically function identically to their natural counterparts, no compliance of safety regulations should necessarily apply. Therefore Big Ag firms did not have to worry over strict regulatory hurdles, which otherwise apply to other products such as pharmaceutical drugs, processed foods, pesticides, cosmetics and chemical additives.

However, during the past decade a flurry of research has shown that the “substantial equivalence” hypothesis is patently false. Alexandria University in Egypt, the Permaculture Research Institute and the Norwegian Center for Biosafety each found genetically modified crops to be fundamentally different. In addition, studies have confirmed that nutrient levels in traditional, organically raised grown crops are substantially higher than GM varieties. New technological methods to create concise profiles of a food’s molecular composition, notably “omics,” were not available in the early 1990s when Clinton wore the mantle as America’s first biotech president. Omic technology destroyed the Big Ag’s industry’s arguments to support the lie about substantial equivalence. For example, Kings College London published a study in Scientific Reports of Nature revealing unquestionable genetic consequences between GMO Roundup and non-GMO corn. The differences include changes in 117 proteins and 91 metabolites.

Despite “substantial equivalence” having been debunked, the erroneous hypothesis continues to linger in pro-GMO propaganda. However, in Kahn’s recent essay, she attempts to shift attention away from the early generation of GMOs, which were engineered solely to sell more toxic pesticides, and emphasize GMO’s potential for increasing nutritional health and to advance medicine. In order to add a bit of balance, Kahn quotes James Madison University professor Alan Levinovitz who accurately described one fundamental criticism, among many others, against GMOs. “With genetic engineering there’s a feeling that we’re mucking about with the essential building blocks of reality,” Levinovitz stated. “We may feel OK about rearranging genes, the way nature does, but we’re not comfortable mixing them up between creatures.”

But most disturbing is Kahn’s failure to make any mention of the trail of environmental disasters and disease risks due to consuming genetically modified foods. She whitewashes the matter; she prefers we may forget that Monsanto’s soy and corn, which now represent the majority of these foods grown in the US, was developed solely to allow farmers to spray highly toxic pesticides without injuring the crops.

These crops contain notable concentrations of the pesticides that then find their way into numerous consumer food products including baby foods. Nor should we forget that Round-Up grown foods may be destroying people’s microbiome.  Last year, researchers at the University of Turku in Finland reported a “conservative estimate that approximately 54% of organisms in our microbiome are “potentially sensitive” to glyphosate. Despite her pro-GMO advocacy, Kahn could have taken a moral high road to at least apologize on Monsanto’s behalf for the disasters glyphosate has left in its wake. The company has yet to atone despite losing three trials with $2.4 billion fines, repeated appeal losses, and being ordered to pay $10.5 billion in settlements. To date Monsanto’s glyphosate poisoning has been identified with the suppression of essential gut enzymes and amino acid synthesis, gluten intolerance, disruption of manganese pathways, neurological disease, cancer, amyloidosis and autoimmune disease. Her New York Times article would have better served the improvement of public health as a warning rather than an applause to appease companies such as Bayer/Monsanto and Syngenta. And shame on the New York Times’ editors for permitting such biased misinformation to find its way into print.

Kahn is eager to cite findings showing GMO benefits without indicating her sources. She tells us that environmental groups have “quietly walked back their opposition as evidence has mounted that GMOs are both safe to eat and not inherently bad for the environment.” Kahn doesn’t mention who these groups might be. She reframes the Philippine story of the destruction of genetically engineered Golden Rice; yet around that time even the pro-industry magazine Forbes published an article questioning Golden Rice’s viability and noting that its benefits are only based upon unfounded hypotheses. As for its risks to health, GM Watch in the UK points out the work conducted by David Schubert at the Salk Institute revealed that the rice might potentially generate Vitamin A derivatives that could “damage human fetuses and cause birth defects.”

Kahn, who should be acknowledged as a highly respected science journalist and teaches journalism at the University of California’s Berkeley campus, happens to be a contributing author for the Genetic Literacy Project (GLP) at the University of California at Davis, acts more like a public relations operation sponsored by the agro-chemical industry.  Monsanto/Bayer, Syngenta and DuPont are among GLP’s industry partners.

It is one of the most frequently quoted sources of cherry-picked information by pro-GMO advocates and journalists. In our opinion, it is perhaps one of the most financially compromised and scientifically illiterate organizations, founded and funded to disseminate pro-GMO propaganda in order to prop up public support for GMOs and genetic engineering in general. In effect, some universities now act as private industry’s lobbyists. This becomes a greater scandal when the university is a public institution receiving public funding.  GLP and its east coast partner, Cornell University’s Alliance for Science, largely funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, serve as the GMO industry’s clearing houses for public relations to spin science into advertising, propaganda and character assassination of GM opponents.

The Genetic Literacy Project is a key collaborator with another food industry front organization, the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH). ACSH has nothing to do with actual health science. It has been described by the independent corporate financial watchdog organization Sourcewatch as a thinly veiled corporate front that holds “a generally apologetic stance regarding virtually every other health and environmental hazard produced by modern industry, accepting corporate funding from Coca-Cola, Syngenta, Proctor Gamble, Kellogg, General Mills, Pepsico, and the American Beverage Association, among others.” ACSH also favors toxic pesticides, the use of biphenol A in products, cigarettes and hydrofracking.  It is closely aligned with pseudo-medical front organizations that criticize alternative and natural health modalities, such as Quackwatch and the Science Based Medicine network.

GLP sources a couple thousand corporate-friendly studies favoring GMO benefits and safety.  One review of over 1,700 studies, known as the Nicolia Review, for a time was the most cited source making the broadest claims for GMO safety.  However subsequent independent and unbiased reviews of Nicolia’s analysis concluded that many of these studies were tangential at best and barely took notice of anything related to crop genetic engineering.

Many studies are completely irrelevant from a value-added perspective because they have nothing to do with GMO safety. Furthermore, other studies in Nicolia’s collection conclude the exact opposite of their intention and give further credibility to GMOs environmental, animal and human health risks. When Nicolia published his review, he omitted and ignored scientifically sound research that directly investigated GMO safety and found convincing evidence to issue warnings.  For example, one peer-reviewed publication by over 300 independent scientists declared that there is no scientific consensus that GM crops and food are safe.  Not surprisingly, there is no mention of this study in the Nicolia Review.

It is no secret that Monsanto and Big Ag have significant influence over UC-Davis’s agricultural department and divisions.  The bogus economic studies trumped up by the Big Ag cartel to defeat California’s GMO labeling bill Prop 37 were performed at UC-Davis and then publicized through the GLP. Gary Ruskin, who has been filing Freedom of Information Act requests, has publicly expressed deep concerns that UC Davis is acting as a financial conduit for private corporations and interests to develop and launch PR attacks against academics, professors, activists and other institutions who oppose those same corporate interests.

For GMO opponents, the name Mark Lynas, may send shivers down the spine. As soon as any journalist or researcher mentions Lynas’ name approvingly, one can be certain which camp the author represents. Therefore when Kahn quotes Lynas as if he were an unbiased authority about GMOs, we know we have boarded the wrong train and will reach a destination of distorted scientific facts and self-righteous corporate praise.

The public watchdog group US Right to Know describes Lynas as “a former journalist turned promotional advocate for genetically engineered foods and pesticides who makes inaccurate claims about those products from his perch at the Gates Foundation-funded Cornell Alliance for Science (CAS).” Lynas has accused those who would inform the public about Round-Up’s carcinogenic properties as conducting a “witch hunt” by “anti-Monsanto activists” who “abused science.”  Lynas has denied his role as a shill for Big Ag. However, a decade ago, The Guardian acquired a private memo from the pro-biotechnology organization EuropaBio about its initiative to recruit “ambassadors” to preach the GMO gospel. Mark Lynas was specifically named in the document alongside then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan as a prime candidate to pressure European agencies who were skeptical about GMO claims, promises and health and environmental risks. In short, Lynas has been one of Big Ag’s most invaluable foot soldiers for over a dozen years.

Similar to the Genetic Literacy Project, the Cornell Alliance for Science does not conduct any agricultural research; yet its tentacles to attack GMO opponents are far reaching in the media. CAS was launched in 2014 after the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation granted the alliance $5.6 million in start-up monies. The public relations Alliance makes the unfounded claim to represent “balanced” research about genetic engineered products.  One of its missions is to influence the next generation of agricultural researchers to embrace GMO science. For CAS, as for Bill Gates, GMOs are the only food solution for Africa’s future. Five years ago, organic New York farmers mobilized to pressure the Trustees of Cornell University to evict CAS from the campus and halt its influence over the school’s prestigious College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Unfortunately, the Alliance is still there.

One argument Kahn wants us to buy into is that there were mistakes made during the early roll out of GMOs in the 1990s. But, somehow, mysteriously and without any solid evidence, we are supposed to believe that these same companies now engineering new generations of crops have learned their lessons. All that has really changed has been the genetic technology for altering plant genomes. The same mind-set that only technology and the quest for food dominance remain. After hundreds of thousands of dollars were flushed away during a genetically modified wheat project, a retired professor of plant agriculture at the University of Guelph in Canada remarked:

“We – scientists and the public – are so malleable and gullible (or is it because researchers and research administrators are just desperate for money?), that we swallow and become promoters of the mantra that GM is somehow going to feed the world: by resolving the monumental threat of burnt toast? Or browning in cut apples? Or flower color in carnations? Really? For shame. Let’s be honest. The one and only reason these people, corporations, and governments are funding this sorry use of [lab] bench space is because it may yield a proprietary product.”

Following Lynas’ lead, Kahn wants us to believe that genes exchanged between different plants is common in nature and therefore manipulating genes between species with genetic engineering tools, such as CRISPR, should not worry us. Yes, plants have acquired genes from other organisms in the past – the far distant past – according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. However, it is so exceedingly rare that these should be regarded as anomalies without any correlation whatsoever to the millions of different genes available to bio-engineer new plant organisms. This has been one of Lynas’ pet arguments on his bully pulpit since turning his back on his former Greenpeace activists and joining Monsanto’s legions.

It may also be noted that Jennifer Kahn is an active participant in CRISPRcon, a forum dedicated to “the future of CRISPR and gene editing technology applications in agriculture, health, conservation and more.” Among the organization’s supporters are Bayer, the Innovative Genomics Institute, Cornell Alliance for Science, Corteva Agriscience and the United Soybean Board.  A mission noted on its website is expressed in one of its mottos, “The public doesn’t trust GMOs. Will it trust CRISPR?” This is a public relations pitch that permeates her Times article.

It is important for independent investigators and researchers to identify and publicize the background of cloaked public relations shills posing as unbiased journalists in mainstream news sources. We believe Kahn’s New York Times piece is an attempt to disingenuously manipulate the narrative so more Americans will love GMOs. In the wake of the agrichemical industry’s efforts to bolster favorable images of GMOs and more recently CRISPR editing technologies, the mainstream media willingly rolls out a red carpet. No equal publishing space is awarded to the critics of genetic engineering who uncover the flaws in the industry’s public research. Consequently, journalists such as Mark Lynas and Jennifer Kahn are the norm rather than exception. Today the lesson is clear that money, power and influence sustain the lies and deceit of private industry.  Take on any cause critical of genetic engineered foods, and Big Ag will come after you.

Seven years ago, 70 percent of Americans, according to a Consumer Reports National Research Center survey, did not want genetically modified organisms in their food. In 2018, the Pew Research Center reported that only five percent of Americans said GM foods were better for one’s health – which about makes up the number of people who are in one way or another invested in the agrichemical industry. Still over half believe they endanger health. Yet too much has been invested into agro-biotechnology to expect GMOS to disappear at any time. As the public increasingly turns away from genetically modified organisms in their produce, we will expect new volleys of industry propaganda appearing in the mainstream media. We can also expect to hear ever wilder and more irrational claims about how GMO-based agriculture might reduce CO2 greenhouse pollution and save humanity. And we expect much of this PR campaign to be backed by the World Economic Forum’s full-throttle Great Reset invasion. In other words, out of desperation to reach global food dominance, the agro-chemical industry backed by western governments will be declaring a full food war against the peoples of the world.  It is time for us to unlearn any illusory attachment we might have to Big Agriculture and learn to loath GMOs.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Learning to Loath GMOs”: Genetic Engineering, Genetic Modified Plants, Biotechnology and Big Agriculture
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Stoke White Investigations has examined the reported killing of civilians in a French air strike on a wedding party in Mail in January 2021. The following is adapted from the report’s Executive Summary. The full report can be viewed here.  

On 3 January 2021, France undertook 3 airstrikes as part of its Operation Barkhane mission in Bounti, central Mali. France claimed it had attacked an armed “terrorist group”, but locals reported that a wedding party had been attacked. A subsequent UN report into the strikes  – the first investigating France’s military activities in Mali – concluded that a wedding was indeed taking place, and that 19 civilians had been killed.

What exactly happened on the Sunday afternoon is disputed by the various parties of this civilian casualty allegation, but by the evening of the attack, a local social organisation, the AES Corporation, had already notified its members that a wedding was attacked outside Bounti, killing civilians.  Two days later, French forces told the AFP that its military aircrafts had “neutralised” dozens of fighters in central Mali and that reports of an attack on a wedding “do not match the observations that were made”.

French Armed Forces reported on January 7 that they had targeted members of Katiba Serma, an armed group, loosely connected with Al-Qaeda after they had conducted a multi-day intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) mission in Douentza, in central Mali’s Mopti region. As part of this, a French Reaper drone had been conducting an ISR mission for one hour when it decided to follow a motorcycle carrying two individuals north of the “NR16” highway.  The motorcycle joined approximately “40 adult men in an isolated area”, one kilometre north of the village of Bounti, in the region of Douentza. The real-time intelligence of the drone had apparently given the French Armed Forces the confidence that it located members of the Katiba Serma.

‘Robustness Of The Targeting Process’

Following the Reaper’s ISR mission, a pair of French Mirage 2000 fighter aircrafts were called in to carry out a “targeted strike at 3:00 pm local time”. The “behaviour of the individuals”, “materials identified” and “cross-checking” led to the launch of three airstrikes located at “30 PWB 4436 83140” [15.223967, -2.586948] in a semi-wooded area. According to the French Armed Forces, the airstrikes resulted in the killing of 30 individuals, and no women or children were killed due to the “analysis of the area before and after the strike, as well as the robustness of the targeting process”. The French were adamant that they had excluded the possibility of “collateral damage”. The Malian Ministry of Defence and Veterans Affairs (MDAC) supported France’s statement that it targeted members of Katiba Serma.

A  Wedding Was Attacked, At Least 100 Attended Says UN 

A United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) investigation, following the airstrikes in Bounti, declared that 22 individuals were killed at the wedding. The UN report found that five members of Katiba Serma were among the guests of the wedding, only one of them was visibly armed. Two of them had left before the airstrikes hit the celebration, while three were killed. The rest of the casualties were civilians.

While France claimed that it had targeted 40 adult men in an isolated area, the UN concluded that a group of at least 100 individuals were attending a wedding. This finding corresponds with testimony gathered by Stoke White Investigations from victims and relatives. The victims were all men, aged between 23 and 71, the majority of whom lived in the Bounti village. Fighters from non-state armed groups rarely gather together in Mali, due to the threat of airstrikes and drone surveillance. The French government responded to the UN report by questioning its validity and methodology.

We believe that it is highly likely that the drone-led airstrikes against the wedding in Bounti have infringed the laws of war by ignoring or failing to comply with the principle of distinction between combatants and civilians, or the principle of proportionality by killing civilians to attain a military advantage.

Both the French armed forces and the Mali government are yet to come clean and provide evidence that the gathering was not a wedding, and secondly that it has “neutralised” members of a terrorist non-state armed group. The burden of proof remains with the attacking force, as the onus is on the one triggering lethal force, not the one on the receiving end, particularly when concerning civilians.

There is no denying that the laws of war and international human rights law is applicable on the 3 January, 2021 attack against the wedding in Bounti. With this in mind, it could only be lawful to target valid military objectives as per International Humanitarian Law. France urgently needs to provide evidence on how it came to the conclusion that the wedding it targeted was, in its perspective, a gathering of members of a non-state armed group.

While it could be argued that members of the armed group joined the wedding and used it as a human shield, it should be noted that France denies that the gathering was a wedding in the first instance. Additionally, at least two of the members of the armed group left the wedding before the attack took place according to testimonies documented by MINUSMA. Thus, making it difficult to enter the realm of legal argument that it was even proportionate to engage.

France’s Shadow War in Mali

We believe that the French Armed Forces need to act promptly and conduct an impartial and transparent investigation into the Bounti attack. Ignoring and denying the MINUSMA report, as well as our investigation that it was a wedding that was attacked, creates an environment of mistrust on France’s military activities across the Sahel, let alone in other theatres of conflict such as Syria and Iraq.

Along with the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), we received data on 51 fatalities from civilian targeting incidents involving French forces in Mali between 2017 and 2021. Others suggest that at least 43 civilians were killed and five other injured in six separate incidents since 2018 alone.

This demonstrates not  only the underreported nature of the conflict across the Sahel, but also the lack of monitoring of civilian casualties of local and foreign forces.  This is not the first instance of France ignoring civilian casualty allegations. This gap in transparency needs to be addressed. It is reasonable to say that France has a systematic problem in admitting and identifying civilian casualties and / or injuries as a result from its military actions. The denial of the killing of civilians at a wedding in Bounti on 3 January 2021, should be viewed in this light.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on New Report Examines Civilian Deaths in French Drone-instigated Air Strike in Mali
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On March 13, 2020, the public school district where I teach announced that all classrooms and buildings would be closed for two weeks. Then two weeks turned into two months, and two months turned into over a full year without in-person instruction.

My school serves a diverse population of low-income students in the San Francisco Bay Area. It is impossible to overstate the severity of this disruption caused by school closures for these students, many of whom did not have a computer or internet at home when virtual learning began. Online, my students got only a fraction of the regular curriculum. Kids who had once loved the social aspects of school were left with only the parts of school they hated, and students with disabilities who depended on school for daily living needs were cut off from a vital service.

“Public health” and “the safety of our children” came to mean students Zooming from homeless encampments, experiencing severe abuse, regressing academically, falling into depression, going hungry, struggling through catastrophic learning loss, and, in the saddest cases, not making it through the year alive.

Despite consistent evidence that schools were not sites of high transmission for COVID-19, many teachers failed to put aside baseless fears about classroom superspreading and rampant infection. As a result, many of the most vulnerable children in our society suffered outrageous hardships, while their affluent peers attended private schools in person. We’ve all been told that school closures and lockdowns were mandated by science, but what if these mandates were immoral? What if they were based on a series of lies? In fact, what if the entire rationale for most restrictions was actually rotten to the core?

We’re watching the mainstream pandemic narrative starting to unravel. While the Senate and House intelligence committees investigate the origins of SARS-CoV-2, many reporters are openly wondering why they initially dismissed the lab leak hypothesis as “misinformation.” Few in media consider the possibility that their approach to the theory was not an anomaly, but rather a long-established pattern of journalistic dereliction of duty. For the public, these renewed questions about the virus (and their hard-to-face answers) speak to a deep sense that something is amiss in the story we’ve been told by major media outlets. But gain-of-function research is just the tip of the iceberg.

A trove of media darling Dr. Anthony Fauci’s emails was recently released to the public. The emails reveal early assertions that asymptomatic transmission is rare, that post-infection immunity is highly likely, and that masks are “not really effective.” However, you wouldn’t know that from the public messaging since the start of the pandemic, in which bureaucrats and journalists upheld lasting misconceptions that asymptomatic cases are dangerous, natural immunity is not a factor in protecting the population, and individuals are responsible for viral spread. These misconceptions fueled countless months of lockdowns, business closures, and job losses, pushing millions of people into poverty and despair through the destructive lie that stringent “sick until proven healthy” interventions save lives.

In reality, the rushed doomsday forecasts and commitment to politically correct pseudoscience prompted leaders to abandon decades of pandemic planning. This not only had disastrous economic consequences, but it also exacerbated the effects of COVID-19 itself. And rather than swiftly correct their errors, public health officials and politicians doubled down, manipulated data, and blamed ordinary people for the failure of nonsensical policies. The uncomfortable truth is that “The Science” did not protect vulnerable populations. Instead, “expert” advice served only to make the pandemic more deadly and replace the scientific process with destructive anti-science.

Saving Lives by Killing People

In December 2020, 35% of Americans believed that half of the people with COVID-19 required hospitalization. The correct figure was 1%-5%. Americans also estimated that the share of COVID-19 deaths for people between 18 and 24 was 8%. It was actually 0.1%. These incorrect assumptions were influenced by anecdotes, shocking media coverage, and early projections like the influential Imperial College model, which threatened that without lockdowns there would be 40 million COVID-19 deaths worldwide. The model assumed an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0.9%, but the actual IFR of COVID-19 is 0.15% and the median IFR for people under 70 is 0.05%.

As a result of mistaken prognostications like this, the media compared COVID-19 to the 1918 influenza pandemic, for which the average age of death was 28. For COVID-19 the average age of death is 73, and about half of all deaths are in people 80 or older. While the CDC projected a one-year decrease in life expectancy for the U.S. population, the overall decrease in life expectancy was only five days, and the U.S.’s excess mortality in 2017 was greater than its excess mortality in 2020.

There is no better example of the harm created by flawed simulations, and the subsequent misguided interventions, than New York’s disastrous nursing home policy. While Gov. Andrew Cuomo landed a $5 million book deal and won an Emmy for his televised briefings, conditions on the ground for COVID-19 patients in his state were catastrophic. Over 9,000 elderly COVID-19 patients were sent from hospitals back to nursing homes. Additionally, Cuomo required group homes for people with intellectual disabilities to take COVID-19 patients and attempted to issue a blanket DNR guideline for all cardiac patients in New York City. He also denied nursing homes’ requests for testing kits, ignored the concerns of families, and gave immunity to nursing home executives. This resulted in the deaths of nearly 15,000 long-term-care patients.

These deaths did not occur because Cuomo ignored scientists and researchers. They occurred precisely because Cuomo was adhering to predictions from his team of experts who projected the need for 140,000 hospital beds and 40,000 ICUs. Ultimately, New York’s actual bed and ICU use peaked in mid-April at 18,825 and 5,225, respectively. The deadly decisions the governor’s office made were motivated by a perceived need to save resources and space—a manufactured imperative based on fictitious IFR figures and a baseless belief in universal risk.

Moreover, although some New York hospitals were overwhelmed, many were not. While Elmhurst hospital in Queens was at full capacity in April, the hospital had 26 new ambulances to take patients to 3,500 empty beds in New York City, many within a 20-minute drive. Because of panic induced by horrific forecasts, New York City doctors cited the need for “wartime ethics” when advising patients and families about DNRs. At some hospitals, doctors were informally allowed to override patients’ desires for medical intervention. These ethical violations were urged on by crazed media coverage and an environment of psychological terror, but they were not justified by the true level of danger involved in treating patients.

Despite concerns about hospital beds and ICUs, field hospitals across the country remained largely empty, costing taxpayers $660 million despite the fact that most of them did not serve any patients. Cuomo’s nursing home order was replicated by four other Democratic governors, and one-third of all American deaths from the virus are now linked to nursing homes. As a consequence of these practices, New York State has the second-highest COVID-19 mortality rate in the country.

Following the Science

Three of the top four states in overall COVID-19 mortality have Democratic governors who “followed the science” long after the initial promises that it would only take “two weeks to flatten the curve.” Although these states have high population density, density is often associated with lower COVID-19 death rates. After Texas Gov. Greg Abbott lifted all his state’s restrictions in April, Texas saw no resulting surge in cases, hospitalizations, or deaths. In fact, many states that continued restrictions saw higher cases and deaths than states that lifted restrictions early.

These trends are consistent with dozens of peer-reviewed studies and retrospective analyses indicating that stay-at-home orders did not have an impact on rates of fatal infection and that comparisons between many countries do not show superior outcomes from lockdowns. Besides hospitals, nursing homes, and other health care settings, households show some of the highest rates of transmission, while the share of transmission that has happened outdoors is less than 0.1%. Furthermore, vitamin D and exercise have both been linked to better outcomes for COVID-19 patients. In the U.S. 78% of people hospitalized for COVID-19 were overweight or obese. Lockdowns caused Americans to gain an average of two pounds per month and reduce their daily steps by 27%, thereby increasing the likelihood of adverse COVID-19 outcomes.

Not only were government orders confining people to their homes highly detrimental, but the early recommended treatment procedures for the virus were often fatal. Although experts and the media claimed that ventilators were lifesaving, death rates in most states actually dropped dramatically once the use of ventilators was abandoned in favor of other treatments. In order to meet what was supposed to be an astronomical medical demand, the U.S. spent $3 billion manufacturing ventilators, but by August 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services had distributed only 15,057 ventilators, leaving 95,713 of them untouched in a federal stockpile.

Usually, 40%-50% of patients in severe respiratory distress die on ventilators, but in New York City the death rate for COVID-19 patients on ventilators was 88%. Hospital staff often intubated patients prematurely or left them on ventilators for 10-15 days. Patients were given unusually heavy sedatives so that staff would be able to check on them less frequently. U.S. hospitals received $13,000 for each Medicare COVID-19 patient and $39,000 for each Medicare patient they intubated. These patients were separated from their families and had no one to advocate for them. Many people died after terrified doctors, misinformed about the scale of the risks, used intubation as a way to avoid virus exposure.

When lockdowns began, commentators referred to herd immunity as a “genocidal” concept that meant exposing vulnerable people to disease. That is actually what happens when natural immunity is prevented. Lockdowns limit and delay the acquired immunity of the younger population, making older people more vulnerable to exposure, especially in the absence of focused protection measures. Long-lasting immunity from COVID-19 is acquired after mild or asymptomatic cases, and sensational stories about “long COVID” and “COVID heart” have been debunked. In-person learning was not correlated with higher rates of student illness and school closures may have actually worsened death rates.

Clearly, quarantining the healthy did exactly the opposite of what was sold to the public: It increased non-COVID-19 excess deaths while leaving elderly and immunocompromised people completely unprotected. While some may excuse the destructiveness of lockdowns as a simple error, the sheer volume of reversals public health officials have made during the pandemic paints a picture of bureaucrats intentionally misleading the public in order to cover up their failures or pursue agendas unrelated to public health.

Moving the Goal Posts

Experts have consistently taken an imprecise approach to statistics, changed their minds, and withheld information while claiming the mantle of “scientific consensus.” Over the summer of 2020, the WHO quietly changed its definition of herd immunity from protection acquired through both natural immunity and vaccination to one acquired only through vaccination. Similarly, in December 2020, Fauci declared that he was changing his estimate for vaccination rates needed to achieve herd immunity from 60% to 90%. When asked for a scientific rationale, Fauci said he changed the percentage based purely on polling that indicated more Americans were willing to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

When lockdowns failed to yield meaningful mitigation results, public health agencies that had previously recommended against masking changed their position. Although simulations suggested that 80% mask compliance would do more to stop the spread of COVID-19 than lockdowns, regional analysis in the United States does not show that mandates had any effect on case rates, despite 93% compliance. Moreover, according to CDC data, 85% of people who contracted COVID-19 reported wearing a mask.

Research has shown that once unquestioned rules like 6 feet for social distancing are arbitrary and not actually associated with lower transmission. Reporting of death and hospitalization rates was also inexact, and mass asymptomatic testing distorted public understanding of the virus. Ninety-five percent of COVID-19 deaths had an average of four related underlying conditions and the CDC’s death count includes “deaths involving unintentional and intentional injury.” As a result of testing children hospitalized for unrelated conditions, the number of pediatric COVID-19 hospitalizations was exaggerated by at least 40%.

The PCR testing protocol for COVID-19 was based on a paper by Christian Drosten, which was peer-reviewed and published within just two days in a journal on whose editorial board Drosten sits. The method was created “without having virus material available,” using instead a genetic sequence published online. The PCR test amplifies genetic material of the virus in cycles but does not determine whether a case is infectious. A higher number of cycles indicates a lower viral load. The cycle threshold for PCR tests used in the U.S. was usually limited at 37 or 40, highly sensitive levels. In July 2020, Fauci remarked that at these levels, a positive result is “just dead nucleotides, period.”

For vaccinated Americans, the CDC has lowered the cycle threshold for “breakthrough infections” to only 28 cycles and announced that post-vaccine cases will only be counted if they result in hospitalization or death. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky stated that vaccinated Americans who died and tested positive for COVID-19 merely died “with” COVID-19, not “from” COVID-19. This method of tallying would eliminate many pre-vaccine cases. It is also likely that 85%-90% of tests that are positive at a cycle threshold of 40 would be negative at a cycle threshold of 30.

Despite this lack of accurate data, authorities have consistently scapegoated members of the public as “anti-maskers” or “anti-vaxxers” responsible for prolonging the pandemic. They have used divisive messaging and disorienting scare tactics in order to justify months of COVID-19 restrictions that were based on dogma, not on science.

Scientific Inversion

Our current state of scientific inversion has sown intense division in the U.S. and threatens to rip apart the social fabric. For the past 16 months, the public has been told that it is our duty to serve the needs of medical institutions and personnel, not the other way around. Effective low-cost therapeutics like ivermectin were dismissed in favor of a vaccine program that transferred billions of dollars from taxpayers to pharmaceutical executives and shareholders. Critics of measures like school closures were accused of far-right white supremacy, even though these measures were most damaging to working-class people and minorities. Deadly policies were portrayed as lifesaving, and public health protocols caused immense clinical damage.

A few people have benefited from this war on reality while many have paid a heavy price. In 2020, workers lost $3.7 trillion, while billionaires gained $3.9 trillion and 493 new individuals became billionaires. During this same period, decades of progress against diseases like malaria and tuberculosis were reversed. Disruptions to health and nutrition services killed 228,000 children in South Asia. Globally, the impact of lockdowns on health programs, food production, and supply chains plunged millions of people into severe hunger and malnutrition.

In the U.S., we are facing a crisis of cardiovascular disease and undiagnosed cancer. Unemployment shock will cause 890,000 additional deaths over the next 15 years. Overdoses from synthetic opioids increased by 38.4%, and 11% of U.S. adults considered suicide last June. Three million children disappeared from public school systems, and ERs saw a 31% increase in adolescent mental health visits.

Now, the stories that were used to justify these hardships are continuing to unravel. Many of the people responsible will insist that the second-order consequences are the horrible symptoms of a magic virus and that the mistakes made in handling such a crisis were inevitable. But preventing young children from reaching crucial developmental milestones in the face of mounting evidence is not just a “mistake.” Forcing hospital patients to die alone without saying goodbye to their families is not just a “mistake.” Pushing millions of people into poverty and starvation is not just a “mistake.” These are crimes.

Basic civil, human, and economic rights were violated under demonstrably fraudulent pretenses. The sacrifices we thought we were making for the common good were sacrifices made in vain. Unlawful lockdowns demoralized the population and ruined lives. The tragic reality is that this was all for nothing. The only way to prevent these events from recurring is to exhaustively investigate not just the origin of the virus, but every corrupt and misguided decision made by politicians, NGOs, public health organizations, and scientific institutions made since its fateful emergence.

*

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.

Alex Gutentag is a public school teacher and writer in California. Follow her on Twitter at @galexybrane.

Featured image is from Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Dr. Bhakdi explains clearly, based on new scientific evidence, why he believes:

  • Your immune system is your best defence against SARS-CoV-2, and indeed all coronaviruses.
  • If you have been infected, even if you experienced no symptoms at all, you are immune to all variants.
  • We have already reached herd immunity.
  • There is no scientific reason to vaccinate against SARS-CoV-2. There is simply no benefit and the rollout must be stopped.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

What if America Delists Chinese Firms?

July 28th, 2021 by Prof. Shang-Jin Wei

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

A recent flurry of official measures in both China and the United States suggests that the two governments are not keen on Chinese firms retaining their US stock-market listings. Moreover, the effects of delisting these often fast-growing companies may be easily manageable for both countries.

Chinese firms are more enthusiastic than most about listing on US stock exchanges. Currently, 250 of them, including companies that are registered in Hong Kong or offshore centers but derive most of their revenue and profits from mainland China, trade on US equity markets. But a recent flurry of official measures in both China and the United States suggests that the two governments are not keen on Chinese firms retaining their US listings. If push comes to shove, how would delisting hurt either country?

The latest controversy concerns the dominant Chinese ride-hailing platform Didi Global (partly owned by Uber), which on June 30 raised $4.4 billion in a successful IPO on the New York Stock Exchange. Within 48 hours, the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), citing a suspected data-security breach, announced that it would restrict the company’s ability to sign up new users. The CAC then ordered the removal of Didi from all domestic Chinese app stores, and the State Administration of Market Regulation, the country’s antitrust authority, fined the firm for not obtaining prior approval for earlier mergers and acquisitions.

The penalties imposed on Didi – widely interpreted as a warning to other Chinese companies against listing in the US without government approval – partly reflect three concerns among Chinese policymakers. The authorities are worried that sensitive digital data, including the location of (and traffic flows around) important addresses in China, may fall into the hands of the US intelligence or defense communities. They also do not want Chinese technology firms to become too large and powerful, and fear that Big Tech companies’ forays into financial markets may undermine financial stability.

I suspect that the Chinese authorities have a fourth reason: to reduce US leverage. In the last days of his administration, President Donald Trump signed America’s Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. The new law authorizes the delisting of Chinese companies from US stock exchanges if China fails to allow the US Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to obtain the underlying worksheets of these firms’ auditors after three consecutive years. And on June 22, the US Senate passed another bill that could bring delisting forward by one year.

If the US has the option of delisting Chinese firms en masse and in a disorderly manner at a time of its choosing, it could potentially use it to generate financial and economic instability in China. The Chinese authorities may therefore find it prudent to reduce or eliminate this vulnerability.

US lawmakers’ ostensible reason for threatening to delist Chinese companies is to protect American investors from potential accounting frauds such as the one committed by Luckin Coffee last year. But US investors have lost much more money as a result of accounting scandals at US companies such as Enron, WorldCom, HealthSouth, Freddie Mac, American International Group, and Lehman Brothers, some of which took place after the PCAOB was established. Moreover, Chinese firms’ most egregious accounting frauds tend to be discovered by professional short-sellers using techniques – such as undercover company visits – that auditing firms do not employ.

Chinese authorities once tacitly encouraged US listings, viewing them as a symbol of China’s embrace of the global capital market. Many Chinese technology firms also had little alternative to listing in the US before 2018. But the situation today is different.

Previously, many Chinese firms chose to list in New York instead of Shanghai or Shenzhen because their foreign private-equity or venture-capital investors wanted to avoid China’s foreign-exchange controls. Moreover, China has much tougher listing requirements and a long and uncertain waiting period for regulatory approval. For example, Amazon and Facebook would not have been allowed to list in China at the time of their US IPOs because they did not have the requisite profits.

Similarly, although Hong Kong imposes no capital controls, it also had stricter listing requirements than the US until 2018. In particular, while the US allows different classes of shares to have different voting rights – as is the case with Alibaba and Didi, for example – Hong Kong required voting rights and financial stakes to be exactly aligned. Most countries regard a divergence between voting rights and cash-flow rights as facilitating bad corporate governance, because it potentially allows controlling shareholders to enrich themselves through self-dealing at the expense of other investors.

But after seeing so many Chinese companies choosing New York, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange decided to allow US-style multiple share classes for technology and life-sciences firms. More Chinese firms have since listed in Hong Kong, or have a dual listing there and in New York. Tencent, China’s biggest social-media company, was first traded in Hong Kong before adding a secondary listing in New York, and currently commands a higher price-to-earnings multiple than Facebook, its closest US counterpart.

This suggests that the effects of delisting US-traded Chinese firms may be manageable for both China and America. China, as a high-savings country and a net exporter of capital, does not need US listings of its companies to import more capital. And while some firms’ founders and initial investors may experience a valuation haircut in their IPOs, this does not pose a major challenge to the Chinese government.

Similarly, most US hedge funds, mutual funds, and rich individuals will still be able to invest in Chinese firms listed in Hong Kong, and even – albeit less conveniently and straightforwardly – those listed in mainland China. True, delisting profitable and fast-growing Chinese companies may reduce returns for many middle-class US households whose pension funds are restricted to investing only in US-listed securities, and US stock exchanges will lose business. As ordinary Americans would not connect lower returns on their pension funds to delisting of Chinese firms, US politicians are unlikely to face a backlash. And that fact could make delistings more likely.

*

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.

Shang-Jin Wei, a former chief economist at the Asian Development Bank, is Professor of Finance and Economics at Columbia Business School and Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs. 

#Yes, It’s a “Killer Vaccine”. They Are Killing Our Children

July 28th, 2021 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

All Global Research articles 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.

Share this article far and wide.

***

#Yes, It’s  A “Killer Vaccine”

And the governments are fully aware of what’s happening.

The vaccine must be halted and discontinued immediately.

Yesterday evening, we got news from France of a young man, 22 years old who died nine hours after having being vaccinated. He wanted to travel on a holiday to Greece.

He just wanted to live said his father. … he was my only son, and he died, killed by a crap vaccine that was never validated or properly tested”. 

This tragic event was posted on social media in a despicable statement:

“This story is intended to scare the French, it is invented from scratch by the #antivax …

A complaint should be filed for disseminating erroneous information for political ends!” (translation by GR)

And then what happened.

The mainstream media provided its own interpretation quoting “authoritative medical sources”.

It  wasn’t the vaccine which triggered Maxime Beltra‘s death. He died from an allergic reaction, they said:

“a probable serious food allergy, according to medical sources”.

Now isn’t that a piece of authoritative fake news, quoting hospital officials.

Today Our thoughts are with Maxime Beltra and his family.

And Maxime Beltra is not alone. There are millions of sons and daughters, family members: similar cases of vaccine related deaths Worldwide.

#Yes, It’s A Killer Vaccine. That message should be loud and clear. Our children are being killed.

We call on our readers and all humanity to question this diabolical “vaccine consensus” imposed by our governments, Big Pharma, the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation. And the mainstream media is complicit.

The fake reports issued by the health authorities are there to manipulate the “official” death and injury statistics.

We call on our readers to initiate a campaign, initiate #Yes, It’s A Killer Vaccine with informative messages of what is happening in different parts of the World.

Save Lives Worldwide.

Spread the word. Providing information and spreading News will Save Lives.

#Yes, It’s A “Killer Vaccine”. 

They Are Killing our Children. The Vaccine should be Halted and Discontinued Worldwide

***

The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 26, 2021

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on #Yes, It’s a “Killer Vaccine”. They Are Killing Our Children

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

More than a hundred executives with links to industries blamed for pollution were permitted to take part in vital international talks to combat climate change, The Ferret can reveal.

Shell, Chevron, middle eastern oil companies, other fossil fuel firms, carbon traders, agribusiness and chemicals multinationals all registered to join United Nations (UN) climate negotiations in May and June — as did the nuclear power industry.

Campaigners say that allowing such “vested interests” to be involved is “pandering to climate-wrecking” and “unacceptable”. They accuse big businesses of trying “to delay genuine progress and push false solutions”.

The companies, however, defend their right to have their voices heard by decision-makers. “The business community needs to be part of the solution, so it needs to be part of the process,” argues one industry association.

In November Glasgow is due to host a meeting of world leaders to make decisions about cutting climate pollution. Known as COP26, it could be the largest international summit ever held in the UK.

It is seen by many worldwide as the most important since the 2015 historic agreement on cutting greenhouse gas emissions agreed by 196 countries in Paris. The US President, Jo Biden, is expected to attend.

COP26 is being organised by the UK Government for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Online negotiations in the run-up to COP26 were hosted by UNFCCC in Bonn from 31 May to 17 June, covering the agenda for Glasgow and country actions to tackle climate change.

An analysis of all those who registered to attend has revealed that 138 were linked to big business interests. They included 45 with links to the fossil fuel industry, 24 from the carbon trading business, 19 from the nuclear power industry and its backers, 12 from agribusiness interests, eight from the chemical industry and 30 from other industry groups.

The largest delegation was 24 people from the International Emissions Trading Association (Ieta), based in Geneva. It says its mission is to be “the trusted business voice on market-based climate solutions” and has many fossil fuel companies as members.

One of the Ieta representatives was David Home, chief climate change advisor to the oil giant, Shell. He reportedly claimed in 2018 to have helped write part of the 2015 Paris Agreement on carbon markets.

In May Shell was told to cut its carbon emissions by a court in the Netherlands, following a legal challenge by environmental groups. On 20 July the company said it would appeal against the ruling.

Others on Ieta’s list included Kate Shilina from the German energy company, RWE, and Takashi Hongo from the Japanese firm, Mitsui. Both companies have fossil fuel interests.

The Paris-based business lobby group, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), had 15 people registered to attend the UN climate sessions. They included another of Shell’s climate advisors, Steve Schofield.

Other ICC representatives were Hinse Boonstra from the German drugs and pesticides multinational, Bayer, and Gloria Jaconelli from the agrochemical industry association, Croplife International.

There were four people registered from the International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (Ipieca), which says it aims to advance “environmental and social performance”. One was Arthur Lee, a senior strategy advisor from the US oil company, Chevron.

Others included 11 people from Kuwaiti oil companies, one from a United Arab Emirates oil firm in Dubai, and one from Qatar Petroleum. Three of Russia’s delegation had links to fossil fuel, mining and chemical industries.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development registered eight people with links to the Indian manufacturer, Tata, the Spanish energy company, Iberdrola, the Swiss food giant, Nestlé, and others.

Amongst others who registered for the climate talks were the Global Dairy Platform, which represents the dairy industry; the Edison Electric Institute, which brings together US power companies; and the industry-backed International Fertiliser Association.

The analysis of registrations was done by the campaign group, Glasgow Calls Out Polluters (Gcop). It met with UK COP26 president, Alok Sharma MP, in June to urge him to “kick polluters out of COP26”.

Gcop organiser, Eilidh Robb, warned that there could be a “corporate circus” at COP26. “The UK Government is refusing to challenge the industries at the centre of the climate crisis,” she said.

“Instead, they are pandering to their climate-wrecking interests by encouraging them to join vague and ill-defined net zero programmes which allow them to kick the can of climate action further down the road.”

Friends of the Earth Nigeria warned that the “profit-only” goals of businesses were incompatible with those of the UNFCCC. “Given the fossil fuel industry’s role in the massive carbon emissions that have led to the climate crisis, their accreditation and that of their allies to attend the climate talks represents an unacceptable and irreconcilable conflict of interest,” argued the group’s Philip Jakpor.

Corporate Europe Observatory, which exposes company lobbying, also criticised the UK Government. “The likes of Shell are only at the UN talks to delay genuine progress and push false solutions like carbon markets and offsets via lobby groups such as Ieta,” said the group’s researcher, Pascoe Sabido.

“Rather than slash industry emissions, these approaches allow firms to keep digging up and selling fossil fuels, which spells disaster for the climate. Yet the UK Government appears to be on board, and is pushing a similar agenda at COP26.”

Industry representatives insisted that they should be involved in international climate talks. “We believe in an open and fair democratic UN process that includes all points of view, including those who need to reduce emissions,” said a spokesperson for the International Emissions Trading Association.

climate

Photo thanks to Glasgow Calls Out Polluters

“It is true that our membership includes fossil fuel companies and other industries — which know they need to, and are committed to, change.”

Ieta supported the Paris Agreement using “market-based approaches” which it said could deliver climate goals effectively. “We support the UK Government’s efforts to inspire a monumental, cooperative effort to achieve the Paris goals as soon as possible,” the spokesperson added.

“The business community needs to be part of the solution, so it needs to be part of the process. The Paris goals require cooperation at a scale not seen before — not exclusion and ‘cancel culture’ tactics.”

Ieta denied that it wrote parts of the Paris Agreement. “Ieta supported negotiators with our observations and recommendations on drafts, just like many other groups did, as part of the normal UN diplomatic and stakeholder process,” the spokesperson said.

“Our members observe UN climate negotiations, because they are serious about bringing business solutions to the climate challenge.”

Shell also said it supported the Paris Agreement. “We are very clear about the steps that we are taking to help meet society’s needs for more and cleaner energy,” a company spokesperson told The Ferret.

“We make no apology for talking to policy makers and regulators around the world to make our voice heard on crucial topics such as climate change and how to address it.”

Altogether the climate negotiations in May and June involved 177 governments and governmental groups with more than 3,200 people. In addition there were 219 non-governmental organisations present as observers, comprising more than 1,600 individuals.

The Cabinet Office in London, which is co-ordinating the UK COP26 presidency, referred The Ferret to the UNFCCC, saying it organised the talks. “The UK COP Presidency did not have a role in determining attendance of the event,” said a spokesperson.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change has been approached for comments. The International Chamber of Commerce and Chevron did not respond to requests to comment.

*

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 story was published in tandem with the Sunday National.

Featured image is from iStock/philips

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The following are excerpts from a speech Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s delivered in Singapore. The host country is one of ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which he mentions more than once in the address. The others are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. For over a decade the U.S. has been trying to recruit ASEAN nations, individually and collectively, into an anti-Chinese (secondarily, an anti-Russian) bloc in the Asia-Pacific region. The first to lead that charge were Barack Obama, the self-styled first Pacific president of the U.S., and his secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

Austin’s use of the phrase “a free and open Pacific, at peace with itself and with the world” is not fortuitous. It’s a variation of the expression used by then-President George H. W. Bush at Mainz, Germany in 1989 in a speech titled A Europe Whole and Free. In the interim the description has been expanded to Europe, whole, free and at peace. That phrase has been used to place all of Europe under NATO’s thumb except for Belarus and European Russia. Austin’s repetition of it suggests a similar design on the Asia-Pacific region.

In accusing China of “genocide and crimes against humanity,” he used the exact language used by NATO to justify waging its air wars against Yugoslavia and Libya.

Secretary of Defense Remarks at the 40th International Institute for Strategic Studies Fullerton Lecture (As Prepared)

There are transnational threats, like the pandemic and the existential threat of climate change… the specter of coercion from rising powers… the nuclear dangers from North Korea… the struggles against repression inside countries such as Myanmar…and leaders who ignore the rule of law and abuse the basic rights and dignity that all people deserve.

***

In the days ahead, I’ll travel from Singapore to see my counterparts in Vietnam and the Philippines. I’ve come to Southeast Asia to deepen America’s bonds with the allies and partners on whom our common security depends….

[E]merging threats and cutting-edge technologies are changing the face and the pace of warfare. So we are operating under a new, 21st-century vision that I call “integrated deterrence.”

Now, integrated deterrence means using every military and non-military tool in our toolbox, in lock-step with our allies and partners. Integrated deterrence is about using existing capabilities, and building new ones, and deploying them all in new and networked ways…

We’re working with our hosts here in Singapore to enter a new phase in cyber-defense cooperation. We’re partnering with Japan to deploy new sensors in space to better detect potentially threatening behaviors….

Integrated deterrence also means working with partners to deter coercion and aggression across the spectrum of conflict… including in the so-called “grey zone” where the rights and livelihoods of the people of Southeast Asia are coming under stress….

Meanwhile, we’re improving interoperability across our security network. And that includes more complex exercises and training. In Japan, for example, we recently wrapped up an ambitious, large-scale exercise…in which U.S. and Japanese forces together conducted the first successful firing of a High Mobility Artillery Rocket System in Japan.

***

And we recently held the exercises known as Pacific Vanguard and Talisman Sabre off the coast of Australia, together with Japan, Australia, and the Republic of Korea. That underscored our ability to carry out integrated, high-end maritime operations with our allies.

Meanwhile, we are working with Taiwan to enhance its own capabilities and to increase its readiness to deter threats and coercion… upholding our commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act….

At the same time, we’re moving to enhance our combined presence in the Indo-Pacific with other close partners and allies. Take Britain’s historic deployment of a carrier to the Pacific. The HMS Queen Elizabeth is sailing through this region as the flagship of a multi-nation carrier strike group that includes a U.S. destroyer and a U.S. Marine Corps F-35 squadron.

Our strategic partnerships can carry us all closer to the historic common project of a free and open Pacific, at peace with itself and with the world….

[We] are working through old alliances, and through new partnerships, and through regional and multilateral channels—from ASEAN to the Quad to the U.N. Security Council.

Beijing’s claim to the vast majority of the South China Sea has no basis in international law. That assertion treads on the sovereignty of states in the region….And we remain committed to the treaty obligations that we have to Japan in the Senkaku Islands and to the Philippines in the South China Sea.

Unfortunately, Beijing’s unwillingness to resolve disputes peacefully and respect the rule of law isn’t just occurring on the water. We have also seen aggression against India… destabilizing military activity and other forms of coercion against the people of Taiwan…and genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.

***

I know how pleased President Biden was to host the first Quad Leaders’ Summit in March. And structures like the Quad make the region’s security architecture even more durable.

*

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

Rick Rozoff, renowned author and geopolitical analyst, actively involved in opposing war, militarism and interventionism for over fifty years. He manages the Anti-Bellum and For peace, against war website

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Featured image is a screenshot from a video on defense.gov

Selected Articles: How the COVID Scam Is Perpetrated

July 28th, 2021 by Global Research News

Politics over Science: Biden Admin Signals Intent to Force FDA Approval of COVID Vaccines

By Jordan Schachtel, July 27, 2021

The Biden Administration has signaled its next move as part of the White House’s full court press to pressure Americans into taking COVID-19 vaccines.

How the COVID Scam Is Perpetrated: Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, July 26, 2021

I have provided numerous documented detailed accounts demonstrating the lack of evidence supporting the official Covid narrative.  The next time you hear Big Pharma’s propagandists say “believe the science,” ask them what science.

After the Apocalypse – America’s Role in a World Transformed

By Jim Miles, July 27, 2021

The contemporary apocalypse as seen by Andrew Bacevich in his latest book, “After the Apocalypse”, consists of four different horsemen: first mentioned are the severe climate effects of global warming; Trump “toxic and divisive” presidency is mentioned next;  followed by the Covid-19 pandemic and its subsequent economic effects; and finally, “a mass movement demanding a reckoning with the nation’s legacy of racism”.

Israel’s War Crimes: Is the Tide Finally Turning?

By Philip Giraldi, July 27, 2021

The Unilever decision greatly boosted the morale of the perpetually under siege non-violent Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has been calling on companies and investors to support Palestinian human rights by isolating Israel economically.

Florida COVID-19 Fatalities Data Included Man who Died in Motorcycle Accident

By Laura Dyrda, July 27, 2021

A man who died in a motorcycle accident was counted among the COVID-19 related deaths in the state, leading to questions about whether the state’s reported coronavirus death rates are accurate, according to Fox 35 Orlando.

Crimes against First Nations, Colonial Dispossession. Forcibly Separated from Their Families and Placed in Church-run Schools

By Kim Petersen, July 27, 2021

Imagine that your childhood experience was being forcibly separated from your family and placed in church-run schools. Imagine hearing that you were a savage; being forbidden to speak in your savage tongue.

Video: UK Official Admits Lockdowns for “Social Control”

By Del Bigtree and Jefferey Jaxen, July 27, 2021

Part whistleblower, part human rights activist, Graham Brady is calling out his own government’s ill-advised Covid mitigation policies, originating from fear, rather than sound public health science.

Health Freedom Is the Hottest Political Issue on the Entire Globe, and Our World Will Never be the Same after this

By Michael Snyder, July 27, 2021

We are witnessing an epic global struggle for freedom, and the outcome of that struggle is going to greatly shape what our world is going to look like in the years ahead.

Nicaragua’s Sandinistas Battle ‘Diabolical’ US Empire and Poverty on 42nd Anniversary of Revolution

By Ben Norton, July 27, 2021

42 years after the victory of the Sandinista revolution, Nicaraguans are still celebrating the gains of the leftist movement, and hoping to take the transformative process to another stage.

What’s Actually Going On in Cuba?

By Helen Yaffe, July 27, 2021

The international media has exaggerated and manipulated these events to depict mass opposition to the Cuban government, police repression of peaceful protests and a regime in crisis.

Belt and Road vs. New Quad for Afghanistan’s Coming Boom

By Pepe Escobar, July 27, 2021

While facts on the ground spell out balkanization, the Taliban, even on the offensive, know they cannot possibly pull off a military takeover of Afghanistan. And when the Americans say they will continue to “support Afghan government forces,” that means still bombing, but from over the horizon and now under new Centcom management in Qatar.

Exploitative Trade Rules: The World Trade Organisation

By Rod Driver, July 27, 2021

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) makes the rules that govern global trade. Its stated purpose is “expanding…trade in goods and services.” Its guiding principle is that governments should not have laws that ‘distort’ trade.

Why Germany Has Won and Italy Has Lost

July 28th, 2021 by Manlio Dinucci

All Global Research articles 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.

***

German Chancellor Merkel – writes Alberto Negri (il manifesto, July 23) – has resisted the pressure of three U.S. administrations – Obama, Trump and Biden – to cancel North Stream 2, the pipeline that flanks the North Stream inaugurated ten years ago, doubling the supply of Russian gas to Germany. Instead, “South Stream, the Eni-Gazprom pipeline, failed”. Negri rightly concludes that Merkel “has won the game that we have lost”. The question arises spontaneously: why did Germany win and Italy lose?

The headline of the Washington Post is significant: “US, Germany reach agreement on Russian gas pipeline, ending dispute between allies”. The agreement, stipulated by President Biden with Chancellor Merkel, has been and is strongly opposed by a bipartisan group in Congress, led by Republican Senator J. Risch who proposes a law against “the malignant Russian project”. So the agreement is actually a “truce” (as Negri defines it).

The reason why the Biden administration has decided to stipulate it is to put an end to the “dispute” that was spoiling relations with Germany, an important NATO ally. The latter, however, had to pay the “pizzo” to the U.S. boss, committing itself – as requested by the under-Secretary of State Victoria Nuland – to “protect Ukraine” (in fact already a member of NATO) with an investment fund of $ 1 billion to compensate it for the decreased revenue, since the twin North Stream gas pipelines pass through the Baltic Sea bypassing its territory.

In return, Germany has, at least for now, US permission to import 55 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year from Russia. The pipeline is managed by the international consortium Nord Stream AG, consisting of 5 companies: Russian Gazprom, German Wintershall and Pe-gi/E.On, Dutch Nederland’s Gasunie and French Engie. Germany thus becomes the energy hub for the Russian gas supply to the European network.

The same role could have been assumed by Italy with the South Stream pipeline. The project was born in 2006, during the Prodi Il government, with the agreement stipulated by Eni and Gazprom. The pipeline would have crossed the Black Sea (in Russian, Bulgarian and Turkish territorial waters) continuing overland through Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary, Slovenia and Italy to Tarvisio (Udine). From here the gas would be routed into the European network.

Construction of the pipeline had begun in 2012. In March 2014, Saipem (Eni) was awarded an initial €2 billion contract to build the undersea section. In the meantime, however, while the Maidan Square putsch precipitated the Ukrainian crisis, the Obama administration, in concert with the European Commission, moved to scuttle the South Stream. In June 2014, a delegation from the U.S. Senate, headed by John McCain, arrived in Sofia and transmitted Washington’s orders to the Bulgarian government. Immediately this announced the blocking of the works of the South Stream, in which Gazprom had already invested 4.5 billion dollars.

In this way, Italy lost not only contracts worth billions of euros, but also the possibility of having on its territory the hub for the supply of Russian gas in Europe, which would have generated strong revenues and increased employment. Why has Italy lost all this? Because the Renzi government (in office from 2014 to 2016) and Parliament accepted Washington’s imposition with bowed heads. Merkel’s Germany, on the contrary, opposed it. It then opened the “dispute between allies” that forced Washington to accept the doubling of North Stream, while retaining the U.S. claim to decide which countries Europe is allowed to import gas from and which countries it is not allowed to import gas from.

Would an Italian government dare to open a dispute with Washington to defend one of our national interests? The fact is that Italy has lost not only the pipeline, but its own sovereignty.

*

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

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.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Perché la Germania ha vinto e l’Italia ha perso

July 27th, 2021 by Manlio Dinucci

La cancelliera tedesca Merkel – scrive Alberto Negri (il manifesto, 23 luglio) – ha resistito alle pressioni di tre amministrazioni Usa – Obama, Trump e Biden – perché cancellasse il North Stream 2, il gasdotto che affianca il North Stream inaugurato dieci anni fa, raddoppiando la fornitura di gas russo alla Germania.

È invece «fallito il South Stream, il gasdotto di Eni-Gazprom». Conclude giustamente Negri che la Merkel «ha vinto la partita che noi abbiamo perso». Sorge spontanea la domanda: perché la Germania ha vinto e l’Italia ha perso?

Significativo il titolo del Washington Post: «Usa e Germania raggiungono un accordo sulla pipeline del gas russo, ponendo fine alla disputa tra alleati». L’accordo, stipulato dal presidente Biden con la cancelliera Merkel, è stato ed è fortemente osteggiato da uno schieramento bipartisan del Congresso, capeggiato dal senatore repubblicano J. Risch che propone una legge contro «il maligno progetto russo».

Quindi l’accordo è in effetti una «tregua» (come la definisce Negri). La ragione per cui l’amministrazione Biden ha deciso di stipularlo è mettere fine alla «disputa» che incrinava i rapporti con la Germania, importante alleato Nato. Questa ha dovuto però pagare il «pizzo» al boss Usa, impegnandosi– come ha richiesto la sottosegretaria di Stato Victoria Nuland – a «proteggere l’Ucraina» (di fatto già nella Nato) con un fondo di investimento di 1 miliardo di dollari che la risarcisca per i diminuiti introiti, dato che i due gasdotti gemelli North Stream passano dal Mar Baltico aggirando il suo territorio. Come contropartita la Germania ha, almeno per ora, il permesso Usa a importare dalla Russia 55 miliardi di metri cubi annui di gas naturale.

Il gasdotto è gestito dal consorzio internazionale Nord Stream AG, costituito da 5 società: la russa Gazprom, le tedesche Wintershall e Pegi/E.On, l’olandese Nederland’s Gasunie e la francese Engie. La Germania diviene così l’hub energetico per lo smistamento del gas russo nella rete europea.

Lo stesso ruolo avrebbe potuto assumere l’Italia con il gasdotto South Stream. Il progetto era nato nel 2006, durante il governo Prodi Il, con l’accordo stipulato da Eni e Gazprom. Il gasdotto avrebbe attraversato il Mar Nero (in acque territoriali russe, bulgare e turche) proseguendo via terra attraverso Bulgaria, Serbia, Ungheria, Slovenia e Italia fino a Tarvisio (Udine). Da qui il gas sarebbe stato smistato nella rete europea.

La costruzione della pipeline era iniziata nel 2012. Nel marzo 2014 la Saipem (Eni) si aggiudicava un primo contratto da 2 miliardi di euro per la costruzione del tratto sottomarino. Nel frattempo però, mentre con il putsch di Piazza Maidan precipitava la crisi ucraina, l’amministrazione Obama, di concerto con la Commissione Europea, si muoveva per affossare il South Stream. Nel giugno 2014 arrivava a Sofia una delegazione del Senato Usa, capeggiata da John McCain, che trasmetteva al governo bulgaro gli ordini di Washington. Subito questo annunciava il blocco dei lavori del South Stream, in cui la Gazprom aveva già investito 4,5 miliardi di dollari. In tal modo l’Italia perdeva non solo contratti per miliardi di euro, ma la possibilità di avere sul proprio territorio l’hub di smistamento del gas russo in Europa, da cui sarebbero derivati forti introiti e incremento di posti di lavoro.

Perché l’Italia ha perso tutto questo? Perché il governo Renzi (in carica dal 2014 al 2016) e il Parlamento hanno accettato a testa china l’imposizione di Washington.

La Germania della Merkel, al contrario, si è opposta. Ha quindi aperto la «disputa tra alleati» che ha costretto Washington ad accettare il raddoppio del North Stream, pur mantenendo gli Usa la pretesa di decidere da quali paesi l’Europa può importare o no gas naturale. Un governo italiano oserebbe aprire una disputa con Washington per difendere un nostro interesse nazionale? Il fatto è che l’Italia ha perso non solo il gasdotto, ma la propria sovranità.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Perché la Germania ha vinto e l’Italia ha perso

Majority of US Physicians Decline COVID Shots, According to Survey

July 27th, 2021 by Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

First published by Global Research on June 21, 2021

***

Of the 700 physicians responding to an internet survey by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), nearly 60 percent said they were not “fully vaccinated” against COVID.

This contrasts with the claim by the American Medical Association that 96 percent of practicing physicians are fully vaccinated. This was based on 300 respondents.

Neither survey represents a random sample of all American physicians, but the AAPS survey shows that physician support for the mass injection campaign is far from unanimous.

“It is wrong to call a person who declines a shot an ‘anti-vaxxer,’” states AAPS executive director Jane Orient, M.D. “Virtually no physicians are ‘anti-antibiotics’ or ‘anti-surgery,’ whereas all are opposed to treatments that they think are unnecessary, more likely to harm than to benefit an individual patient, or inadequately tested.”

The AAPS survey also showed that 54 percent of physician respondents were aware of patients suffering a “significant adverse reaction.” Of the unvaccinated physicians, 80 percent said “I believe risk of shots exceeds risk of disease,” and 30% said “I already had COVID.”

Other reasons for declining the shot included unknown long-term effects, use of aborted fetal tissue, “it’s experimental,” availability of effective early treatment, and reports of deaths and blood clots.

Of 560 practicing physicians, 56 percent said they offered early treatment  for COVID.

Nonphysicians were also invited to participate in the survey. Of some 5,300 total participants, 2,548 volunteered comments about associated adverse effects of which they were aware. These included death, amputation, paralysis, stillbirth, menstrual irregularities, blindness, seizures, and heart issues.

“Causality is not proven. However, many of these episodes might have resulted in a huge product liability or malpractice award if they had occurred after a new drug,” stated Dr. Orient. “Purveyors of these COVID products are protected against lawsuits.”

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons has represented physicians in all specialties since 1943. Its motto is omnia pro aegroto, everything for the patient.

*

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

Featured image is from Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On 24 July 1534, French navigator Jacques Cartier voyaged to the Gulf of Kaniatarowanenneh (River of the Mohawks, St Lawrence) and planted a cross on the shore of Gaspé. It signified claiming possession of the territory on behalf of the king of France, Francis I. Donnacona, chief of Stadacona (Québec city), was unhappy at this effrontery. Surmising this, Cartier lied and downplayed the significance of the 9-meter (30-ft) cross.

A Thought Experiment

Imagine that your childhood experience was being forcibly separated from your family and placed in church-run schools. Imagine hearing that you were a savage; being forbidden to speak in your savage tongue; being forced to dress in your oppressor’s sartorial; being made to pray to the oppressor’s god; being fed strange, insalubrious, unpalatable meals; being used as slave labor; being subject to beatings; and, even worse, being sodomized or raped. If you survived this cruel assimilation project, how would your feelings be toward the government, its gendarmerie, and the church? And what of your feelings toward the cross, that ubiquitous symbol of your stolen childhood and your people’s dispossession? [1]

The Blowback to Colonialism

On Canada Day, 1 July, a statue of the British navigator James Cook was torn from its pedestal and tossed into the murky waters of the Inner Harbor of Camosack (Victoria). Afterwards, several wooden red dresses, commemorating missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, were arranged in the bronze Cook’s sted. Half a block away, a statue of queen Victoria situated on the lawn in front of the Parliament Buildings somehow eluded the anti-imperialist fervor of the day. However, the Victoria statue in front of Winnipeg’s Manitoba Legislature did not escape its fate. It was decapitated and toppled, as was the statue of the current monarch, Elizabeth. Victoria’s head was thrown in the Assiniboine River. [2]

Then, sometime between 16 July and 17 July, a steel cross atop Mt Ts’uwxilum (known to most by its anglicized spelling of Mt Tzouhalem), in the Cowichan Valley on Vancouver Island, was cut down. People are drawing a link between the removal of the cross with the revelation of unmarked graves at former Indian Residential Schools in Canada. The taking down of the Mt Ts’uwxilum cross came on the heels of a confirmed 160 unmarked graves on the grounds of the former Kuper Island Residential School on Penelakut Island (the restored First Nation designation for Kupfer Island).

Ladysmith Chemainus Chronicle spoke to Penelakut member Steve Sxwithul’txw, an acclaimed filmmaker and a survivor of the Kuper Island Residential School, who started a GoFundMe with his partner Michele Mundy and Tom LaFortune for Vancouver Island First Nations to search former residential school sites on their territory. Is fundraising something First Nations should have to do?

“I think it’s important that the government fund this. In no way shape or form that First Nations should be funding this. In no way shape or form should a residential school survivor be fundraising to find bodies,” said Sxwithul’txw.

Sxwithul’txw demands accountability of the government and churches.

The work is going to continue for the next number of years — the unearthing of our lost children. We can keep unearthing them, but at the same time, what is going to happen? Who is going to be accountable? Is the Government of Canada going to take responsibility? They’re culpable. Same with the churches. So what’s going to be the process? I’m asking non-Indigenous Canadians to apply for answers. Write to your MP to get answers and move forward with investigations.

The government and churches are culpable, but so is the RCMP.

North Cowichan mayor Al Siebring knows of the devastation caused to many lives by the residential schools, but he nonetheless bemoans the removal of a cross first placed on Mt Ts’uwxilum in 1976: “That is not how we as a society should be dealing with our past. We need to respect each other and get along.” [3]

In other words, Siebring says the symbols of colonialism — the symbols of the institutions that brought about the dispossession of First peoples and sought their disappearance through assimilation — should remain on display or should not be summarily removed. This sentiment is expressed for a symbol now merged with genocide that was erected on the mountain named after chief Ts’uwxilum on the territory of the Quw’utsun (Cowichan) people.

Would Siebring argue similarly for mutual respect regarding swastikas displayed as symbols in Europe? [4]

As for how to deal with the symbols and symbolism, of course, First Nations should be consulted and lead the way. However, there is also an argument to be made that the current generation of non-Indigenous Canadians, who are ashamed of the heinous crimes of previous generations and wish to repudiate these crimes by removing the symbols of oppression, have a right to repurpose the spaces to better reflect sincerity for reconciliation.

The Cross and Original Peoples

Meanwhile, although reconciliation is the buzzword, many actions speak to the continuation of colonial-settler dispossession. For instance, the Mi’kmaq still struggle against government ennui and white racism for their right to harvest lobster as they have done centuries before the White Man arrived. The Wet’suwet’en First Nation are still resisting the construction of a pipeline through their unceded territory, abetted by the RCMP. Mi’kmaw groups are opposed to the construction of a LNG export facility in Mi’kma’ki (Nova Scotia) and have an understandable fear of “man camps” that would house the construction workers. And the RCMP are still killing Indigenous people.

Yet, the moral solution is clear. If you steal something, then elementary morality demands that you return what you have stolen — in the same condition and with additional compensation as required. Land back:

Land Back is really about the decision-making power. It’s about self-determination for our Peoples here that should include some access to the territories and resources in a more equitable fashion, and for us to have control over how that actually looks. — Jesse Wente, a dad, husband, and Ojibwe man

Dolefully, it seems that colonialism in both its historical and present-day forms remains a cross Indigenous peoples are forced to bear.

*

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.

Notes

1. I am not indigenous to Turtle Island, and do not pretend to know what it feels like to have experienced what the Indigenous people of Turtle Island have experienced. I can only attempt to imagine it.

2. Queen Victoria’s legacy is tarnished by her reigning over the racist dispossession of peoples throughout the British empire.

3. Quoted by Kevin Rothbauer, “Cross that overlooked Cowichan Valley from Mount Tzouhalem cut down,” Cowichan Valley Citizen, 22 July 2021, A1 and A35.

4. It is acknowledged that Nazis purloined the swastika from the East where it was a common symbol with a positive connotation and a long history for Hindus and Buddhists.

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

Israel’s War Crimes: Is the Tide Finally Turning?

July 27th, 2021 by Philip Giraldi

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Targeting and killing Palestinian children could not accomplish what a decision by an ice cream company has achieved. To be sure, the visual impact of Israel’s recent onslaught on Gaza turned many against that country’s war crimes and its ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, but what the Israeli government really has feared most is an economic and cultural boycott such as the one that brought down the apartheid regime in South Africa. That blow came last week when Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, which is sold in the food shops in the illegal-under-international-law Israeli settlements on the West Bank, would no longer market its product in those areas after the current contract with suppliers expires at the end of 2022.

Social media and mainstream media normally censor any posts or stories that are too critical of the Jewish state, but in this case the decision reverberated throughout the media as ice cream wars are both newsworthy and exceedingly rare. But the dramatic response by both Israeli politicians and their spear carriers in the US Congress indicated just how serious the move, little more than a gesture in practical terms, was considered to be.

There was also a touch of irony to the tale as Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield were and still are both politically liberal Jewish New Yorkers who moved to Vermont to open their business. The fact is that they were not party to the decision as they had sold their company to British food and consumer home products conglomerate Unilever back in 2000, which is precisely the problem for the Israeli government. Even though Ben & Jerry’s has an independent board, its parent company Unilever is a major corporation. The fact that it accepted a decision that it knew would be extremely controversial is significant as there would have to have been a consensus over the issue by the company’s top executives and board as well by major shareholders. There are indeed reports that the independent board of Ben & Jerry’s wanted to boycott all of Israel but was restrained by Unilever management. Either way, for Israel it was perhaps the shape of things to come with other companies possibly following the Ben & Jerry example by limiting their involvement in the country’s economy or pulling out altogether.

The Unilever decision greatly boosted the morale of the perpetually under siege non-violent Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has been calling on companies and investors to support Palestinian human rights by isolating Israel economically. Israel’s government responded sharply even as it unleashed its Ministry of Strategic Affairs’ army of largely diaspora trolls on the internet, overwhelming the ice cream maker’s website and Facebook pages with a defense of Israel that included vile accusations of anti-Semitism.

The Israeli head of the Ben & Jerry subsidiary is also apparently refusing to go along with what is only a partial boycott, affecting the clearly illegal settlements. In a tweet, local CEO Avi Zinger wrote:

“We are continuing to sell in all of Israel, and we will not surrender to the pressure of Unilever and the global Ben & Jerry’s.”

Israeli President Isaac Herzog immediately condemned the Ben & Jerry move, insisting that any boycotts of Israel over human rights concerns constitute “a new kind of terrorism.” Newly elected Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has also inevitably joined the chorus , labeling Ben & Jerry “anti-Israel ice cream.” Ironically, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also publicly called on his co-religionists to boycott Ben & Jerry, saying “Now we Israelis know which ice cream NOT to buy.” It was a complete reversal on Netanyahu’s part as he has argued vehemently against any boycott campaigns, particularly as they apply to Israel.

Also in Israel itself, Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked visited the Ben & Jerry’s ice cream factory. She confirmed that Israeli authorities were already working with American Jewish and Christian Zionists, as well as other pro-Israel groups and Congress to pressure Unilever “until they change their despicable decision. Ben & Jerry’s International chose to suck up to terrorist and antisemitic organizations” and the government will engage in the “legal, consumer and diplomatic arenas” to reverse the decision.

It is no surprise that Israel is particularly pressing hard on what it perceives as a friendly audience in the United States. In a move coordinated with Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, who has himself tweeted “Ben & Jerry’s decision represents shameful surrender to antisemitism, to BDS and to all that is wrong with the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish discourse. We will not be silent,” Gilad Erdan, Israel’s ambassador to the United States and the United Nations, called the move “the dehumanization of the Jewish people.” He reportedly has contacted the governors of the 35 states in America that have legislated against the BDS movement, demanding that they sanction or otherwise punish Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever over the decision. He wrote “I ask that you consider speaking out against the company’s decision, and taking any other relevant steps, including in relations to your state laws and the commercial dealings between Ben and Jerry’s and your state.” As two-thirds of US states have such legislation, including major large population states Florida, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, California, Maryland and Texas the threat is a serious one, though the legislation and what it actually authorizes varies from state to state.

The anti-BDS legislation is widely regarded as unconstitutional as it would essentially eliminate free speech if the subject is Israel. It was recently successfully challengedin Georgia by journalist Abby Martin, who was denied the right to speak before a college group if she would not first sign a statement saying that she would not support any boycott of Israel.

Indeed, Jewish groups and spokesmen in the US are beginning to line up against the ice cream maker. Faux conservative talking head Ben Shapiro has announced to his audience that he will no longer eat Ben & Jerry’s ice cream. Perhaps more significant, the ubiquitous Anti -Defamation League (ADL) has issued a statement on the decision “We are disappointed by this decision from @benandjerrys. You can disagree with policies without feeding into dangerous campaigns that seek to undermine Israel.” Meanwhile, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations has written to the governors of the 35 states that have anti-BDS legislation and has demanded that they force their state pension funds to divest from Unilever.

And as ADL and the Conference of Presidents go, so too goes the US government. Predicably call-me-Zionist Joe Biden and the US State Department, which has Zionist Jews at its three top positions, added their two cents, confirming that the White House “firmly reject[s] the BDS movement, which unfairly singles out Israel.” And there are the usual sounds coming out of the Israeli firsters in Congress and elsewhere. Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma, for example, quickly called for “block[ing] the sale of all #Benandjerrys in the state and in any state-operated facility to align with our law.” Florida’s Ron DeSantis, self-described as America’s most pro-Israel governor, was also quick off the mark, instructing his state government to stop any purchases of Unilever products while Texas governor Greg Abbott called the move “disgraceful and an insult to America’s closest ally in the Middle East.” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has meanwhile committed himself to stop eating Ben & Jerry’s ice cream.

If anyone does not have a problem with the behavior of Israel and its proxies in the United States I will attempt to explain. Wealthy Israel, which has been taking the United States taxpayer for a ride for over seventy years, is a major strategic liability for the US and a moral cesspit due to its genocidal policies towards the Palestinians and its incessant promotion of war within its region and beyond. Its president is now grossly hyperbolically referring to an ice cream company’s partial boycott as a “new form of terrorism.” In the current context, its Foreign Minister and Ambassador are also inter alia interfering in US politics and our judiciary, openly calling on individual American states to take steps to sanction and punish a Vermont based ice cream company which made a business decision based on both moral and legal considerations.

Worse still, many Americans who claim to be ethical but who perversely function as corrupted politicians and media whores are fully on board with punishing Ben & Jerry, which is a direct assault on the Bill of Rights and serves no national interest whatsoever. If there is anything that better illustrates the toxicity of the lopsided relationship with Israel than what is taking place right now it is difficult to imagine just what that might be. Hopefully the decision by Unilever will backfire on the critics, encouraging rather than discouraging other companies to divest in Israel or boycott what it produces. They will be joined by the labor unions, university student representative bodies and mainstream churches that have already denounced apartheid Israel and signed on to BDS. That Israel and its friends are terrified of the possible consequences of the Ben & Jerry boycott is in fact good news. Hopefully the charade of one set of rules for Israel and one set of rules for everyone else will end and Americans will at last be freed from a relationship that has brought nothing but grief since 1948.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Signs of COVID Injection Failure Mount

July 27th, 2021 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In the U.K., symptomatic COVID-19 cases among “vaccinated” individuals have risen 40% in one week, reaching an average rate of 15,537 new infections a day being detected. Meanwhile, symptomatic COVID-19 cases among the unvaccinated has declined by 22% and is now at a current daily average of 17,588

This suggests the wave among unvaccinated has peaked and that natural herd immunity has set in, while “vaccinated” individuals are actually becoming more prone to infection

Data show countries with the highest COVID injection rates are also experiencing the greatest upsurges in cases, while countries with the lowest injection rates have the lowest caseloads

100 fully injected crew members had tested positive onboard the British Defense aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth. The Navy ship has a case rate of 1 in 16 — the highest case rate recorded. This suggests vaccine-induced herd immunity is impossible, as these injections apparently cannot prevent COVID-19 even if 100% of a given population gets them

It is mathematically impossible for COVID shots to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 infection. The four available COVID shots in the U.S. provide an absolute risk reduction between just 0.7% and 1.3%. Meanwhile, the noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio across age groups is a mere 0.26%. Since the absolute risk that needs to be overcome is lower than the absolute risk reduction these injections can provide, mass vaccination simply cannot have a favorable impact

*

In recent weeks, a number of signs have emerged indicating the COVID-19 injections cannot put an end to COVID-19 outbreaks. In the July 15, 2021, video report above, Dr. John Campbell reviews data coming out of the U.K. On a side note, I do not agree with everything Campbell says in this video, such as promoting mask wearing, for example. It’s his data review that is of interest here.

As noted in the video, as of July 15, 87.5% of the adult population in the U.K. had received one dose of COVID-19 “vaccine” and 67.1% had received two. Yet symptomatic cases among partially and fully “vaccinated” are now suddenly on the rise, with an average of 15,537 new infections a day being detected, a 40% increase from the week before.

Meanwhile, the daily average of new symptomatic cases among unvaccinated is 17,588, down 22% from the week before. This suggests the wave among unvaccinated has peaked and that natural herd immunity has set in, while “vaccinated” individuals are becoming more prone to infection.

U.K. hospitals are confirming double-injected patients are part of the patient population being treated for active COVID infection, and two cities have issued public warnings to their residents, letting them know they may end up in the hospital even if they’ve been double-injected against COVID-19.

“There are currently 15 patients in hospital with COVID across the Trust; last month there were none,” The Yorkshire Post reported1 July 9, 2021. An undisclosed number of them had received two doses of COVID “vaccine.”

“The message I would like to share with you all is that some of their patients are double vaccinated,” Heather McNair, chief nurse at York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals, told the Post.2

“This is a disease that can still affect you and still make you poorly when you are double vaccinated. We have got a ward at the moment full of COVID patients in our hospital and that is not going away anytime soon.”

While the number of hospitalized COVID patients doubled in a single week, the total number was still well below the number reported in January 2021 — a statistic Amanda Bloor, accountable officer for the NHS North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group, takes as proof that the injection program is “having the anticipated impact around reducing the risk of death and reducing serious illness.”

COVID Surges in Countries with Highest Injection Rates

I wouldn’t be so quick to assume lower hospitalization rates in the middle of summer are a sign that the injections are having a positive impact. We also have data3 showing that countries with the highest COVID injection rates are also experiencing the greatest upsurges in cases, while countries with the lowest injection rates have the lowest caseloads. This trend “is worrying me quite a bit,” Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology, said in a July 16, 2021, Tweet.4

daily new confirmed covid 19 cases per million people

share of people who received at least one dose of covid 19 vaccine

You can view more data in this thread, posted by Corona Realism.5 Cyprus, where more than 51% of residents have received the jab, now has the highest case count in the world. Interestingly, the outbreak on the British Navy ships — which I’ll cover further below — occurred shortly after a stopover in Cyprus.6

cyprus covid cases vs vaccinated population

Bhutan offers an interesting glimpse into the effects of mass COVID “vaccination”. They managed to get 64% of residents injected in just one week, starting March 27, 2021, and almost immediately, there was a rapid uptick in cases.

In the first graph below, you see the extraordinarily rapid injection rate in Bhutan, going from zero to 64% in a matter of days. In the second graph, you can see the effect on cases in the weeks that followed. They went from near-zero cases at the outset of the injection campaign, to a high of more than 400 cases per million in the weeks following.

share of people who received at least one dose vaccine

biweekly confirmed covid 19 cases per million people

Case Counts Lowest in Low-‘Vaxxed’ Nations

On the flipside, we see the lowest number of positive COVID tests congregated in nations that also have the lowest rates of COVID “vaccine” uptake. While it’s not a 100% clear-cut correlation, it is a trend, and we also have to remember that the PCR tests have issues that complicate any attempt at data analysis.

biweekly changed in confirmed covid 19 cases

The main problem is that if you run the PCR test at too-high a cycle threshold (CT), you end up with an inordinate number of false positives.7,8,9 The CT refers to the point in the test where a positive result is obtained. A CT of 35 or higher will give you a 97% false positive rate.10

For maximum accuracy, you’d have to use a CT of 17.11 It’s unclear what all these countries are using, but it’s unlikely they’re using a CT below 20 as a matter of routine. This means most case counts around the world will be falsely elevated.

This is particularly true for unvaccinated individuals in the U.S., as their tests are recommended to be run at a CT of 40, whereas patients that have received a COVID injection will have their COVID tests run at a CT below 28. This makes it appear as though the case rate is higher among the unvaccinated, when in reality it’s just an artifact from highly biased testing and few of these falsely positive “cases” are actually sick.

Looking at the hospitalization rate for confirmed COVID-19 in the U.S.,12 we see that the number of people sick enough to require medical attention is nowhere near what it was during the winter months of 2021, and since only 5.9% of American adults had been injected with two doses as of February 21, 2021,13 we can conclude that the injections did not cause this rapid decline in hospitalizations.

new admissions of patients with confirmed covid 19 united states

The best explanation for the decline in both cases and hospitalizations after the rollout of COVID shots is the emergence of natural herd immunity from previous infections.

In a July 12, 2021, STAT News article,14 Robert M. Kaplan, Professor Emeritus at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, calculated that by April 2021, the natural immunity rate was above 55% in 10 U.S. states, and in most of those same states, new infections were in rapid decline as early as the end of 2020, at a time when only a tiny fraction of the population had received their shots.

CDC Doesn’t Track All Breakthrough Cases

We must also remember that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are artificially driving down case rates, hospitalization rates and death rates for “vaccinated” Americans by selectively tracking breakthrough cases. They only track and report breakthrough cases where the patient is hospitalized or dies.15 They do not count mild cases, even if they have a positive test result.

A number of media outlets have expressed concerns about this biased tracking and reporting. As noted in Harvard Health,16 the CDC’s strategy prevents us from ascertaining whether one injection is more or less effective than another. It can also hide manufacturing problems and prevent us from determining whether timing of the second dose might have a bearing on effectiveness, as well as a number of other things.

Business Insider17 pointed out that not tracking all breakthrough cases makes it more difficult to determine how dangerous the Delta variant really is. NPR expresses a similar view, stating that “Critics argue the strategy could miss important information that could leave the U.S. vulnerable, including early signs of new variants that are better at outsmarting the vaccines.”18

Even Complete ‘Vaccine’ Coverage Won’t Stop Infections

July 14, 2021, BBC News reported19 100 fully injected crewmembers had tested positive onboard the British Defense aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth. It’s unclear whether any of them actually have symptoms. According to British defense secretary Ben Wallace, mitigation efforts include mask wearing, social distancing and a track and trace system. He made no mention of actual treatment for acute infection.

Other warships are also reporting onboard outbreaks, although Wallace did not offer any details about them. The fleet is currently in the Indian Ocean and plans to continue the 28-week deployment, with Japan as their destination. BBC News said the queen and prime minister had been onboard the flagship shortly before it sailed.

This case offers a sobering view into the effectiveness of these gene modifying shots, as the HMS Queen Elizabeth now has a case rate of 1 in 1620 — the highest case rate recorded so far, that I know of. Yet 100% of the crew has been double-injected. This tells you that the vaccine-induced herd immunity narrative is a fairytale. These injections apparently cannot prevent COVID-19 even if 100% of a given population gets them!

Israeli Data Indicate Pfizer ‘Vaccine’ Failure

Data from Israel also offer a dismal view of COVID-19 injections. Israel used Pfizer’s mRNA injection exclusively, so this gives us a good idea of its effectiveness. Overall, it looks like an abysmal failure, as a majority of serious cases and deaths are now occurring among those injected with two doses. The following is a screenshot of graphs posted on Twitter.21

The red is unvaccinated, yellow refers to partially “vaccinated” and green fully “vaccinated” with two doses. The charts speak for themselves.

new hospitalizations

new severe covid 19 patients

deaths trend

Overall, it doesn’t appear as though COVID-19 gene modification injections have the ability to effectively eliminate COVID-19 outbreaks, and this makes sense, seeing how it’s mathematically impossible for them to do so.

The four available COVID shots in the U.S. provide an absolute risk reduction between just 0.7% and 1.3%.22,23 (Efficacy rates of 67% to 95% all refer to the relative risk reduction.) Meanwhile, the noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio across age groups is a mere 0.26%.24 Since the absolute risk that needs to be overcome is lower than the absolute risk reduction these injections can provide, mass vaccination simply cannot have a favorable impact.

CDC Tries to Hide COVID Jab Death Toll

They can, however, cause unnecessary deaths among otherwise healthy individuals. Tragically, the CDC is doing everything it can to hide just how great that death toll is. In what appears to be a deliberate attempt at deception, the CDC “rolled back” its July 19, 2021, adverse events report to statistics from the previous week. I’ll explain. Take note of the specific dates and death totals in each of the following excerpts. The July 13 report reads as follows:25

“Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 334 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 12, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 6,079 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.”

The original July 19 report (saved on Wayback) initially read as follows:26

“Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 19, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 12,313 reports of death (0.0036%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.”

Please note, the death toll more than doubled in a single week. That original July 19 report was then changed to this. The date on the report is still July 19:27

“Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 334 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 13, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 6,079 reports of death (0.0018%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine.”

At a time when accuracy and transparency is of such critical importance for informed consent, it’s beyond shocking to see the CDC engage in this kind of deception. Yet here we are. We’re now living in a world where crucial public health data is being manipulated at every turn. For this reason, looking at larger trends such as those reviewed above may offer a more dependable picture of what the real-world consequences of these shots are.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) recently posted more than 50 video presentations from the pay-for-view Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination held online October 16 to 18, 2020, and made them available to everyone for free.

The conference’s theme was “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century” and it featured physicians, scientists and other health professionals, human rights activists, faith community leaders, constitutional and civil rights attorneys, authors and parents of vaccine injured children talking about vaccine science, policy, law and ethics and infectious diseases, including coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccines.

In December 2020, a U.K. company published false and misleading information about NVIC and its conference, which prompted NVIC to open up the whole conference for free viewing. The conference has everything you need to educate yourself and protect your personal freedoms and liberties with respect to your health.

Don’t miss out on this incredible opportunity. I was a speaker at this empowering conference and urge you to watch these video presentations before they’re censored and taken away by the technocratic elite.

*

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

Notes

1, 2 The Yorkshire Post July 9, 2021

3 PBS Our World in Data, Daily confirmed cases

4 Twitter Robert Malone July 16, 2021

5, 20 Twitter Thread Reader July 16, 2021

6 MSN July 14, 2021

7 The Vaccine Reaction September 29, 2020

8 Jon Rappoport’s Blog November 6, 2020

9 YouTube TWiV 641 July 16, 2020

10 Clinical Infectious Diseases September 28, 2020; ciaa1491

11 European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases April 27, 2020; 39: 1059-1061

12 CDC.gov, Interpretive Summary for July 16, 2021, Hospitalizations

13, 14 STAT News July 12, 2021

15 CDC COVID-19 Breakthrough Case Investigations and Reporting

16 Harvard Health June 3, 2021

17 Business Insider July 3, 2021

18 NPR June 2, 2021

19 BBC News July 14, 2021

21 Twitter Alex Berenson July 18, 2021

22 Medicina 2021; 57: 199

23 The Lancet Microbe July 1, 2021; 2(7): E279-E280

24 Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-5352

25 Wayback CDC Reported Adverse Events July 13, 2021

26 Wayback CDC Reported Adverse Events July 19, 2021

27 CDC Reported Adverse Events July 19, 2021, Now altered

Featured image is from Chemical Violence

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

A U.K. member of Parliament has come forward writing a blistering op-ed for the Daily Mail.

Part whistleblower, part human rights activist, Graham Brady is calling out his own government’s ill-advised Covid mitigation policies, originating from fear, rather than sound public health science.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

US Attempting to Prevent China’s Technological Rise

July 27th, 2021 by Paul Antonopoulos

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill banning scientists from receiving government funding if they are also involved in any Chinese-funded project. Washington’s move is part of the U.S.’ overall strategy of technological confrontation with China.

In the late 2000’s, China adopted the 1000 Talents Program to actively recruit world-class scientists to work in the country. Under the program, such professionals are offered very attractive working conditions: wages equal or even higher than in developed Western countries, visa exemptions for family members, a high degree of scientific freedom, and reduced bureaucracy and reporting.

Initially, the program was mainly aimed at Chinese scientists who trained and worked abroad. According to the American consulting organization Marco Polo, for every 10 people of Chinese origin who attended university and received advanced degrees in the U.S., nine stayed there to work for more than five years. Thus, the 1000 Talents Program was originally intended to provide Chinese scientists with working conditions at least equal to those in the U.S. However, the program was later extended to top scientists of other nationalities.

But the program is facing pressure, with Harvard University Professor Charles Lieber awaiting trial in the U.S. as prosecutors claim that he hid from the government that he was working for China as part of the 1,000 Talents Program. The scientist denies his guilt.

According to Bloomberg, the bill that was introduced by Republican Randy Feenstra is aimed at combating some countries’ supposedly unfair policies in attracting talented professionals. The bill also received support because the U.S. had previously passed the Innovation and Competition Act, which included a government investment of $250 billion into basic research and advanced technology.

The Act is designed to increase the competitiveness of the U.S. in science and technology, keeping the country in the lead. Therefore, Feenstra’s bill proposes that in order to be in charge of distributing funding, the National Science Foundation must ban cooperation with other countries. In addition to China, the document also mentions Russia, Iran and North Korea. However, the U.S.’ main goal is to limit cooperation with China, the main economic and technological rival of the U.S.

On the one hand, it is true that limiting contact between scientists will hinder China’s development in the short term. However, from a strategic point of view, this will not bring any benefit to the U.S. Major American companies, especially those in the Silicon Valley, were built with foreign talent. In fact, the U.S. has traditionally been a technological leader as it has been able to attract the best minds from around the world.

Marco Polo researchers analysed the most successful articles on artificial intelligence cited and presented in 2019 in scientific journals and at leading conferences. Among the papers presented at the industry’s largest annual event – Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, more than half of the papers are authored by scientists from U.S. research institutions and companies like Google, Microsoft Research, Stanford University, Carnegie Mellon University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Of these, 30% of the research was done by Chinese scientists.

Although China has a long way to go in becoming the world’s technological leader, as former Google CEO Eric Schmidt (who now heads the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Commission) said, China is closing the gap with the U.S. much faster than expected. Schmidt believes that the U.S. can maintain its advantage over China only if it unites with Japan and South Korea.

It begs the question though whether the U.S. can make Japan and South Korea overcome their centuries-long animosity to focus on China. For now, this seems like an unlikely prospect, even amidst the “Olympic Spirit.”

In fact, there is even the potentiality that China will seek to strengthen cooperation with South Korea and Japan in these fields. For Tokyo and Seoul, China is their most important trading partner despite geopolitical challenges. In 2019, a quarter of South Korea’s total exports went to China. For Japan, China is the second largest export market – accounting for 20% of Japan’s total exports.

Moody’s predicts that under the five-year plan, China will increase research and development spending by 7% per year. Japanese and South Korean partners, according to Moody’s projections, will hugely benefit from China’s technology development strategy.

Although the U.S. is attempting to contain China’s rapid technological advancements, decades of relying on foreign expertise has weakened the American talent pool, opening opportunities especially for Chinese and Indian researchers. With China able to offer equal conditions, or in many cases even superior to the West, the Asian country’s rise to technological dominance continues unabated despite cynical actions by the U.S. like the Innovation and Competition Act.

*

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

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Biden Administration has signaled its next move as part of the White House’s full court press to pressure Americans into taking COVID-19 vaccines.

It seems the White House intends to strongarm the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) into fully approving COVID vaccines, while completely dismissing evolving safety and efficacy concerns in the process.

It began during a CNN town hall this week, when President Biden appeared to let it slip (in difficult to comprehend language) that he was pushing for full FDA approval before the end of the year.

Fully authorizing the COVID vaccines will allow for the government to hop over legal and regulatory hurdles that come from their current status under emergency use authorization. The Biden Administration seems to believe full approval will act as a mandate for further draconian, top down policies from the federal government, the likes of which may include vaccine passports and compulsory vaccination for much of public and private industry.

In an article earlier this week, state-corporate press organ NBC News attempted to tee up the case for vaccine mandates. Several Obama and Biden “health” officials went on the record for the piece to make it clear they wanted to make life as difficult as possible for “unvaccinated” Americans.

“The official regulatory sign off would remove a significant legal and public relations barrier for businesses and government agencies that want to requirevaccinations for their employees and customers, former health officials from the Biden and the Obama administrations said,” the NBC article states.

Andy Slavitt, a former Biden Administration official who infamously advertised a mask that he claimed could “deactivate” the coronavirus, told NBC News:

“I think once the vaccines go through full FDA approval, everything should be on the table, and I think that everything will be on the table at the level of municipalities, states, employers, venues, government agencies.”

The FDA is not in fact an independent regulatory agency. It is simply another executive branch agency that falls under the umbrella of the Department of Health and Human Services. While the FDA is tasked with ensuring the safety of drugs that have prospects for the open market, the reality remains that politicians and pharmaceutical companies regularly steer and manipulate the FDA as they please.

The revolving door between Big Pharma and the Government Health is very much on display at the FDA today. Patrizia Cavazzoni, the FDA’s new top drug regulator, worked for two decades in Big Pharma (including a stint at Pfizer) before entering her government role in 2019. In fact, it is the norm, not an aberration, for Big Pharma executives to have a resume stuffed with Big Pharma consulting and employment gigs. Recent FDA chiefs, such as Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieband Obama FDA chief Robert Califf, have resumes stuffed with examples of the constant revolving door between lobbying, government, and pharmaceutical companies.

The notion that mRNA vaccines have proven, *long term* safety and efficacy standards for the masses is simply not possible to prove at this time. Real world data (as opposed to Big Pharma studies) out of Israel, Malta, the UK, and elsewhere show that the vaccines have not exactly demonstrated much of an ability to prevent infection, contrary to the early claims made by pharmaceutical companies and Government Health institutions.

The bottom line: The White House is seeking to use the reputation of the FDA to force more Americans to take COVID vaccines, and they’ve made it clear that this is entirely about politics, and not science. The government agency that gave us the disaster that is the food pyramid is not an independent body, nor is it any kind of authority on science and health. The FDA is just another bureaucracy, with the primary interested parties being the White House and Big Pharma.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Politics over Science: Biden Admin Signals Intent to Force FDA Approval of COVID Vaccines
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

We are witnessing an epic global struggle for freedom, and the outcome of that struggle is going to greatly shape what our world is going to look like in the years ahead.  Ultimately, one of the most fundamental rights that we have is the right to make our own health decisions.  If someone else has the authority to make those decisions for you, then you aren’t really free.  This pandemic has transformed the debate over health freedom into the most hotly contested political issue on the entire planet, and the intensity seems to have been turned up a few more notches in recent days.  As governments around the world have begun instituting new lockdowns, new mandates and new “health passports”, we have seen huge eruptions of anger all over the world.

For example, over the weekend there was an enormous health freedom protest in London

Thousands have gathered today Saturday, July 24, in London’s Trafalgar Square to protest against the lockdown rules and COVID-19 vaccinations. A wide range of speakers is attending the event, including well-known British conspiracy theorist, Kate Shemirani, who spoke to the crowd. Demonstrators are angry about the recent move which will see vaccine passports becoming compulsory in England to access nightclubs and other packed venues.

At the same time, there were also massive protests in the heart of Paris

French anti-riot police fired tear gas Saturday as clashes erupted during protests in central Paris against COVID-19 restrictions and a vaccination campaign, television reported.

Police sought to push back demonstrators near the capital’s Gare Saint-Lazare railway station after protesters had knocked over a police motorbike ridden by two officers, television pictures showed.

Images showed a heavy police presence on the capital’s streets. Scuffles between police and demonstrators also broke out on the Champs-Elysees thoroughfare, where tear gas was fired and traffic was halted, the pictures showed.

On the other side of the globe, we continue to see violent protests in Sydney and other major Australian cities

Thousands of people took to the streets of Sydney and other Australian cities on Saturday to protest lockdown restrictions amid another surge in cases, and police made several arrests after crowds broke through barriers and threw plastic bottles and plants.

The unmasked participants marched from Sydney’s Victoria Park to Town Hall in the central business district, carrying signs calling for “freedom” and “the truth.”

Millions upon millions of people are fed up and are refusing to accept any more violations of their fundamental rights.

But of course there are millions of others that are eagerly embracing the tyrannical measures that have been implemented by national governments around the globe.

In the end, the scale is going to tip one way or the other, and the outcome is going to greatly shape the direction of humanity’s future.

So let us hope that freedom wins.

Right now, the corporate media continues to work very hard to generate as much panic as possible.  Earlier today, I found it quite comical when one news outlet ran a story about how authorities are now warning us that COVID can be spread by flatulence

The official advice is to open a window to increase ventilation and slow the spread of Covid, but now there could be an added incentive – the virus may also be spread by flatulence.

Ministers have privately pointed to evidence that Covid could be spread by people breaking wind in confined spaces such as lavatories. One said they had read “credible-looking stuff on it” from other countries, although government scientists are yet to produce a paper on the matter.

The source said there had been evidence of a “genomical-linked tracing connection between two individuals from a [lavatory] cubicle in Australia.”

You better run out and do as they say, because someone sitting in the next bathroom stall may have gas.

Here in the United States, we are now being told that more mandates and more lockdowns are coming because “this pandemic is spiraling out of control yet again”

“More mitigation is coming. Whether it’s masking, or whether it’s closures or whether it’s your kids having to return to virtual learning, that is coming,” the Trump administration surgeon general told CBS’ “Face the Nation” on Sunday.

“And it’s coming because this pandemic is spiraling out of control yet again. And it’s spiraling out of control because we don’t have enough people vaccinated.”

In fact, we are already starting to see some local governments put new mandates into place.

For instance, a new mask mandate has just been announced in St. Louis and St. Louis County

Faced with a rising tide of COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations, St. Louis and St. Louis County leaders announced Friday that they will reinstate a mask requirement, for vaccinated and unvaccinated residents alike.

As more mandates are instituted by local governments around the country, it is inevitable that we will see widespread protests break out just like we are seeing in other countries.

Meanwhile, other “pestilences” continue to make headlines as well.  A drug-resistant “superbug” that is “resistant to all existing treatments” is causing quite a bit of alarm for U.S. health officials at this moment…

Cases of a deadly fungal infection resistant to all existing treatments have been spreading through nursing homes and hospitals in the United States for the first time, health officials said.

In the past we have seen isolated cases, but now we are being told that it looks like this “superbug” is spreading pretty easily from person to person

“This is really the first time we’ve started seeing clustering of resistance” in which patients seemed to be getting the infections from each other, said Dr Meghan Lyman, a medical officer at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

If that wasn’t bad enough, scientists have recently confirmed cases of the Bubonic Plague “in animals and fleas” in six different Colorado counties…

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment says there have been laboratory-confirmed reports of plague in animals and fleas from six counties.

One of the six counties with confirmed plague is LaPlata County, where a 10-year-old resident died from causes associated with the plague. Laboratory testing has since confirmed the presence of plague in a sample of fleas collected in the county, according to CDPHE.

For even more examples like this, please see my previous article entitled “4 ‘Pestilences’ That Everyone Should Be Keeping An Eye On Right Now”.

As I have stated before, I believe that we have entered a new era of great pestilences.  Scientists all over the globe are constantly playing around with deadly diseases, and in many instances they are actually attempting to make them even deadlier.

With that in mind, it chilled me to the core to read that 33 ancient viruses were recently discovered “trapped in the ice of the Tibetan Plateau”

Glaciers can preserve all sorts of relics from the distant past. So could they also be home to a pandemic from prehistoric times as well? It’s possible. A team from The Ohio State University has discovered a collection of viruses that have never been seen before in the ice of a glacier in China.

Scientists say the viral samples date back nearly 15,000 years and may reveal how pathogens evolve over the centuries. Of the 33 viruses found trapped in the ice of the Tibetan Plateau, the team considers 28 to be completely novel. About half of them also seem to have survived specifically because of the freezing conditions.

Now these ancient viruses will be “brought back to life”, and it is inevitable that scientists around the world will start playing around with them.

So what happens when there is an “accident” and one of those ancient viruses gets released?

We live at a time of incredible stupidity, and our stupidity is going to end up getting a whole lot of people killed.

*

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.

Michael Snyder has published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News which are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.

Featured image is from Pixabay

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

A man who died in a motorcycle accident was counted among the COVID-19 related deaths in the state, leading to questions about whether the state’s reported coronavirus death rates are accurate, according to Fox 35 Orlando.

Fox 35 inquired with Orange County Health Officer Raul Pino, MD, about two COVID-19 deaths that were reported among individuals in their 20s last week. The Florida Department of Health said COVID-19 can be listed as the immediate or underlying cause of death, but instances such as trauma, homicide and motor-vehicle accidents are supposed to be excluded from the COVID-19 death rates.

On July 18, the state removed the motorcyclist’s death from the list of COVID-19 fatalities. In Florida, medical examiners certify all COVID-19 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.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Grayzone reports from Nicaragua on the 42nd anniversary of the Sandinista revolution. Nicaraguans discuss their improved quality of life, President Ortega condemns the dictatorial US “empire that wants to dominate all countries,” and Vice President Murillo declares poverty an imperialist “crime against humanity.”

42 years after the victory of the Sandinista revolution, Nicaraguans are still celebrating the gains of the leftist movement, and hoping to take the transformative process to another stage.

This July 19, tens of thousands of Nicaraguans flooded downtown Managua, the capital, to show their support for the revolution and the national government that since 2007 has been led by the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN).

An ocean of Nicaraguans filled the streets bearing red and black bandanas, waving FSLN flags, and chanting revolutionary slogans.

The celebration lasted for an entire week, culminating with speeches by President Daniel Ortega and Vice President Rosario Murillo, who emphasized gains of the revolution like free universal healthcare and education for all citizens, new high-quality infrastructure, the empowerment of women and the youth, as well as an assertive stance on the global stage.

Ortega used his speech on July 19 to announce a 5% increase in government spending on social programs, and a corresponding 5% increase in the salaries of public workers.

Murillo vowed to accelerate the government’s war on poverty, linking it to the “diabolical imperialist threat” posed by US intervention. Stressing that underdevelopment of the Global South is an “imperialist imposition that has been used to dominate, divide, diminish,” the Nicaraguan vice president called poverty a “crime against humanity.”

Highlighting Washington’s decades-long war on the Sandinistas, Ortega railed against US imperialism, calling the “yanqui empire” a global dictatorship obsessed with destroying Nicaragua, Russia, China, and any country in its way, led by “rulers who want to impose their hegemony, who want to make themselves owners and lords of the planet, who even want to take over the universe.”

nicaragua july 19 2021 avenida bolivar

While tens of thousands of Nicaraguans filled Managua to commemorate the revolution, international media outlets blasted out fake news.

Spanish corporate news wire EFE falsely claimed, “Few celebrate Nicaragua’s revolution on its anniversary number 42.” In reality, although they did not receive any coverage in the mainstream foreign press, there were demonstrations this July in support of the Sandinista Front all across Nicaragua, in most the country’s departments and major cities, including Masaya, Estelí, Boaco, Rivas, Chinandega, Jinotega, Matagalpa, Granada, Leon, Chantales, Carazo, and beyond.

The onslaught of disinformation, spread shamelessly by Western corporate outlets, is part of the unconventional warfare that has been waged against Nicaragua and its leftist government, since the Sandinistas returned to power through a series of democratic elections beginning in 2006.

In 2018, the United States backed a violent coup attempt aimed at overthrowing the FSLN and the party’s President Daniel Ortega. For months, right-wing bands waged a campaign of sabotage to destabilize the country, erecting barricades that battered the economy, while hunting down Sandinista activists in their homes and on the street.

The putsch fizzled out in July 2018. But just when it was on the path to recovery, Nicaragua encountered a new series of stumbling blocks.

nicaragua july 19 2021 avenida bolivar crowd

In 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic ravaged the world, further damaging Nicaragua’s economy. The US-funded anti-Sandinista opposition exploited the health crisis to launch another bid to sabotage the government.

As if this were not enough, that November, Central America was hit by not one but two hurricanes, Eta and Iota.

Despite the many obstacles, Nicaragua is still moving forward. The Sandinista government guarantees free, socialized, high-quality healthcare and education for all of its citizens.

And while Nicaragua is the second-poorest country in the western hemisphere (after Haiti), it has some of the strongest social programs in the region, as well as excellent public infrastructure, on par with that of much richer Latin American countries.

The Sandinistas have also heavily emphasized the role of women in leadership positions. It passed laws requiring government offices to be split at least 50-50 between men and women, leading to the fifth-highest level of gender equality in the entire world, and the highest in Latin America.

The government’s gains are especially impressive when considering that Nicaragua’s neighbors in the so-called Northern Triangle – Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala – are wracked by catastrophic violent crime rates, making them some of the most violent nations on Earth that aren’t officially at war.

Compared to its neighbors, Nicaragua is an oasis of stability and peace. And many Nicaraguans attribute their relative security to the Sandinista Front.

According to a survey taken this May by the mainstream polling firm, M&R Consultores, 76% of Nicaraguans feel their country has progressed in the 14 years of rule of the Sandinista Front. 73% say the government gives them hope, 69% personally approve of President Daniel Ortega, and 63% believe their families will have better lives and jobs with the FSLN staying in power.

When I walked around downtown Managua on the week of July 19, the wellspring of popular support was palpable.

nicaragua sandinista revolution anniversary 2021

“Thanks to the Sandinista Front and Comandante Ortega, my children can go to college for free, and the public schools are excellent,” said a middle-aged woman. “When I was a child, in the neoliberal period, we had to bring our own desks to school, and there were holes in the walls.”

“We have various new hospitals, and they’re free,” a man effused. “Before you would go and pay a lot, and they would just give you a pill.”

As I strolled down Avenida Bolívar a Chávez (the main street in the capital, where monuments to Venezuelan anti-imperialist leaders Simón Bolívar and Hugo Chávez had been erected), I spoke with dozens of people who had gathered to celebrate the revolution.

“The roads were horrible before Comandante Ortega returned,” recalled an elderly man. “It was just earth and mud outside my house. Now I have good roads all around my neighborhood.”

“I remember the neoliberal era. We had nothing. They privatized everything. They pillaged the country,” a woman lamented. “Before the Sandinista Front came back, we didn’t even have electricity or water. It went out every day.”

Many women emphasized the role the Sandinista Front has played in empowering them and their family members.

Several Nicaraguans also recognized me and stopped to show gratitude to The Grayzone for reporting on their struggle. “Thank you for telling the truth about what is going on,” a young Sandinista activist said. “The other media outlets say so many lies. They are all lies.”

sandinistas nicaragua july 19 2021 managua

Before Covid-19 broke out, Managua was the site of massive rallies each July 19, in which hundreds of thousands of Sandinista supporters filled downtown Managua to celebrate. At The Grayzone, we have reported on these enormous popular celebrations, which essentially amount to multi-day parties in the streets.

Both last year and this year, however, the government cancelled the official July 19 celebration, over health concerns due to Covid-19. (I also reported on the 41st anniversary of the revolution in 2020, from inside Managua.)

Yet these cancellations did not stop the hardcore base of the Sandinista Front from filling the streets of  Managua in celebration.

The night before the anniversary, on July 18, tens of thousands of Nicaraguans filled Managua’s Plaza La Fe.

Sandinista revolution anniversary July 18 2021

A long line of cars stretched all the way down Avenida Bolívar. Sandinistas were willing to sit in hours of traffic to attend.

Nicaragua July 18 2021 avenida bolivar

During a midnight fireworks launch, Nicaraguans blasted revolutionary music from their cars, and partied into the early morning.

Sandinista anniversary July 18 2021 plaza la fe

The enthusiasm that many Nicaraguans felt toward the Sandinista Front was tangible. One woman displayed a leg tattoo of President Daniel Ortega.

nicaragua sandinista ortega tattoo

While tens of thousands of Nicaraguans filled Managua’s Plaza La Fe and Avenida Bolívar on the night of July 18, many more held large community parties, called vigilias, in working-class barrios.

I attended a large gathering in the blue collar neighborhood of San Antonio, where young people mingled with elders and danced to a blend of reggaeton, rap, and música testimonial – revolutionary songs sang in unison and celebrating the Sandinista Front’s victories.

Revelers constantly stopped me to thank me for “reporting what is actually happening” in their country, complaining that the pro-Sandinista majority is ignored by foreign corporate media outlets, which instead act as mouthpieces for the elite right-wing opposition.

Sandinista revolution vigilia San Antonio 2021

An older man related to me the story of how he had left Nicaragua to study in Germany, and later worked in the United States, but later decided to return home because he wanted to support the revolutionary process.

“I have seen the poverty and homeless in the United States, and it is horrible, it is barbaric in a country with so much wealth,” he said.

Another Sandinista supporter exclaimed to me, “We want to thank the people of the United States who support the Sandinista Popular Revolution. The people of the US are not the same as the government; we know that!”

The older man had been involved in the armed struggle in the 1970s, and said that during the ’80s, he met many US activists who arrived in Nicaragua to help build the revolution.

Sandinista revolution 2021 vigilia San Antonio

The vigilia in San Antonio was organized by local Sandinista activists, who put a series of poster boards outside of the event, highlighting what they consider to be the most important gains of the revolution.

“The revolution is health for everyone,” read one, showing photos of the socialized healthcare system and new hospitals built under the FSLN government.

nicaragua sandinista vigilia health

“The revolution is: free, high-quality education,” read another poster. It included images of new school infrastructure, a state-of-the-art technological training center, and the free school supply program.

nicaragua sandinista vigilia education

“The revolution is: building road infrastructure and dignified homes,” the boards continued, displaying the Sandinistas’ highly subsidized public housing initiative.

nicaragua sandinista vigilia infrastructure

And last but not least was a sign emphasizing, “Without the participation of women, there is no revolution!”

nicaragua sandinista vigilia women

After days of community celebrations of the anniversary across Nicaragua, President Daniel Ortega and Vice President Rosario Murillo delivered speeches in Plaza de la Revolución, in the heart of Managua.

Ortega proceeded to his speech down Avenida Bolívar, standing through the open roof of his presidential vehicle and waving at the thousands of Nicaraguans who had rallied to commemorate the revolution.

ortega car crowd july 19 2021

The president’s security team reportedly did not support the decision, but Ortega insisted on greeting his supporters.

ortega car crowd july 19 2021 night

Nicaraguan President Ortega: US empire wants to dominate the world and suppress all other powers

Although Nicaragua is a small country of 6 million people, its Sandinista government punches above its weight on the international stage.

In the 2021 celebration, Ortega made it clear that anti-imperialism is at the forefront of the FSLN’s revolutionary program.

The “world is more and more shaken by the desires of the North American rulers, who want to impose their hegemony, who want to make themselves owners and lords of the planet, who even want to take over the universe,” the Nicaraguan president declared. “That is how far their plans go. Because they have atomic bombs, because they have lots of money.”

“And they can’t understand that that era, where imperialism had a period that was temporary, but a period of hegemony, when the balance between the Soviet Union and the United States was broken, that that moment of hegemony that it had, it was a few seconds, and that disappeared,” Ortega said.

“Now the peoples of the world are fighting; the North American people are fighting, bravely, the North American people are fighting, and the peoples of Europe are also fighting,” he continued.

“Those countries that still dream of imposing their colonialist, neocolonialist policies in the world, they are simply outside of reality. That is no longer possible.

“When the universe was created, and in the universe, Earth came up, there was never any god that said, ‘The yanquis are going to be the owners of the world.’ Not in Africa, not in Asia, not in our American lands where are ancestors were, our roots. There were a multitude of gods worshiped by different cultures, and not one god said ‘We must submit ourselves to the yanqui empire.’”

Free public health “clinics and hospitals are for all Nicaraguan families,” not just Sandinistas

In a particularly memorable moment, Ortega argued that Nicaraguan opposition supporters were themselves victims.

“There are even those Nicaraguan families that, for diverse reasons, aren’t able to understand what is the struggle for dignity, for justice, which has to do with their own material realities, and those families are also victims,” he said. “I mean, the people who oppose us, because there are people who oppose us, as a result of the ferocious propaganda that there is, and they are in misery.”

“But when they see that they are passing a new highway, they are happy. And they are not upset because it was the Government of the People-as-President that is building that road,” Ortega continued. “And when a clinic is being built, and when a hospital is being built, as dozens of hospitals have been built in these years [of the Sandinista government], clinics for women, the doors are open for all Nicaraguan families.”

“They are not clinics or hospitals only for Sandinista families. They are clinics and hospitals for all Nicaraguan families!” Ortega emphasized.

He then announced a 5% increase in government spending on social programs, including a 5% raise for public sector workers.

Ortega also stressed the importance of housing the population. “We will continue giving property titles until all Nicaraguans in our homeland have a house, a lot, a place to live, a farm,” he said.

Since 2007, the Sandinista government has given poor and working-class Nicaraguans more than 501,000 property deeds, in both urban and rural areas, Ortega emphasized. This is important because it ensures that Nicaraguans are secure in their homes, and have legal protections so they cannot be displaced by wealthy landlords, corporations, or developers that want to steal and exploit the land they live on.

“When the property is recorded in the [government] registry, there are no latifundia-style thieves who can steal that property from the peasants,” the Nicaraguan president reassured.

Ortega: Coup-plotters provoked Nicaraguan police with violence and wanted them to shoot back

In his discussion of the violent 2018 coup attempt, Daniel Ortega praised the national police for “resisting the provocations, the bullet wounds, the deaths.” He specifically highlighted the officers in the city of Masaya, who were under siege for weeks by heavily armed extremist coup-mongers.

“How difficult it was in that moment to have to tell those comrades there not to shoot back, not to resist, to endure it, not to shoot, while the terrorists were firing bullets, with funding from the yanquis and the oligarchy, attacking every day,” Ortega said.

“It was a provocation. They wanted the police to react, so they could say it was a massacre,” the president continued, explaining the strategy of the US-backed putsch. “The police were simply following orders to resist without firing any bullets, which are the most difficult orders to follow, when an institution is being attacked, when a command is being attacked.”

Ortega’s comments recalled an op-ed published in the New York Times by a US government-backed anti-China activist, titled “A Hong Kong Protester’s Tactic: Get the Police to Hit You.” The unusually candid 2019 article explained how Western-sponsored insurgents employed “aggressive nonviolence to provoke the authorities,” based on a strategy called “Marginal Violence Theory,” which uses “the most aggressive nonviolent actions possible to push the police and the government to their limits.”

But as The Grayzone has reported, the tactics Nicaragua’s opposition employed in 2018 were anything but non-violent.

Ortega: US empire is “crazy” and “wants to dominate all countries”

“This is a complex struggle, because it is a struggle that involves the global interests of the empire that wants to dominate all countries,” Daniel Ortega continued in his speech.

The US empire “wants to suppress other powers, instead of getting along with the powers it wants to suppress them. It wants to suppress the Russian Federation; it wants to subordinate it. It wants to suppress, it wants to subordinate the People’s Republic of China. They’re crazy! They’re crazy!” he said.

The US empire “wants to suppress powers, and they want to suppress nations as well, like Nicaragua,” Ortega went on. “We are a strategic point, and that is where the yanqui persecution of Nicaragua comes from, because here there is a giant resource, which is a canal through Nicaragua.”

And US government officials “don’t want, they have never wanted, as long as Nicaragua has existed, they have imposed treaties so that Nicaragua would not sign any agreement with any country of the world, even European countries, if they don’t authorize it. They gave themselves the right over our land. Because there were traitorous sell-out governments, and they gave themselves the right to say to the Europeans, here you cannot enter, here we will decide the canal, we the United States, the yanqui empire.”

“We are in the middle of that battle, in that struggle, and it is a struggle, yes, one in which we are advancing,” Ortega said.

“Simply, what I can say is that, despite the empire’s attempts to destroy our country, here is Nicaragua, on its feet, firm and moving forward,” the president declared. “Despite the fact that they have tried to destroy the economy, they have killed, spreading terror, they have put into practice terrorism in Nicaragua, they have laundered billions of dollars in Nicaragua to spread terrorism.”

“And there they are doing the calculations where they are carrying out investigations into the infamous foundations, and millions of dollars are showing up here, millions there, and we are talking about millions of dollars to be used to try to destroy the Nicaraguan people. And they have failed.”

Sandinista women lost arms hands revolution Ortega

Sandinista women who lost their hands and arm in the revolutionary struggle, honored by President Daniel Ortega on the 42nd anniversary celebration (Photo credit: Canal 6)

While on stage for the anniversary celebration, Ortega honored two female guerrilla fighters who had lost their arms or hands in the Sandinista armed struggle. He also praised the revolutionaries who in the 1980s fought the CIA-trained Contras, which he referred to as “the yanqui government’s mercenaries, criminals, terrorists.”

Before his speech, Ortega grabbed a giant Nicaraguan flag and declared, “This flag does not have and will not have any stars!” It was a symbolic denunciation of the US government’s desperate attempt to try to reimpose control over Nicaragua.

Ortega was also referencing a popular Sandinista song called Soberanía (Sovereignty), which went viral in Nicaragua this July, and was performed on stage at the celebration. The tune has become a unifying anthem for the Sandinista Front’s 2021 electoral campaign. Its lyrics read as follows:

Sovereignty in my land is written in large letters

And not in ink but rather in blood, throughout history

Here we do not want foreign interference

It will never be the same when a Nicaraguan speaks compared to someone outside

Outside, outside they can say what they want

But if you are here in Nicaraguan land, respect my flag

The blue and white flag, which does not have a star

Here all countries have their ambassadors

But some of those those men do not respect diplomacy

And there is one, with his arrogance, who makes his way in the White House

And if he wants to speak, he should abandon his position

And he will see how short his time on this Earth lasts

I am not speaking about war, it is only a demand

That he can speak his BS, but outside the country

Outside, outside they can say what they want

But if you are here in Nicaraguan land, respect my flag

The blue and white flag, which does not have a star

For which Sandino raised up the Red and Black [flag]

Nicaraguan VP: Poverty is a ‘crime against humanity’ imposed by imperialism

In her speech at the 42nd anniversary event, Vice President Rosario Murillo also strongly condemned “the most brutal aggressions of North American imperialism” and the “diabolical imperialist threat.”

Murillo also put an emphasis on the need to “continue fighting against poverty, that imperialist imposition that has been used to dominate, divide, diminish.”

The Vice President declared, “We fight against poverty, which is hatred, which is a crime against humanity, and we fight so that its promoters stop those hatreds that they impose with methods that are considered novel or unconventional, but we refuse to refer to them as ‘soft’ or ‘color [revolutions],’ because nothing is light or easygoing or colorful in the shameless and dark minds in the dens where the colonialists and imperialists of the planet plot their crimes.”

This July, the Sandinista Front launched a new five-year National Plan to Fight Against Poverty, especially dedicated to further developing the country and raising living standards for working-class people.

William Grigbsy, a prominent Nicaraguan radio host whose daily program Sin Fronteras (Without Borders) is influential within the Sandinista movement, reflected on Murillo’s speech, emphasizing that the vice president referred to poverty as a “crime against humanity.”

“To me, this is one of the most powerful things that Rosario said,” Grigsby commented. “Poverty is an imperialist imposition. It is the maximum expression of capitalism. Poverty is an imposition; it is not something that we are because we want to be, or because we are stupid, as some people say. No brother, they have imposed it on us, creating the rules to impoverish us, to make us poor, and to live with that terrible scourge that is poverty

Grigsby emphasized the country’s contrast with Haiti: “It is a nation that has so much wealth. But they are pillaging it. The copper, the other minerals, it is being stolen, by the Canadians, the yanquis, the French, and they keep plundering it, in the north of Haiti. They are the owners. They even own the police.”

Grigsby added, “It is the same that has been done against us, that has been against the Salvadoreans, the Hondurans, the Mexicans, any country. They have pillaged these countries and imposed the crime against humanity they call poverty.”

*

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 images in this article are from The Grayzone 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Human rights lawyer Steven Donziger said Monday that he is a victim of an “obvious travesty of justice” and vowed to appeal after a judge found him guilty on six counts of criminal contempt of court.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska marks the latest development in a case that stems from Donziger’s role in securing a historic, multibillion-dollar settlement against Chevron over the oil giant’s devastating pollution of the Ecuadorian Amazon.

Chevron has not paid any of the 2011 settlement, which the corporation claims was improperly obtained.

While the Ecuadorian Supreme Court upheld the original settlement, Chevron has relentlessly pushed its fraud claims in U.S. court. In 2014, a federal judge with connections to Chevron ruled—based on testimony from a witness who has since admitted to lying—that Donziger was guilty of a “pattern of racketeering activity,” a charge he has denied.

Donziger was then ordered to turn over his cell phone and computer to Chevron. When he appealed on the grounds that the devices contained client information, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan hit the attorney with criminal contempt charges that ultimately landed him under house arrest, where he has remained for more than 700 days.

In a statement (pdf) Monday, Donziger characterized Preska’s ruling as “the latest attempt by Chevron and its judicial allies to criminalize me and to send a message of intimidation to legitimate human rights lawyers who successfully challenge the major polluters of the fossil fuel industry.”

“The decision marks a sad day for the rule of law, for our democracy, and for our planet,” Donziger added. “The United States has now become one of those countries where environmental advocates are attacked, put in jail, or even murdered for doing their jobs successfully.”

Donziger went on to describe Preska’s decision as “the result of a patently unfair trial process that she and Judge Kaplan structured to undermine my defense and to make me appear guilty.”

In 2019, after the Southern District of New York declined to take up the case against Donziger, Kaplan appointed a Chevron-connected private law firm to pursue the prosecution. Kaplan then handpicked Preska—previously a member of the Chevron-funded Federalist Society—to preside over the case.

In his statement Monday, Donziger said Preska “let Chevron’s own lawyers testify” against him “while protecting them from having to disclose how much Chevron paid them.”

“Judge Preska already has detained me in my home for 720 days when the longest sentence ever given for my supposed ‘crime’ is 90 days of home confinement,” Donziger said. “We have a strong appeal and I look forward to the opportunity to brief the appellate court on this obvious travesty of justice. I also repeat my call for Judge Preska to release me immediately so I can return to my human rights work and help those in Ecuador who are suffering and dying because of Chevron’s dumping of billions of gallons of cancer-causing toxic waste into the Amazon.”

From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Chevron’s Devastating Pollution of Ecuadorian Amazon: Donziger Slams Criminal Contempt Ruling as ‘Message of Intimidation’ to Human Rights Lawyers
  • Tags: , , , ,

What’s Actually Going On in Cuba?

July 27th, 2021 by Helen Yaffe

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On Sunday 11 July, dozens of anti-government protests, apparently coordinated via social media, took place simultaneously throughout Cuba. In several places, including in San Antonio on the outskirts of Havana and in Matanzas, where Covid-19 cases have been surging, protests turned violent, with windows smashed, shops looted, cars overturned, rocks thrown and people assaulted.

The international media has exaggerated and manipulated these events to depict mass opposition to the Cuban government, police repression of peaceful protests and a regime in crisis. Meanwhile, the role of external forces, the existence of a concerted social media war on Cuba, the pernicious impact of US sanctions and the mobilisation of thousands of Cubans in support of the revolutionary government have been deliberately downplayed or ignored.

In most of the Americas, including in the US, such social disturbances are common, and often involve serious casualties and multiple arrests. In Cuba, however, the last violent protest was the Maleconazo uprising in 1994 – the worst year of the so-called ‘special period’ of economic crisis in which Cuba’s GDP fell by 35% after the collapse of the socialist bloc which accounted for nearly 90% of Cuba’s trade. Hoping to push the country over the edge, the US government enacted the Torricelli Act in 1992 and Helms Burton Act in 1996, tightening US sanctions and obstructing Cuba’s trade with the rest of the world. While scarce resources were harnessed to prioritise welfare, Cubans faced shortages in every sector: food, fuel, medicines, housing, industry, transport, and so on. Life was tough.

These conditions are returning to Cuba today as a direct result of US sanctions. Reversing Barack Obama’s tentative rapprochement, the Trump administration tightened the US blockade to unprecedented levels, adding 243 new actions, measures and sanctions to cut off Cuba’s trade with the world, fine ships carrying fuel to Cuba, scare away foreign investors, block remittances and family visits, and prevent Cuba’s access to the international financial system which is dominated by US dollars.

Over 50 of those coercive measures have been taken since the beginning of the pandemic, severely impacting Cuba’s capacity to import medical ventilators, spare parts, syringes, medicines and their raw materials, food and fuel. Even international donations of medical supplies to Cuba are blocked. This creates an agonising dichotomy: thousands of Cuban medical specialists have treated Covid-19 patients in 40 countries and the island of Cuba has the only domestically developed Covid-19 vaccines in Latin America, and yet Cubans face exhausting daily queues for basic goods. Their frustration should not surprise anyone.

With the combined impact of sanctions and the pandemic, Cuba’s GDP fell by 11% in 2020; tourism fell 75% and imports fell 30% compared to 2019, hence the unfilled shelves and long queues. At the same time, the social media campaign, oiled with millions of US Congress-approved dollars and orchestrated from Miami, blames the Cuban government for these hardships and dismisses US sanctions as an excuse or a lie. It seeks to channel the Cuban people’s frustrations into political opposition.

Since late 2020, Miami-based social media ‘influencers’ and YouTubers have urged Cubans to take to the streets, with some even offering money, or phone credit, to anyone who carries out, films and uploads acts of violent disorder and arson.

At an international press conference on 13 July, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez presented evidence of a new media campaign. On 15 June, the hashtag #SOSCuba was launched by a US company, the same day it was authorised to receive state funding. On 5 July, hashtags appeared calling for a “humanitarian corridor” in Cuba, with bots and troll farms being used to disseminate messages on Twitter through fake accounts – one doing five retweets per second on 10 and 11 July. Twitter users changed their geolocations to look like they were in Cuba, and images of both a huge protest in Egypt and of Argentinians celebrating their America Cup victory were credited as mass mobilisations in Havana. The following Friday, a video claiming to show Cuban police shooting a man dead at his home was exposed by Cuban media when the same man was interviewed in good health.

The Trump sanctions and the social media war are the contemporary versions of the ‘two track’ policy pursued by the US since the Cuban Revolution: economic sanctions and the promotion of an internal opposition. The objective is ‘regime change’, as articulated in the secret memorandum of 6 April 1960 written by Lester Mallory, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs. Recognising popular support for the revolutionary government, he advised measures to “weaken the economic life of Cuba […] to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government”.

Cuban President Miguel Diaz Canel responded to events on 11 July in a similar manner to Fidel Castro during the Maleconazo in 1994. He went to San Antonio to speak to local people, recognised their legitimate frustrations, and then led a march through the community in defence of the Cuban Revolution.

Hours later, he appeared on television to inform the public about the events, acknowledge Cubans’ daily difficulties and give a fervent denunciation of US imperialism and the social media campaign. He declared: “The streets belong to the revolutionaries!”. At that signal, thousands of Cubans mobilised in towns and cities around the country to defend Cuban socialism.

The following days have seen a tense calm, with one violent protest in Arroyo Naranjo on the outskirts of Havana in which one person died and more sustained injuries, including police. Small skirmishes have taken place since. Internet access was temporarily suspended, presumably to prevent social media being used to coordinate more protests. Car radios and workplace televisions were tuned into a four-hour broadcast by the president and government ministers who discussed the events, analysed the country’s situation, and denounced US intervention. From Florida, there were threats of a naval flotilla and calls for military intervention.

With mind-boggling hypocrisy, Joe Biden expressed his concern about the situation, and called on the Cuban government to listen to the people. But if Biden were actually concerned, and listening to the Cuban people, he would lift the sanctions. This was a demand I heard from every Cuban I spoke to at a rally of 200,000 in Havana on 17 July, when hundreds of thousands took to the streets around the island.

Cuban authorities have made it clear that violent disorder will be punished through the legal system. There may be more conflict ahead, but as the lines are drawn, no-one should underestimate the resilience of the Cuban Revolution.

*

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.

Helen Yaffe is a senior lecturer in economic and social history at the University of Glasgow. She is the author of We Are Cuba: How a Revolutionary People Have Survived in a Post-Soviet World and Che Guevara: The Economics of Revolution.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The contemporary apocalypse as seen by Andrew Bacevich in his latest book, “After the Apocalypse”, consists of four different horsemen: first mentioned are the severe climate effects of global warming; Trump “toxic and divisive” presidency is mentioned next;  followed by the Covid-19 pandemic and its subsequent economic effects; and finally, “a mass movement demanding a reckoning with the nation’s legacy of racism”.

“After the Apocalypse” is a short book, more of an extended essay.   Bacevich’s goal is a view to revising “the premises informing America’s role in the world.  Put simply, basic U.S. policy must change.”   He does so by identifying “the connecting tissue between the delusions of the recent past and the trauma that are their progeny.”  This is achieved through examining the “manufactured memory” of different aspects of U.S. geopolitics, bureaucracy, national security, and imperial mismanagement.

The main part of the book presents the many facets of this manufactured memory.  The language used as descriptors leaves the reader with no doubt about Bacevich’s perspective.  Without extensive quoting this vocabulary tells a lot about the tales:  arrogance, ignorance, delusions, obsolescence, reckless irresponsibility, miscalculations, hapless, defective, self-inflicted and on.  Most of that refers to the establishment and its policies and personnel.  He is not quite so expansive on the population in general but his word choice in that sense is also quite summative:  lethargy, indifference, apathy.  He does recognize that much of the latter is because of most of the former.

Topics

In short Bacevich recognizes most of the problems occurring with the decline of the empire and provides sufficient information and detail to support his ideas.  His topics include Christianity, in particular in relation to the ‘homeland’ and China.  He acknowledges the financial advantage of the petrodollar as the global reserve currency.  Due to human depredations of the environment, “nature itself becomes the threat.”  He looks at the rise of China much more so than Russia, with a caveat on the latter as his first of three basic tenets of imperial management: don’t invade Russia.

In a sub-section titled “Plenty of daylight” Bacevich examines U.S. policy with Israel.  Along the way he recognizes “This de facto policy of colonization hugely complicates prospects of the “two-state solution” which successive U.S. administrations…consistently professed to support.”  Financially he identifies the obligation that makes it “incumbent upon the American taxpayer to sustain Israeli military superiority in perpetuity.”  In its relationship with Iran, Washington’s inflexibility obliges it “to take sides in disputes that are extraneous to core American interests.”

Unfortunately while examining the U.S.’ essential interests, the Palestinians are not directly mentioned other than through the use of the terms ‘colonization’ and ‘two-state solution’.

Solutions

It is Bacevich’s conclusion that provides the most room for thought, as Bacevich, in spite of his strong sense of what is happening in the U.S. and around the world, still retains some of his military perspectives (Colonel, U.S. Army, retired; currently Professor Emeritus of International Relations and History at the Boston University Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies).

The Isreali ties are not mentioned directly other than within a “change in fiscal priorities.The share of discretionary spending allocated to the military-industrial complex will have to shrink considerably.”

His strongest recommendations, very direct, are to quit NATO, which in essence means the end of NATO as any kind of power.  Further he calls for the U.S. to “liquidate” both Central Command (CENTCOM) and Africa Command (AFRICOM) and “once more classify terrorism as a criminal matter, falling under the purview of courts and law enforcement agencies” at all levels “rather than armies.”

Strangely enough, and this is where Bacevich’s residual militant thinking comes into play, is how he views China and its “provocations”  that have “caused unease throughout the region.”  He argues that “An abrupt change in the U.S.military posture in the Indo-Pacific could trigger such a disaster [an actual shooting war]”.  This is a rather backward logic, that maintaining the Indo-Pacific Command will help avoid actual conflict.  His main argument that a U.S. policy of “sustainable self-sufficiency will help to avert such a prospect” is given no definition.

1984

Militarism rises again as his final solution involves a “new North American Security Zone (NASZ)”  creating a “common cause with Canadian and Mexican forces in maintaining the integrity of the NASZ  perimeter.”  Does this not describe Orwell’s 1984 vision of Oceania and Eurasia (the latter now including Orwell’s Eastasia)?

As a Canadian, recognizing that we are already a large part of U.S.foreign policy, U.S. culture, and U.S. financial constructs, the last thing Canada needs is a stronger liaison with the U.S.  We are already pretty much a de facto fifty-first state although we pretend otherwise – our economies are fully linked as are our militaries.  Canada supports NATO, supports Israel in some aspects more strongly than the U.S., and supports other U.S. imperial interests across the world from Haiti, Venezuela, Cuba, over to Saudi Arabia, Russia, and China and on.  We do not need 1984 realized.

Sum

Andrew Bacevich has written an important work examining the U.S. empire.  Unfortunately he has not fully escaped from his inculturated need for military control of – something – in this case Canada and Mexico.  “After the Apocalypse” summarizes enough of U.S. history and current policies well enough to support his primary premise of deconstructing the “manufactured memory” in order to make progress domestically with less involvement in the world in its dominant military aspects.

*

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.

Jim Miles is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

CNN continued its wall to wall broadcasts calling for unvaccinated people to be punished, with analysts again calling for those who haven’t gotten the COVID shots to be segregated from society and forced to pay for tests every single day.

The latest CNN ravings come on the heels of a leaked internal email from CNN’s Washington bureau chief complaining that the “carrot” is no longer working in terms of convincing Americans to get vaccinated and that authorities need to start using the “stick.”

See this.

Americans Are So Gullible that They Fall for Alleged Facts from “Health Authorities” that Cannot Possibly Be Known

An example:  CNBC stated:

“In hospitals around the country, 97% of people admitted with Covid symptoms are unvaccinated, and 99.5% of all Covid deaths are also among the unvaccinated.”

CNBC provided no source, and there cannot possibly be a source. “Most people were vaccinated in mass clinics.  The vaccinations are not in their medical records.  There are no insurance claims for the vaccine, which was free.”

In other words, there is no way to know whether vaccinated or unvaccinated people are dying.

Again, the question before us is why are presstitutes and government health agencies concocting lies to scare people?

What the facts actually show is that it is the countries with the largest percentages of the populations vaccinated that are experiencing the most new cases.  The question is whether the new cases are illnesses caused by the vaccines.

See this.

Compared to Europeans Americans Are Sheep and Willingly Accept Tyranny

See this and 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.

Featured image is from NaturalNews.com

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This column high-lights the unethical/criminal attempts of  

the Trump-orchestrated, Biden-endorsed and Big Pharma-implemented Operation Warp-Speed,

the unethical plan to totally skip both short-and long-term animal safety and efficacy studies in order to promote potentially dangerous Covid-19 vaccines for both human adults and children.

Here is a very telling Announcement from the the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) website (May 4, 2021).

Be aware that the AAP membership relies on routine vaccinations for a large portion of the annual revenues)

“Children ages 2-11 could potentially be eligible for (the still-experimental) COVID-19 vaccine this fall. Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla, DVM, PhD (Doctor of Veterinary Medicine!), said on a quarterly earnings call Tuesday. He expects to request (experimental) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September. Under his plan, an EUA request for ages six months to 2 years would follow in the fourth quarter.

“Pfizer and its (German) partner BioNTech currently are waiting for an FDA decision on an EUA for adolescents aged 12-15 years.” (See this)

The Pfizer track record below was collated and edited by Dr. Gary G. Kohls

***

Why it’s Insane to Trust Pfizer’s or Moderna’s or Johnson & Johnson’s or AstraZeneca’s Experimental, Fast-tracked Vaccines for Covid-19

To back-up the accusation of “criminality” of Big Pharma corporations like vaccine-maker Pfizer, I attach a list of 14 Pfizer drugs that were FDA-approved for marketing before long-term safety Studies were done (Note that the corporate-controlled 1986 US Congress passed a law – signed by President Ronald Reagan – that made it against the law to sue pharmaceutical corporations for deaths or injuries caused by their vaccines!)

Pfizer is one of the largest multinational pharmaceutical (drugs and vaccines) companies on the planet – and one of the five largest vaccine manufacturers (the five are Pfizer, Sanofi, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline and Johnson & Johnson.  (AstraZeneca is # 10). Pfizer has faced numerous lawsuits – just in the US – for fraudulent marketing and medical injuries caused by its most profitable, drugs.

Pfizer holds the record for the largest fine paid for a health care fraud lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice. Pfizer paid $2.3 billion in fines, penalties, and settlement for illegal marketing claims.

For details see:

Video: Pfizer Has a Criminal Record. Is It Relevant?

By US Department of Justice, May 04, 2021

***

Here is a partial list of 14 of Pfizer’s most dangerous, most litigated, most potentially lethal drugs.

(NOTE:  If any reader had adverse effects to any of these Pfizer drugs, he/she might want to consult an attorney).

Celebrex, Bextra, Geodon, Zyvox, Lyrica, Neurontin, Protonix, Prempro, Chantix, Depo-Testosterone, Zoloft, Effexor, Lipitor, Xeljanz, etc

Celebrex and Bextra

Prizer promoted its two COX-2 pain relievers Celebrex and Bextra which generated 7000 lawsuits and a $894 million settlement. Both medications were me-too drugs similar to Merck’s infamous Vioxx, which caused 50,000 lawsuits because of cardiovascular deaths and injuries. Merck settled most of the cases with a $4.85 billion settlement.

Geodon, Zyvox, and Lyrica

Pfizer paid $1 billion to resolve allegations under the civil False Claims Act that the company illegally promoted four drugs –Bextra; Geodon, an anti-psychotic drug; Zyvox, an antibiotic; and Lyrica, an anti-epileptic drug – and caused false claims to be submitted to government health care programs for uses that were not medically accepted indications.

Neurontin

Pfizer paid out $142 million for committing racketeering fraud in the marketing of Neurontin.

Protonix

As part of a larger group of proton pump inhibitor lawsuits, Pfizer faced a number of Protonix lawsuits after it acquired drug company Wyeth who had been accused of marketing the drug for unapproved uses. In 2013, Pfizer agreed to pay $55 million to settle illegal marketing claims, but the company may still be facing lawsuits for permanent kidney damage caused by Protonix.

Prempro

Nearly 10,000 Prempro lawsuits were filed by women who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. The lawsuits were largely settled by 2012 for about $1 billion.

Chantix

Pfizer faced about 3,000 Chantix lawsuits filed by people who claimed they experienced suicidal thoughts and psychiatric disorders after using Chantix for smoking cessation. Pfizer set aside about $288 million and at least some of the cases were settled.

Depo-Testosterone

Thousands of cases of medical injury due to testosterone replacement therapy have been filed. Other drug companies have paid $ billions to settle their cases, however some Pfizer testosterone lawsuits were dismissed.

Zoloft

About 250 Zoloft lawsuits were filed, claiming Pfizer actively promoted the use of Zoloft to pregnant women despite knowledge of birth defect risks from their research.

Effexor

Effexor was a medication originally produced by Wyeth which has also been the cause of multiple lawsuits. People who filedEffexor lawsuits claimed that it caused birth defects, and separately, suicidal thoughts and behaviors. In September 2015, Effexor lawsuits were dismissed but may have been eligible to refile.

Lipitor

Pfizer’s drug that lowers cholesterol (but only minimally decreases heart attack and stroke risk) causes serious muscle necrosis (death), muscle weakness, diabetes and other unforeseen health defects has generated billions of dollars of lawsuits.

Xeljanz

Pfizer had failed to do long-term safety and efficacy studies on its new arthritis and ulcerative colitis drug prior to FDA-approval. Xeljanz was therefore only belatedly acknowledged by Pfizer to cause cancer, serious cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolism (such as pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis). Many lawsuits are now in progress.

*

Environmental Pollution Lawsuits Against Pfizer

In 1971 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked Pfizer to end its long-time practice of dumping industrial wastes from its plant in Groton, Connecticut in the Long Island Sound. The company was reported to be disposing of about 1 million gallons of waste each year by that method.

In 1991 Pfizer agreed to pay $3.1 million to settle EPA charges that the company seriously damaged the Delaware River by failing to install pollution-control equipment at one of its plants in Pennsylvania.

In 1994 Pfizer agreed to pay $1.5 million as part of a consent decree with the EPA in connection with its dumping at a toxic waste site in Rhode Island.

In 1998 Pfizer agreed to pay a civil penalty of $625,000 for environmental violations discovered at its research facilities in Groton, Connecticut.

In 2002 New Jersey fined Pfizer $538,000 for failing to properly monitor wastewater discharged from its plant in Parsippany.

In 2003, shortly after Pfizer acquired Pharmacia, the company (along with Monsanto) agreed to pay some $700 million to settle a lawsuit over the dumping of known-to-be-carcinogenic PCBs in Anniston, Alabama.

In 2005 Pfizer agreed to pay $22,500 to settle EPA claims that the company failed to properly notify state and federal officials of a 2002chemical release from its plant in Groton that seriously injured several employees and necessitated a major emergency response.

Also in 2005, Pfizer agreed to pay $46,250 to settle charges that its Pharmacia & Upjohn operation had violated federal air pollution rules at its plant in Kalamazoo, Michigan.

In 2008 Pfizer agreed to pay a $975,000 civil penalty to resolved federal charges that it violated the Clean Air Act at its former manufacturing plant in Groton, Connecticut in the period from 2002 to 2005.

Environmental groups in New Jersey have criticized as inadequate a clean-up plan devised by Pfizer and the EPA for the American Cyanamid Superfund site in Bridgewater, which is considered one of the worst toxic waste sites in the country. Pfizer inherited responsibility for the clean-up through its 2009 purchase of Wyeth.

*

The Medico-legal Justifications for Refusing Experimental Vaccines that Have Not yet Been Tested for Long-term Safety OR Effectiveness

Vaccines that Haven’t yet been Tested on Lab Animals are Being Promoted for Use in infants, Children and Adolescents!

Shame on the following groups of vaccinology-illiterate, Corporate-financed OR controlled individuals who know next-to-nothing about the many dangers of inoculated vaccines and yet urge

1) current or past US President,

2) US Cabinet-member (including NIH, CDC, NIAID/Fauci, FDA),

3) Federal or State Congressperson,

4) State Governor,

5) City Mayor,

6) City Councilmember (or other elected officials),

7) Every University Professor whose institution takes Big Pharma research money,

8) every journalist that blindly pushed Big Pharma’s vaccine agendas while simultaneously not mentioning that every vaccine being (unethically, endlessly and nauseatingly) promoted are still EXPERIMENTAL (ie, not yet proven to be either safe or effective either long-term or short-term.

Here is a list of collaboratively-generated statements of irrefutable truths that need to be considered before some “government” agent approaches you and offers to inoculate you with a mixture of unknown ingredients that, even if known and confirmed, hasn’t yet been proven to be either safe or effective:

I do not know what is in your vaccine, and I don’t trust ANY global, profit-making corporation to tell the truth about what is in any of them.

I do not believe your vaccine is safe – only partly because lab animal safety or efficacy studies were never done on the product (thanks to President Trump’s, Big Pharma-generated and President Biden-endorsed, the dangerously fast-tracked Operation Warp-speed.

I know that many vaccines have been found to contain inherently unsafe toxic adjuvants and toxic foreign materials.

I know that toxic contamination is present in vaccines which are easily preventable with current technology. This suggests intentional contamination of vaccines with toxic agents.

I know that many vaccines are not effective and actually cause the ailment they are purported to mitigate.

I know that adjuvants are put into vaccines to “shock” the immune system into extreme response, and that causes biological “crisis”, stress and damage to the immune system, the blood and the whole body.

I know that vaccine death and injury statistics and information are suppressed/ignored by the mainstream media (including PBS and NPR!) which receives billions of dollars in Big Pharma advertising annually or are actually financially-sponsored by Foundations that have pharmaceutical industry roots.

I know that honest vaccine death and injury statistics and information are suppressed by government in which pharmaceutical regulatory agencies are largely run and controlled by Big Pharma industry executives, loyalists and lobbyists.

I am aware of reports that vaccine experiments have caused tens of thousands of cases of deaths, sterilization, polio, autism and other diseases and injuries globally.

I know that vaccines are so hazardous that the vaccine industry lobbied for and received (in 1986) legal immunity by the US government from the harm (including deaths and disabilities) vaccines are known to cause.

I know that taxpayers have paid billions of dollars to families whose members were injured or killed by vaccines.

I do not trust the profit-motivated vaccine industry or the government agencies (or international agencies) which seem to be acting on behalf of vaccine sales, share price, promotion and the suppression of information of vaccine hazards.

I know that most vaccines have not been tested or proven to be safe – either short-term or long-term.

I know that under current law all physicians and healthcare workers must have my fully-informed consent to administer medicine or vaccines to me. My consent is hereby denied and refused.

I know that non-physicians, (particularly elected officials or bureaucrats), may not administer medicines or vaccines, much less “mandate” medical treatments for the general population.

I know it is possible to mitigate and control all contagious diseases with safer and more effective means than unproven -to-be -safe vaccines.

Anyone who claims the authority or duty to inject materials in my body without my fully-informed consent is my enemy and is attempting to commit a criminal act – and is prosecutable.

I will treat anyone who threatens to violate my body as a criminal assailant.

No, you may not vaccinate me or my children. If you try, I will exercise my right to self-defense against you and your accomplices to any extent I deem necessary to protect ourselves.

Forced vaccination is not authorized or permitted under Founding Law.

If there is a code or statutory “mandate” for forced medication, it is unconstitutional, unlawful and unenforceable.

You may not attempt or threaten non-consensual vaccination, and if you do, you will be dealt with in a manner to restore rule of law, justice and to protect our right to personal physical security.

Your ignorance of vaccine hazards and medical rights and your inability to understand the facts above do not give you any immunity or any license to commit the crime of forced non-consensual medication.

Can you name every ingredient of your vaccine? Presumably not.

Can you predict the physical effects of each of those ingredients? No.

Can you predict the consequences of combining those ingredients? No.

Have you offered to personally take full responsibility to pay for any harm your vaccine causes? No.

Therefore, you do not have the slightest authority or privilege to forcibly administer vaccines.

*

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 Gary G. Kohls lives in the USA and writes articles that deal with the dangers of fascism, corporatism, totalitarianism, militarism, racism, malnutrition, and Big Pharma’s over-drugging and over-vaccinating agendas. In addition, his columns deal with cultural movements that threaten democracy, war, civility, health, freedom, the future of the children and the sustainability and livability of the planet.

His Duty to Warn columns have been re-published around the world for the last decade. Dr Kohls frequently writes about Big Vaccine’s over-vaccination agendas and Big Medicine’s over-screening, over-diagnosing and over-treating agendas.

Many of Dr Kohls’ columns have been archived at a number of websites, including:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/gary-g-kohls;

http://freepress.org/geographic-scope/national;

https://www.lewrockwell.com/author/gary-g-kohls/?ptype=article; and

https://www.transcend.org/tms/author/?a=Gary%20G.%20Kohls,%20MD

Featured image is from Shutterstock

Lebanon Is on the Brink of Social Explosion and Breakdown

July 27th, 2021 by Steven Sahiounie

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Najib Mikati has received 73 votes from the Lebanese Parliament, making him the new Prime Minister elect.  He stated he would not have accepted the position unless he had international support, and he agreed with President Michel Aoun to form a government using the French model.

The UN will co-host along with France an international conference scheduled for August 4.  Diplomates believe the topics will be how to force Lebanese political elites to agree on reforms, and how to deal with the humanitarian crisis unfolding.  The fate of the Lebanese Army also is threatened, and will surely garner attention.

Lebanon has been without a government for nine months, which has further acerbated the economic meltdown.

The World Bank issued a shocking report that ranks Lebanon as one of the three world’s worst financial crises in more than 150 years.  The Lebanese currency has lost more than 90 per cent of its value since late 2019, and its GDP has fallen by some 40 per cent since 2018, in an economic free fall. The report largely blames the country’s sectarian political elites for the crisis.

The cost of food has soared by 700% over the past two years with increases quickening. “The price of a basic food basket increased by more than 50 percent in less than a month,” Nasser Yassin, told AFP Wednesday.

The Lebanese pound is around 15 times the official rate, with the black market trading at 22,000 to the dollar.

The government is almost out of hard currency, which means they can’t buy staple items such as medicines and gasoline. Miles-long lines of angry motorists wait at gasoline stations to fill up. Even the biggest hospitals complain they have run out of some medicines.

Water

Water is life, and the Lebanese water system is on life-support. At any moment the entire system could collapse, leaving millions at immediate risk of having no water. The UN Children’s Fund, UNICEF, is warning of an imminent disaster.

Over the next four to six weeks, most water pumping stations will cease functioning due to the economic crisis, which has caused shortages in funding supplies, chlorine and spare parts.

After the collapse, water prices will soar by 200 per cent per month as residents rush to find alternative private suppliers.

“The water sector is being squeezed to destruction by the current economic crisis in Lebanon, unable to function due to the dollarized maintenance costs, water loss caused by non-revenue water, the parallel collapse of the power grid and the threat of rising fuel costs,” said Yukie Mokuo, UNICEF Representative in the country.

“A loss of access to the public water supply could force households to make extremely difficult decisions regarding their basic water, sanitation and hygiene needs,” she added.

Almost 2 million people have access to just 35 liters per day, compared to the national average of 165 liters prior to 2020. The price of bottled drinking water has doubled over the past year.

“At the height of the summer months, with COVID-19 cases beginning to rise again due to the Delta variant, Lebanon’s precious public water system is on life support and could collapse at any moment,” Ms Mokuo said.

Lebanon is ready to run out of fuel oil to power its electric power generators, but Iraq has stepped in with an interesting, yet complicated deal.

Fuel oil deal

Iraq will provide Lebanon with fuel oil for its power plants in exchange for medical services, with electricity shortages impacting hospitals.

Lebanon’s energy minister, Raymond Ghajar, said the deal would allow “the purchase of one million tonnes of Iraqi state fuel oil on behalf of Electricite du Liban (EDL)” over the course of a year.

The Iraqi oil cannot be directly used by the power stations, so Lebanon will exchange the Iraqi oil for fuel oil from other providers.

Iraq’s health infrastructure is ruins and has never recovered following the attack, invasion and occupation of the US.  Iraqi governmental corruption has prevented investment in public services. Lebanon will offer Iraq some medical aid in exchange for the oil.

Hospitals and COVID

Lebanon’s health services struggle with lack of medicines, doctor and staff leaving for work abroad, and now are facing almost no electricity.

“All hospitals … are now less prepared than they were during the wave at the start of the year,” said Firass Abiad, the manager of the largest public hospital in the country battling COVID-19.

“We only get two to three hours of mains electricity, and for the rest of the time it’s up to the generators,” Abiad said.

During the spring, the COVID cases dropped, but now they are spiking back up as Lebanese abroad flock home for summer visits, bringing the virus along with them.

On Thursday alone, 98 people tested positive for COVID-19 on arrival at Beirut airport, the health ministry said.

“It could be catastrophic if this rise in coronavirus numbers leads to a spike like the one we saw at the start of the year,” Abiad said.

The Port anniversary

Lebanon will mark the one-year anniversary of the horrific explosion at the port of Beirut, which killed more than 200 people, injured more than 7,500 and left about 300 people homeless.

Most effected have still not fully recovered.  The explosion was like a small nuclear blast, but what has followed over the year has been a gradual dissent into misery and hopelessness. Many blame Lebanese officials for storing hundreds of tons of highly explosive ammonium nitrate at the port, which ignited.

Many Lebanese are hungry, angry and broken.  They want to see a sign of improvement, a reason for hope.  Perhaps, the new government, and the international meeting will offer up some signs for a fresh start for Lebanon.  For this, we can hope.

*

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

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from Mideast Discourse

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Lebanon Is on the Brink of Social Explosion and Breakdown
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The exchange of fire between the Turkish Armed Forces and the factions it backs against the Kurdish groups is continuing with full force in Northeastern Syria.

The most recent flare up began when a Turkish MRAP Kirpi armored vehicle was targeted with a guided missile while on its way to a military base in the vicinity of the town of al-Bab in the northern part of Aleppo province.

Two soldiers were killed and two were injured in the incident.

Turkish forces and Turkish-backed militants are targeted by Kurdish militants on a regular basis.

Two days earlier, the ALF (Afrin Liberation Front) released videos of three recent attacks on Turkish-backed forces in the northern countryside of Syria’s Aleppo.

Ankara and the factions it supports never fail to respond to provocation, or carry out one of their own.

Following the attack on the armored vehicle, at least seven Kurdish fighters were killed in northern Syria as part of the retaliatory actions by the Turkish military.

The Turkish MoD published photos of the ALF and People’s Protection Units (YPG) military positions which have been hit in response to the attack.

Bayraktar TB-2 drones were reportedly spotted flying over northern Aleppo during the TAF engagement shots.

Meanwhile, artillery of the Turkish-baked Syrian National Army (SNA) bombarded positions of the Syrian Defense Forces (SDF) on the Hazwan axis in the eastern countryside of Aleppo.

At the same time, Turkish military forces shelled the SDF positions in the village of Maraanaz in the northern countryside of Aleppo.

The Kurdish group, however, didn’t simply sit idly by and receive the punishment.

A barrage of rockets targeted the Turkish-occupied Syrian Afrin region in the northern countryside of Aleppo.

The rockets were reportedly launched from a pocket held by the Kurdish-led SDF to the south of Afrin.

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) maintains several posts within the pocket.

While this escalation is taking place, the al-Qaeda affiliated so-called “moderate opposition” in Greater Idlib continues shelling SAA positions, despite the ceasefire.

Russian aerospace forces (VKS) continue raining punishment for the third day in a row, but it has led to nothing.

The latest airstrikes took place on July 24 and targeted the outskirts of the towns of Kabani and Duwayr al-Akrad in the northern countryside of Lattakia.

Meanwhile, taking advantage of the general chaos in the entire Northern region, the US transferred a supply convoy of 75 trucks carrying armored vehicles, weapons, equipment, logistic supplies as well as construction materials to its military base near the town of al-Shaddadi on July 24.

Earlier this year, an airfield was built in the al-Omar oil fields in southeastern Deir Ezzor.

A large base is also under construction in northeastern al-Hasakah, near the border line with Iraq and Turkey.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

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

U.S. Sanctions: Weapons of Economic Warfare

July 27th, 2021 by Donald Monaco

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On July 22, 2021, the Biden regime inflicted punitive economic sanctions on Cuban government officials extending Trump era sanctions that targeted the tourism and energy industries and stopped remittances being sent to the beleaguered island.   

Shortages of food, medicine and electricity caused by the U.S. embargo have provoked street protests encouraged on social media in what is ironically called the “Bay of Tweets.”  The U.S. State Department, National Endowment for Democracy, U.S. Agency for International Development and U.S. Agency for Global Media have provided grants to Cuban Hip-Hop artists, musicians, bloggers and journalists to spread discontent among the Cuban people.  The NED and USAID are organizations used by the CIA to fund coup d’états around the world.  The U.S. is currently spending $48 million per year to finance regime change in Cuba.

Cuba will never be forgiven for nationalizing the properties of American banks and corporations in the aftermath of a revolution that overthrew the U.S. sponsored dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista in 1959.  A trade embargo was imposed on Cuba by the Eisenhower administration in response to Cuba’s nationalization of U.S. corporate owned oil-refineries that refused to refine Soviet crude oil in 1960. Eisenhower had prohibited the sale of oil to Cuba forcing the country to turn to the Soviet Union to meet its energy needs.  President Kennedy extended the trade embargo in 1962 to include all products produced in Cuba.  The Kennedy brothers, John and Attorney General Robert, were also responsible for authorizing the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 and CIA operation Mongoose in 1962, to subvert the Cuban revolution.

The sixty-year economic embargo cost the small island nation an estimated $130 billion according to a United Nations agency.  The Cuban government puts the cost at $1.1 trillion.

The U.S. government imposes draconian economic sanctions on various countries around the world ostensibly to oppose terrorism and violations of human rights.  That the policy is being implemented by the most violent, terroristic and lawless government on the planet is an irony not lost upon the victims of empire.

As of June 2021, the U.S. Department of the Treasury maintains sanctions on twenty-three nations.  Chief among them are Iran, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Russia, China and the aforementioned Cuba.  What do these countries have in common?  They wish to exercise economic and political sovereignty in a world dominated by the U.S. hegemon.

Although economic sanctions may seem benign, they kill hundreds of thousands of people just as effectively as cruise missiles.  And like cruise missiles, they are a weapon of war, the only difference being the victims of economic sanctions suffer a slow death.  And a silent one.

A report by Mark Weisbrot and Jeffrey Sachs published by the Center for Economic and Policy Research documents the horrendous death of 40,000 civilians killed by U.S. sanctions in Venezuela.  The authors rightly conclude that economic sanctions are a form of collective punishment prohibited by the Hague and Geneva Conventions, international law and U.S. law.

Weisbrot and Sachs note Venezuela earns foreign exchange by the sale of oil.  The revenue is used to purchase food, medicine, medical equipment, spare parts and equipment needed to maintain water, electrical and transportation systems.   By restricting the sale of oil on the U.S. and world market, freezing billions of dollars of assets and prohibiting access to U.S. financial markets, the American government effectively cut off major sources of Venezuela’s income, precipitating an economic crisis in the impoverished country.

The result is economic privation, disease, death, mass migration and social turmoil in a nation suffering from hyperinflation and depression.  Economic warfare extends political warfare.  The U.S. government engineered coup attempts in 2002 against Hugo Chavez and 2018 against Nicolas Maduro.  Both failed.  The Bolivarian revolution persists but at a terrible cost in loss of life.

Exacerbating human suffering is a calculated aim of U.S. policy designed to engineer social instability and regime change.

The most horrific example is Iraq.  A study by Thomas Nagy reveals how the United States used U.N. sanctions to deliberately destroy Iraq’s supply of clean water during the 1991 Gulf War.  Nagy uncovered Defense Intelligence Agency documents that calculated how many Iraqis would die from waterborne diseases resulting from the ban on chlorine imports during the sanctions regime.   The DIA documents calculate the probability of cholera, hepatitis and typhoid epidemics that would result from the prohibition of chlorine imports needed to purify water.

The U.N. sanctions were kept in place after the United States intentionally bombed Iraq’s water treatment facilities, hospitals, health centers, schools, textile factories, automobile plants, chemical, petrochemical, agricultural, transportation, communication and industrial facilities.  Iraq was literally bombed into a pre-industrial age as meticulously documented by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark.  The architects of the Gulf War and U.N. sanctions regime are guilty of war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and violations of the U.N. charter.  The George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton regimes positioned human barbarism at the core of U.S. policy while extolling democracy and human rights.

The sanctions targeted Iraq’s children who died at a rate of 5,000 per month.  Over the 13-year life span of the sanctions regime, over 1.5 million Iraqis lost their lives, including 500,000 children.  The economic sanctions imposed on Iraq were as cruel and monstrous as they were genocidal.

Iran is another country being targeted by U.S. sanctions.  The Trump regime re-imposed economic sanctions on Iran after leaving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear agreement in 2018.

A World Bank report shows that Iran’s GDP contracted at an accelerated rate of 4.7% in 2018/19 to 8.2% in 2019/20.  Oil and gas value fell by 37% as production dropped to 2 million barrels per day, a three-decade low.  Besides the oil and gas sector of the economy, Trump’s sanctions targeted the construction, basic metals and petrochemical industries.  Gas prices have doubled and inflation has skyrocketed seeing prices increase 34.8% for food, housing and consumer services.  As in Venezuela, there are shortages of food and medicine in Iran.   The Iranian government is now running a deficit because of the decline in oil revenue caused by sanctions that have compounded lower gas prices on the global market.

What the language of statistics obscures is the daily hardship and suffering of a people living in countries assaulted by the United States.  A report by Human Rights Watch documents how U.S. secondary sanctions on any “non-US entity” that conducts financial or commercial transactions with Iran have impacted the health care system so extensively, that the “right to health” of the Iranian people is being jeopardized.  Because of the sanctions, Iran cannot get essential medicines and medical equipment necessary for treating critically ill patients.

As with Cuba, Iraq and Venezuela, economic sanctions in Iran are punitive and constitute collective punishment of a people inflicted as part of a strategy of regime change embraced by the U.S. government.

The United States is the most conspicuous abuser of human rights, sponsor of terrorism and perpetrator war of any country in the world.  Economic sanction/embargo is only one tool in the arsenal of imperialism.  If any country needs to be sanctioned because of its lawless behavior, it is the United States.

On March 18, 2021, U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken took part in a confrontational meeting with representatives of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  During the meeting, he stated that actions of the Chinese government “threaten the rules-based order that maintains global stability.”  Blinken said that the United States wanted to “strengthen the rules-based international order.”  The arrogance of these statements is breathtaking.

For functionaries like Blinken, that the United States makes the rules in a global order dominated by American empire is beyond question, despite the Chinese Foreign Minister’s observation that the “US does not represent the world, it only represents the government of the United States.”

On March 17, 2021, Blinken announced U.S. sanctions on Chinese officials for alleged human rights abuses in their treatment of “pro-democracy” protesters in Hong Kong.  It is the centrality of the U.S. financial system and the use of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency that allows the United States to invoke sanctions on any country in the world to advance its imperialist agenda.  The United States only supports “pro-democracy” activists in Hong Kong, Venezuela, Cuba and elsewhere if they can be used as pawns in a chess game where checkmate means regime change in the targeted country.

Sabotaging economies, fomenting coups, rigging elections, inciting popular uprisings, encouraging ethnic strife, funding death squads, promoting separatist and proxy wars, assassinating leaders, bombing and invading countries are the methods by which U.S. empire is sustained.

Sanctions are a form of economic warfare.  The criminality of economic sanctions derives from their lethal and ghastly consequences.  Economic warfare must be exposed for what it truly is: an insidious display of state violence and terror.

*

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.

Donald Monaco is a political analyst who lives in Brooklyn, New York.  He received his Master’s Degree in Education from the State University of New York at Buffalo in 1979 and was radicalized by the Vietnam War.  He writes from an anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist perspective.  His recent book is titled, The Politics ofTerrorism, and is available at amazon.com

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. 

Featured image is from MintPress News

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Over a week ago the excruciatingly slow Doha peace talks between the Kabul government and the Taliban resumed, and then they dragged on for two days observed by envoys from the EU, US and UN.

Nothing happened. They could not even agree on a ceasefire during Eid al-Adha. Worse, there’s no road map for how negotiations might pick up in August. Taliban supreme leader Haibatullah Akhundzada duly released a statement: the Taliban “strenuously favors a political settlement.”

But how? Irreconcilable differences rule. Realpolitik dictates there’s no way the Taliban will embrace Western liberal democracy: They want the restoration of an Islamic emirate.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, for his part, is damaged goods even in Kabul diplomatic circles where he’s derided as too stubborn, not to mention incapable of rising to the occasion. The only possible solution in the short term is seen as an interim government.

Yet there is no leader around with national appeal – no Commander Massoud figure. There are only regional warlords – whose militias protect their own local interests, not distant Kabul.

While facts on the ground spell out balkanization, the Taliban, even on the offensive, know they cannot possibly pull off a military takeover of Afghanistan.

And when the Americans say they will continue to “support Afghan government forces,” that means still bombing, but from over the horizon and now under new Centcom management in Qatar.

Russia, China, Pakistan and the Central Asian “stans” – everyone is trying hard to circumvent the stalemate. Shadow play, as usual, has been in full effect. Take for instance the crucial meeting of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (former Soviet states) – nearly simultaneous with the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Dushanbe and the subsequent Central Asia-South Asia connectivity conference in Tashkent.

The CSTO summit was 100% leak-proof. And yet, previously, they had discussed “possibilities of using the potential of the CSTO member states” to keep the highly volatile Tajik-Afghan border under control.

That’s very serious business. A task force headed by Colonel-General Anatoly Sidorov, the chief of the CSTO Joint Staff, is in charge of “joint measures” to police the borders.

Now enter an even more intriguing shadowplay gambit – met with a non-denial denial by both Moscow and Washington.

The Kommersant newspaper revealed that Moscow offered some “hospitality” to the Pentagon at its military bases in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan (both SCO member states). The objective: keep a joint eye on the fast-evolving Afghan chessboard – and prevent drug mafia cartels, Islamists of the ISIS-Khorasan variety and refugees from crossing the borders of these Central Asian ‘stans.

What the Russians are aiming at – non-denial denial withstanding – is not to let the Americans off the hook for the “mess” (copyright Sergey Lavrov) in Afghanistan while preventing them from reestablishing any offshoot of the Empire of Bases in Central Asia.

They established bases in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan after 2001, although they had to be abandoned later in 2004 and 2014. What is clear is there’s absolutely no chance the US will re-establish military bases in SCO and CSTO member nations.

Birth of a new Quad

At the Central Asia-South Asia 2021 meeting in Tashkent, right after the SCO meeting in Dushanbe, something quite intriguing happened: the birth of a new Quad (forget that one in the Indo-Pacific).

This is how it was spun by the Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs: a “historic opportunity to open flourishing international trade routes, [and] the parties intend to cooperate to expand trade, build transit links and strengthen business-to-business ties.”

If that sounds like something straight out of the Belt and Road Initiative, well, here’s the confirmation by the Pakistani Foreign Office:

“Representatives of the United States, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan agreed in principle to establish a new quadrilateral diplomatic platform focused on enhancing regional connectivity. The parties consider long-term peace and stability in Afghanistan critical to regional connectivity and agree that peace and regional connectivity are mutually reinforcing.”

The US doing Belt and Road right into China’s alley? A State Department tweet confirmed it. Call it a geopolitical case of “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.”

Now this is probably the only issue that virtually all players on the Afghanistan chessboard agree: a stable Afghanistan turbo-charging the flow of cargo across a vital hub of Eurasia integration.

Taliban spokesperson Suhail Shaheen has been very consistent: the Taliban regard China as a “friend” to Afghanistan and are eager to have Beijing investing in reconstruction work “as soon as possible.”

The question is what Washington aims to accomplish with this new Quad – for the moment just on paper. Simple: to throw a monkey wrench into the works of the SCO, led by Russia-China, and the main forum organizing a possible solution for the Afghan drama.

In this sense, the US versus Russia-China competition in the Afghan theater totally fits the Build Back Better World (B3W) gambit, which aims – at least in thesis – to offer an alternative infrastructure plan to Belt and Road and pitch it to nations from the Caribbean and Africa to the Asia-Pacific.

What is not in question is that a stable Afghanistan is essential in terms of establishing full rail-road connectivity from resource-rich Central Asia to the Pakistani ports of Karachi and Gwadar, and beyond to global markets.

For Pakistan, what happens next is a certified geoeconomic win-win – whether via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is a flagship Belt and Road project, or via the new, incipient Quad.

China will be funding the highly strategic Peshawar-Kabul motorway. Peshawar is already linked to CPEC. The completion of the motorway will symbolically seal Afghanistan as part of CPEC.

And then there’s the delightfully named Pakafuz, which refers to the trilateral deal signed in February between Pakistan, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan to build a railway – a fundamentally strategic connection between Central and South Asia.

Full connectivity between Central Asia and South Asia also happens to be a key plank of the Russian master strategy, the Greater Eurasia Partnership, which interacts with Belt and Road in multiple ways.

Lavrov spent quite some time in the Central Asia-South Asia summit in Tashkent explaining the integration of the Greater Eurasia Partnership and Belt and Road with the SCO and the Eurasia Economic Union.

Lavrov also referred to the Uzbek proposal “to align the Trans-Siberian Railway and the Europe-West China corridor with new regional projects.” Everything is interlinked, any way you look at it.

Watching the geoeconomic flow

The new Quad is in fact a latecomer in terms of the fast-evolving geopolitical transmutation of the Heartland. The whole process is being driven by China and Russia, which are jointly managing key Central Asian affairs.

Already in early June, a very important China-Pakistan-Afghanistan joint statement stressed how Kabul will be profiting from trade via the CPEC’s port of Gwadar.

And then, there’s Pipelineistan.

On July 16, Islamabad and Moscow signed a mega-deal for a US$3 billion, 1100-kilometer gas pipeline between Port Qasim in Karachi and Lahore, to be finished by the end of 2023.

The pipeline will transport imported LNG from Qatar arriving at Karachi’s LNG terminal. This is the Pakstream Gas Pipeline Project – locally known as the North-South Gas project.

The interminable Pipelineistan war between IPI (India-Pakistan-Iran) and TAPI (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) – which I followed in detail for years – seems to have ended with a third-way winner.

As much as the Kabul government, the Taliban seem to be paying very close attention to all the geoeconomics and how Afghanistan is at the heart of an inevitable economic boom.

Perhaps both sides should also be paying close attention to someone like Zoon Ahmed Khan, a very bright Pakistani woman who is a research fellow with the Belt and Road Initiative Strategy Institute at Tsinghua University.

Zoon Ahmed Khan notes how “one significant contribution that China makes through the BRI is emphasizing on the fact that developing countries like Pakistan have to find their own development path, rather than follow a Western model of governance.”

She adds, “The best thing Pakistan can learn from the Chinese model is to come up with its own model. China does not wish to impose its journey and experience on other countries, which is quite important.”

She is adamant that Belt and Road “is benefiting a much greater region than Pakistan. Through the initiative, what China tries to do is to present the partner countries with its experience and the things it can offer.”

All of the above definitely applies to Afghanistan – and its convoluted but ultimately inevitable insertion into the ongoing process of Eurasia integration.

*

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

This article was originally published on Asia Times.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from defense.gov/army

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) makes the rules that govern global trade. Its stated purpose is “expanding…trade in goods and services.” Its guiding principle is that governments should not have laws that ‘distort’ trade. In theory this means creating the supposed ‘level playing field’ that was discussed in earlier posts. We saw that in the real world, a level playing field creates advantages for big companies from rich countries, and destroys developing industries in poor countries.

Rules Biased in Favour of Rich Countries

This is evident from the rules on subsidies (payments from governments to help companies). The WTO allows subsidies for research, which are mostly used by rich countries, but it does not allow subsidies that protect infant industries (small industries that might grow if given protection) which are mostly needed by poor countries. Negotiations are based around the notion of trade-offs.(1) That is, if rich countries agree to stop subsidising their farmers, they expect poor countries to offer something in return. This would be reasonable if every country was starting from a position of equal strength, but makes no sense with existing imbalances in wealth and power. 

In the WTO, each country has one vote. This makes the WTO appear to be fairer than other international organizations, such as the IMF and World Bank. Unfortunately, negotiations take place in a very biased way, and often in secret. Many insiders have explained that policy is determined by the advanced nations, predominantly America and Europe, who then threaten or bribe developing countries to make them accept those policies.(2) It was claimed by rich countries that recent WTO meetings would focus on helping poor countries develop(3) but negotiators from poor countries have explained that this is not true. Rich countries mostly focus on trying to open up markets in developing countries so that big businesses can take control of the trade there and make even more profits.

The WTO has been a huge obstacle to improving the global trading system and stopping wealth extraction. For example, when big companies engage in tax evasion, they lie about the value of goods entering and leaving a country.(4) Customs officials should be able to challenge this, but since 1994 the WTO has insisted that customs officials cannot question the values written on invoices.

Rules Written By US Companies 

Many US trade representatives have strong business links, and US negotiating positions are strongly influenced by American companies. In practice, WTO rules are written by and for corporations. The grain company Cargill, one of the biggest food producers in the world, helped US trade negotiators develop their policy on agriculture.(5) The pharmaceutical company, Pfizer, together with other US corporations actually drafted the WTO agreements on Intellectual Property.(6)

At its peak there were approximately 1,000 WTO meetings per year, some of them going on at the same time. The money and effort that corporations spend trying to manipulate events within the WTO are immense, but some of the poorest countries do not have a single permanent member of staff.(7) Small countries find themselves unable to negotiate against armies of lawyers from rich countries.

Biased Judgements 

If there is a trade dispute between countries then a panel of experts chosen by the WTO will meet to make a judgement, but most of these people come from corporate backgrounds. They meet in secret and are chosen because of their expertise in trade matters. They are not experts on health, safety, legal or environmental issues, yet their rulings have touched upon all of these areas. Not surprisingly, on most occasions when the WTO has ruled on a dispute that pitches corporate interest against government regulation, corporate interest has been the winner. WTO rulings have been summarised as follows:

“Acting as the supreme global adjudicator, the WTO has ruled against laws deemed ‘barriers to free trade.’ It has forced Japan to accept greater pesticide residues in imported food. It has kept Guatemala from outlawing deceptive advertising of baby food. It has eliminated the ban in various countries on asbestos, and on fuel economy and emission standards for motor vehicles. And it has ruled against marine-life protection laws and the ban on endangered-species products. The European Union’s prohibition on the importation of hormone-ridden U.S. beef had overwhelming popular support throughout Europe, but a three-member WTO panel decided the ban was an illegal restraint on trade. The decision on beef put in jeopardy a host of other food import regulations based on health concerns. The WTO overturned a portion of the U.S. Clean Air Act banning certain additives in gasoline because it interfered with imports from foreign refineries. And the WTO overturned that portion of the U.S. Endangered Species Act forbidding the import of shrimp caught with nets that failed to protect sea turtles.”(8)

If the WTO rules against a country’s laws, the penalties can be severe. In country after country, the WTO has forced governments to adopt policies that give more power to corporations. These tend to be accompanied by propaganda suggesting that these policies will benefit everyone. In practice this has not been the case. Even supporters of the WTO have been surprised by its power. In 2000 the WTO ruled that US corporate tax policy was unfair.(9) Hardly anyone understood that the WTO could rule on a country’s tax system. We now have an unelected body telling politicians what they can and cannot do. This is not how democracy is supposed to work.

Why do politicians agree to WTO policies? 

The obvious question is why do politicians sign up to agreements that enable organisations like the WTO to overrule them? The truth is that most politicians do not understand the implications of these agreements. In 1995 $10,000 was offered by a famous campaigner, Ralph Nader, to any US politician who read the whole of one of these trade agreements. (It was hundreds of pages long.) Only one senator agreed and, after he read it, he was the only one to vote against it.(10)

If a poor country is outside the mainstream of the global trading system, then it has very little bargaining power in negotiations with rich countries. Leaders of some poor countries believed that the one-country-one-vote system of the WTO would enable poor countries to negotiate with rich countries on a more even footing, because there are a lot more poor countries than rich ones. In practice this has not been the case. Some new members join believing that they will benefit from increased trade with rich countries. There has also been a huge amount of propaganda suggesting that poor countries would benefit from the WTO because rich countries would have to eliminate subsidies and tariffs on textiles and agriculture(11) but this has also not happened. Many countries end up losing out because they are no longer able to regulate trade adequately. In theory they can leave the WTO but there is a risk that rich countries would refuse to trade with them. This would make it difficult for them to import more advanced goods.

This is not always a case of IMF/World Bank/WTO bad guys vs everyone in poor countries. We saw in earlier posts that the US has gone to great lengths to get politicians into power in developing countries who support US policies. Some of these politicians, together with some wealthy business owners, do benefit from these exploitative trade arrangements. As one WTO insider put it, the WTO:

“is the place where governments collude in private against their domestic pressure groups.”(12)

Wrong Priorities

We live in a world that requires higher standards of education, healthcare, environmental laws and labor laws for ordinary people. We saw in earlier chapters that if poor countries are to develop they must be allowed to structure trade rules to protect themselves, yet our global institutions focus on helping big corporations. The key part of the WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture says market forces (that means big companies wanting big profits) should determine each country’s agricultural policies, whereas a more sensible approach would focus on making sure that everyone gets fed, and everyone who produces food gets paid enough to live on.(13)

The WTO, together with the IMF and World Bank, have been nicknamed “The Unholy Trio” due to their role in holding back the developing world through economic means. If governments accept the rules laid down by any of these organisations then they end up ensuring that big corporations and their shareholders can make profit anywhere they choose, despite the downsides to local populations. One of the leading researchers on these issues has said:

“Don’t get too confused between the IMF, the World Bank and the WTO – they are interchangeable masks for a single government system”(14)

The WTO is Dieing… 

At one point, the strength of the WTO (and the IMF) was so great that they were described as Ministries of Trade (and Finance) for a world government. Corporations from rich countries have tried to include agreements on all sorts of things, such as patents, services and investment. They realised that the WTO was the ideal way to persuade developing countries to change their policies. Poor countries finally woke up to what was going on. They worked together to stop rich countries using the WTO to exploit them. Between 2001 and 2015, negotiations collapsed.(15) The head of the WTO resigned in May 2020 saying that it is going nowhere.(16)

…But neoliberalism is a multi-headed beast 

Even if the WTO closed down, this would not be the end of the problem. Corporations and their lobbyists, and the US government, will try to achieve the same goals by other means. Many existing trade agreements are not primarily about trade at all – they are about the rights of investors. They contain what is known as ISDS (Investor State Dispute Settlement).(17) This uses secret courts, similar to the ones described above. Incredible as it may seem, these courts allow companies to sue governments for the loss of potential future profits that are no longer available because of new laws. This has been described as a parallel legal universe, only open to corporations, with rulings that would not occur under domestic law. It is even being used by convicted corporate criminals to escape the law.(18) Just the threat of ISDS is enough to convince governments to roll back public-interest laws. These problems will continue until we remove all forms of excessive corporate power.

*

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

This article was first posted on medium.com/elephantsintheroom.

Rod Driver is a part-time academic who is particularly interested in de-bunking modern-day US and British propaganda, and explaining war, terrorism, economics and poverty, without the nonsense in the mainstream media. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes

1) ‘The GATT years: From Havana to Marrakesh’, WTO, at https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact4_e.htm

2) Fatoumata and Kwa, Behind The Scenes At The WTO, 2004

3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doha_Development_Round

4) Jason Hickel, ‘Aid in Reverse: How poor countries develop rich countries’, The Guardian, 14 Jan 2017, at https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2017/jan/14/aid-in-reverse-how-poor-countries-develop-rich-countries 

5) Mark Curtis, Trade For Life, 2001, p.90

6) Lori Wallach and Patrick Woodall, Whose Trade Organisation, p.350

7) Fatoumata and Kwa, Behind The Scenes At The WTO, 2004

8) Michael Parenti, ‘Globalization and Democracy: Some Basics’, 26 May 2007, at www.countercurrents.org/parenti260507.htm

9) Chakratarthi Raghavan, ‘US Corporate Gravy Train Held WTO Illegal’, 26 July 2000, at https://www.twn.my/title/gravy-cn.htm

WTO ‘DS108: United States – Tax Treatment for “Foreign Sales Corporations”’, 17 May 2006, at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds108_e.htm 

10) Senator Hank Brown, declined the $10,000, which had actually been offered to charity. The offer was made by Ralph Nader. Discussed in ‘Ralph Nader: Conservatively Speaking’, The American Conservative Interview, 21 June 2004, at http://baltimorechronicle.com/061304Nader.shtml 

11) L.Wallach and P.Woodall, Whose Trade Organisation, 2004, p.158

12) L.Wallach and P.Woodall, Whose Trade Organisation, 2004, p.15

13) Joseh Stiglitz, ‘The Insider’, The New Republic, 17 April 2000, at https://newrepublic.com/article/61082/the-insider

14) Greg Palast, ‘The globalizer who came in from the cold Joe Stiglitz: Today’s winner of the nobel prize in economics’, 10 Oct 2001, at www.gregpalast.com/the-globalizer-who-came-in-from-the-cold/

15) Katie Allen, ‘World Trade Organisation: 20 years of talks and deadlock’, The Guardian, 15 Dec 2015, at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/15/world-trade-organisation-20-years-of-talks-and-deadlock 

16) Phillip Inman, ‘Roberto Azevedo quits as WTO chief a year early’, The Guardian, 14 May 2020, at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/14/roberto-azevedo-quits-as-wto-world-trade-organization-chief-a-year-early 

17) ‘More information on Investor-State Dispute Settlement’, Public Citizen, at https://www.citizen.org/article/more-information-on-investor-state-dispute-settlement/

“Corporate attacks on our laws’, at https://www.isdscorporateattacks.org/

18) Chris Hamby, ‘The court that rules the world’, BuzzFeedNews, 28 Aug 2016, at https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/chrishamby/super-court#.mnvxdLAQX 

Chris Hamby, ‘The Billion Dollar Ultimatum’, BuzzFeedNews30, Aug 2016, at https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/chrishamby/the-billion-dollar-ultimatum

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Exploitative Trade Rules: The World Trade Organisation
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

“No force on earth can stop an idea whose time has come,” Victor Hugo once said. The time for the Farm System Reform Act is now. We can’t afford to continue the downward spiral from an unsustainable food system. Here’s how we must change it.

Wildfires, heatwaves, hurricanes and droughts: the deadly impacts of climate change are becoming more intense and devastating. While the transition to a real, renewable energy system is imperative to a livable climate future, it’s just as urgent to address the destructive impacts of our industrial food system. The current system is highly concentrated and exploitative, and it’s driving climate change and water shortages.

To address the climate crisis we must break up the big food monopolies and stop the practice of concentrating large numbers of animals on factory farms. The first step is passing the Farm System Reform Act. 

The Relationship Between Factory Farms and Climate Change

Factory farms drive climate change. Raising cows and pigs on factory farms accounts for 14.5% of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions, the vast majority coming from producing corn and soy to feed factory-farmed animals. In fact, the top 20 meat and dairy corporations together contribute more greenhouse gases than the entire country of Germany, and together the top five contribute more than fossil fuel giants Exxon, Shell, or BP. These meat and dairy corporations are pushing factory farm expansion, further driving up greenhouse gas emissions, while family-scale livestock farms struggle to survive.

Further, while factory farms drive water shortages through climate-induced droughts, they also directly poison vast quantities of freshwater across the country through the waste they produce.

Agriculture is the leading known cause of pollution in U.S. rivers and streams and is the second-largest known contributor to the contamination of wetlands. Pollution from animal feeding operations threatens or impairs over 13,000 miles of U.S. rivers and streams and 60,000 acres of lakes and ponds. In one stark example, nearly 500,000 dairy cows on factory farms in Tulare County, California produce more manure waste than the human residents of the Los Angeles metropolitan area.

We need to break this vicious cycle of factory farms polluting water and driving climate change, which causes water crises for people and the environment.

An Even More Urgent Case For a Ban on Factory Farms 

Food & Water Watch called for a ban on factory farms in early 2018 because we knew the fragility of our food system. For years, our team has been educating and organizing against extensive corporate control and how it harms family farmers, rural communities, food chain workers and consumers. We knew that in order to avoid the worst impacts of climate change we must address industrial agriculture.

Less than two years later we were proud to work with lead sponsors Senator Cory Booker and Representative Ro Khanna to introduce the Farm System Reform Act in U.S. Congress, a visionary bill that includes a ban on new and expanding factory farms and a phaseout of existing facilities by 2040. Originally introduced in the Senate in December of 2019 and in the House in March of 2020, the Farm System Reform Act helped people to see that a better way is possible — and in fact critical — if we are to protect our water and climate as well as protect food chain workers, and ensure a safe and plentiful food supply.

And now we’re doing it again — even bigger and bolder than last time.

Introducing the Farm System Reform Act in 2021

In July 2021, Senator Cory Booker and Representative Ro Khanna reintroduced the Farm System Reform Act in the new Congress with three original Senate co-sponsors and a number of new House co-sponsors. The bill is endorsed by a broad coalition of organizations including Food & Water Watch and Food & Water Action, the American Society of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Family Farm Action, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, and Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. Over 100 individual farmers have also already signed a letter in support of the bill, with more joining every day.

This groundbreaking bill has quickly become the north star of the movement to ban factory farms and end corporate control of our food system and should be a key pillar of national efforts to address climate change. In addition to an immediate ban on new and expanding large factory farms and a phase-out of existing facilities by 2040, the Farm System Reform Act would also:

  • Create a transition program to allow farmers to escape the contract model and shift to more sustainable forms of agriculture
  • Enact a series of market reforms that would make it possible for small growers to compete
  • Hold corporations responsible for their pollution

The Farm System Reform Act is a bold and yet commonsense approach that would move us toward a food and farm system that works for us — instead of wealthy corporations only concerned with their own bottom lines. It would help to build the kind of resilient, regionally-based food system that we advocate for in our new report, Well-Fed. It would level the playing field for family-scale farms and help rebuild rural America. And it would provide a real solution to addressing the climate impacts of industrial agriculture — instead of more false solutions like factory farm gas (biogas) or carbon markets.

Do you share our vision for a just food system? Send a message to your Senators and Representatives today.

*

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

Featured image is from Food and Water Watch

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Over 300 organizations representing civil society, small food producers, researchers and Indigenous Peoples’ from across the world will gather in a virtual and physical event in Rome from 25 to 28 July 2021 to protest against the UN Food Systems Pre-Summit.

The “People’s Counter-Mobilization to Transform Corporate Food Systems” is the latest in a series of criticisms against the UNFSS. Those opposing the Summit include a coalition of scientists who published a petition calling on their peers around the globe to join them.

The People’s Autonomous Response to the UNFSS joins many others in arguing that the Summit is a dangerous distraction from the real problems facing people and the planet at this critical juncture of multiple, combined crises. Its organizers have failed to provide accountability and transparency to ensure peoples’ inputs are incorporated into final outcomes.

The result of a partnership between the UN and the World Economic Forum – a body that brings together the world’s top 1000 corporations – is that the Summit is disproportionately influenced by corporate actors. It is diverting energy, critical mass and financial resources away from the real solutions needed to tackle the growing hunger, climate and health crisis.

Carlo Petrini, Slow Food president and founder, says: “The aim of changing food and farming systems in a genuinely sustainable way can only march on the legs of millions of people in the local economy who are carrying out this ambitious and worthwhile transformation. For all these reasons, I think that the People’s Counter-Mobilization to Transform Corporate Food Systems is a courageous and useful choice. That does not exclude dialogue, indeed, it brings it forward, but dialogue must involve everyone and not just the privileged few in a financial economic system that is responsible for this disaster”.

“The United Nation Food System Summit has become a clear playground where corporate interests have decided to stamp the authority in the food system” adds Edie Mukiibi, Slow Food vice president. “Industrial agriculture with its unjust practices like land grabbing, deforestation, eviction of people and many other practices which lead to climate change and other unjust production processes have resulted into widespread suffering of millions of people mostly in the global South. As Slow Food we are deeply concerned that the current rushed, corporate-controlled, unaccountable and opaque process for this UNFSS will not lead towards the transformation and the change in the food system we envision. It’s a big concern that this summit geared towards repeating the agri-business-as-usual model to solve the food and climate crisis cannot deliver on the holistic and systemic transformation of our food systems we need today”. He concludes: “As Slow Food we stand with hundreds of other civil society organizations especially from the global South, the Indigenous community organizations and all those who care about this planet and the food systemto challenge the pre-arranged outcomes of the Summit and reclaim people’s sovereignty over food systems.

Globalized, corporate-dominated and industrialized food systems have failed the majority of the world’s people, and the Covid-19 pandemic has only worsened the situation. The number of chronically undernourished people is rising. The people without access to adequate food rose steeply to include almost a third of the world, according to the latest UN Report on the State of Food Security and Nutrition published on 12 July. Much of the global South is still reeling from Covid-19 which has exacerbated long standing structural power asymmetries and highlighted the fragility and injustice that lies at the core of our food system.

The protesting movements of peasant and farmers, women and youth organizations, Indigenous Peoples, pastoralists, landless, migrants, fisherfolks, food and agricultural workers, consumers, urban food insecure and other civil society groups represent more than 380 million affiliated members globally. They demand a radical transformation of corporate food systems towards a just, inclusive and truly sustainable food system. They equally demand increasing the participation of small scale food provisioners and workers by strengthening already existing democratic food governance models, such as the UN Committee for World Food Security (CFS) and its High-Level Panel of Experts (HLPE). The CFS, which the UNFSS threatens sidelining and bypassing, is the most inclusive intergovernmental institution addressing global food policy, and one of the few such bodies that prioritise a human rights-based approach and where those most affected by food policies and the actions of corporations can make their voices heard. The UN system is supposed to be a multilateral space, but it is being hijacked by corporate and market interests to provide legitimacy to further expand even more detrimental, technologically complex and costly versions of the food system that has led to the crises the world is facing.

Failed and controversial ideas such as nature-positive solutions, voluntary corporate sustainability schemes, GMOs and biotechnology, regenerative agriculture, and sustainable intensification of agriculture are just some of the false solutions touted by the Summit. Such solutions are neither sustainable, nor affordable for small-scale food producers and workers, and fail to serve public interest and public health. The Summit is an attempt by corporate actors to normalize and legitimize techno fixes that are harmful for people, livelihoods and ecosystems. These false solutions fail to address structural injustices and problems in society such as unequal access to land and resources, biodiversity loss and deepening economic inequality.

The counter-mobilization, which will take place in a hybrid format alongside the UN Food Systems Pre-Summit, will illustrate the realities of small-scale food producers, workers and majority of the world’s people, and their demands and visions for a profound, human rights-based and agroecological transformation of food systems. It will highlight the importance of food sovereignty and the need to protect small-scale sustainable agriculture, traditional knowledge, rights to natural resources, and the rights of workers, indigenous peoples, women and future generations, instead of high-tech, corporate-led agriculture. Real solutions such as binding rules for corporate abuses, stopping pesticide use, and promoting agroecology as a science, a practice and a movement will be proposed and discussed. The event will serve to raise awareness of the Summit’s hidden agendas and expose the public relations gimmick that has been put in place to deflect accountability for today’s crises. It will address the issue of co-option of solutions and measures proposed by social movements, small-scale food producers and workers, while perpetuating the very power imbalances that their solutions seek to redress.

A call to action launched in May 2021 to coordinate the peoples’ response has had worldwide appeal. The program will include the following activities:

  • 25 July 2021: A Global virtual Rally will bring together small-scale food producers and people’s voices from territories around the world.
  • 26 July 2021: Three public roundtable discussions will assess the context posed by COVID-19, the hunger and climate crises and analyse the fault lines of the Summit reading its narrative and false solutions, and its push for corporate capture of governance and science.
  • 27 July 2021: 15 self-organized civil society events will illustrate a diversity of alternatives and visions on how food systems can work for the peoples.
  • 28 July 2021: A closing panel will present a preliminary summary of the actions and discussion during the counter mobilization and a way to challenge the Food Systems Summit in September.

*

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

Featured image is from OneWorld

Afghanistan, Failure and Second Thoughts

July 27th, 2021 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

It is a country other powers simply cannot leave alone.  Even after abandoning its Kabul post in ignominy, tail tucked between their legs, Australia is now wondering if it should return – in some form.  The Department of Trade and Foreign Affairs has been sending out a few signals, none of them definitive.  “We will not comment on intelligence matters,” a spokesman for foreign minister Senator Marise Payne stated tersely earlier this month.

The spokesman was, however, willing to make general remarks about a belated return.  When, he could not be sure, but Canberra’s diplomatic arrangements in Afghanistan “were always expected to be temporary, with the intention of resuming a permanent presence once circumstances permit.”  Australia continued “to engage closely with partners, including the Afghanistan government and coalition member countries.”  Rather embarrassing remarks, given the sudden closure of the embassy on June 18. 

The Australian response, confused and stumbling, is much like that of their counterparts in Washington.  While the Biden administration speeds up the departure of troops, the cord to Kabul remains uncut though distinctly worn.  In April, the US House Services Committee was told by General Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie, head of US Central Command, that the Pentagon was “further planning now for continued counterterrorism operations from within the region.”

Amanda Dory, acting undersecretary of defense for defense policy, also informed members that the Pentagon remained interested in considering “how to continue to apply pressure with respect to potential threats emanating from Afghanistan.”  Hazily, she claimed that the department was “looking throughout the region in terms of over-the-horizon opportunities.”

Such window dressing does little to confront the situation on the ground, which looks monstrously bleak for the increasingly titular Kabul government.  General Scott Miller, top US military commander in Afghanistan, clumsily admitted in June that, “Civil war is certainly a path that can be visualized if this continues on the trajectory it’s on right now.”  The hasty withdrawal from Bagram airbase on July 2 certainly gave the Taliban much scope to visualize that fact.

Unceremoniously hung out to dry in the Doha agreement forged by the US and the Taliban, the frail and terminal regime has imposed a month-long countrywide curfew to address the vigorous onslaught.  According to the interior ministry, the curfew is intended “to curb violence and limit the Taliban movements”, though it would not apply to Kabul, Panjshir and Nangarhar.

The US Air Force has also made a dozen airstrikes in southern Afghanistan, concerned by the Taliban’s push towards Kandahar, the second-largest city in the country.  “The United States has increased airstrikes in support of Afghan security forces in the past several days,” announced General McKenzie.  “And we’re prepared to continue this heightened level of support in the coming weeks if the Taliban continue their attacks.”

Such actions are only band aid measures at best.  The surrender of Afghan soldiers to the Taliban across numerous districts is inking the writing on the wall.  The response from Kabul is that the Afghan army is behaving strategically, refocusing attention on protecting urban centres.  In reality, they have lost both their mettle and the plot, with the Taliban in control of some 85 per cent of the country’s territory, including critical border checkpoints.  As a reminder of their emerging dominance, ghoulish material such as video footage showing the execution of 22 elite Afghan commandos, trained by US forces, terrifies government soldiers.

But McKenzie is a picture of hope over experience.  “The Taliban are attempting to create a sense of inevitability about their campaign.  They’re wrong.  There is no preordained conclusion to this fight.”

Other countries are also bubbling with concern, which, when translated into security matters, imply future interference.  Russia, bloodied and bruised by its own Afghanistan experience, casts a concerned eye at the Taliban train.  “The uncertainty of the development of the military-political situation in this country and around it has increased,” stated Russia’s grave foreign minister Sergey Lavrov earlier this month.  “Unfortunately, in recent days we have witnessed a rapid degradation of the situation in Afghanistan.”  It was “obvious that in the current conditions there are real risks of an overflow of instability to neighbouring states.”

Moscow shares, with Washington, a dark paternalism towards the country.  While the Biden administration has shown less interest of late, Moscow is looking for reassurance against impending chaos.  “It is the feeling in Moscow,” reasoned Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of the Moscow-based Russia in Global Affairs, “that the US is not able to, or even interested in, maintaining a presence in the region to guarantee any particular future direction in Afghanistan.”  The implications of this are ominous enough.

The emptying of the barracks does not put an end to the prying and meddling from non-Afghan personnel.  The country will still host a myriad of special forces and intelligence officials.  Excuses for maintaining some militarised footprint will be traditional: the threat posed by terrorism; the thriving opium trade.  The contractor business will also boom.  A Taliban victory promises a slice of violence for everybody, but so does the presence of this feeble Afghan government.

*

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

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: A U.S. Army Soldier from the A Company, 1-503rd Battalion, 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, conducts a patrol with a platoon of Afghan national army soldiers to check on conditions in the village of Yawez, Wardak province, Afghanistan, Feb. 17, 2010. Partnership between the U.S. Army and the Afghan national army is proving to be a valuable tool in bringing security to the area. (U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Russell GilchrestReleased)

The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 26, 2021

Let us be under no illusions, it’s not only “experimental”, it’s a Big Pharma “killer vaccine” which modifies the human genome. The evidence of mortality and morbidity resulting from vaccine inoculation both present (official data) and future (e.g. undetected microscopic blood clots) is overwhelming.

The 1946 Explosion of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem: A Personal Story

By Lina Gress, July 26, 2021

The inflicted tragedy was the result of long-range planning and deceitful thinking. It was then labelled as “one of the world’s single most lethal terrorist incidents of the 20th Century”.

CDC to Withdraw Emergency Use Authorization for RT PCR Test Because It Cannot Distinguish Between SARS-CoV-2 and the Flu

By Brian Shilhavy, July 26, 2021

The CDC quietly announced last week that it was withdrawing its request to the FDA for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2.

Video: Epidemiologist Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg Discusses Frauds Behind the H1N1 and Covid-19 Pandemics

By Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and Kristina Borjesson, July 26, 2021

In this interview with Kristina Borjesson, Dr. Wodarg addresses how these fraudulent tactics used to declare and handle the H1N1 pandemic including massive bribery paved the way for the actions taken in relation to the 2020-2021 Covid-19 pandemic.

Our War Against Nature. Humanity’s March Toward Extinction?

By David Skripac, July 25, 2021

The billionaire set’s relentless quest for profits at the expense of everyone’s social well-being is fueling worldwide competition for resources and causing an eco-holocaust.

France’s Emmanuel Macron: Vanguard of a “Covid Global Corporate Dictatorship”?

By Gilbert Mercier, July 26, 2021

French citizens should be aware that the very motto of our dear Republic, Liberté -Égalité -Fraternité is under the assault of king Ubu Macron and could, without a strong popular resistance, be decapitated by the cold blade of Macron’s virtual guillotine.

US Parents Sue over Clandestine COVID-19 School Vaccination Programme Which Does Not Require Parental Consent

By Eric Worrall, July 26, 2021

If you live in Washington DC, and your child comes home a bit wobbly, there is a chance the school you entrust with their care just gave them a clandestine Covid jab.

‘Unnecessary, Misleading, Catastrophic’: Senior European Physicians Co-author Expert Statement on COVID Vaccine for Children

By Mordechai Sones, July 26, 2021

Eminent European physicians and scientists this month co-authored an expert statement regarding Comirnaty–COVID-19 mRNA vaccine for children, outlining their expert opinions that “vaccination of adolescents for COVID-19 is unnecessary, claims demonstrating efficacy are misleading, and the safety profiles are catastrophic.”

President Biden Wants Covid “Misinformants” to be Removed from Social Media Platforms

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, July 26, 2021

In a July 16, 2021, White House press briefing, press secretary Jen Psaki admitted the Biden administration is violating the First Amendment by alerting social media companies to posts and accounts it believes is peddling “misinformation” about COVID injections.

Right Of Conquest – A Racist Doctrine

By Jim Miles, July 25, 2021

Local indigenous populations simply want to be left alone to get on with their lives; they do not want to be subjugated by foreigners with new laws who wish to extract the resources and riches of a country for themselves.

Don’t Cry for Lifta: Palestinians Will Endure

By Rima Najjar, July 26, 2021

The last thing Palestinians need is to come to terms in sorrow with our dispossession at the hands of the apartheid, settler-colonial Jewish state. The last thing we need is to be resigned to “facts on the ground.”

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

July 22, 2021 marks 75 years of the explosion with unparallelled magnitude at the hands of the Zionist terrorist group “Irgun” Zvi Leumi headed by Menachem Begin that brought down the South Wing seven-storeyed floors of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, that housed the Secretariat of the British Mandate over Palestine as well as its military headquarters, killing immediately 93 innocent persons, in addition to scores of wounded and missing people.

The inflicted tragedy was the result of long-range planning and deceitful thinking. It was then labelled as “one of the world’s single most lethal terrorist incidents of the 20th Century”.

Why am I evoking this slaughter?! Because with the strategy of demolishing the building, the tragic story of my family begins. This is how the Zionists planned the explosion.

On July 22, the Irgun disguised in the Arab villagers’ clothes, who daily delivered milk to the hotel in large metal containers entered the hotel at the precise hour of 11:30 am. But instead, milk was replaced by 350 KG of explosives which were immediately positioned near each supporting column in the basement café right under the Secretariat.

To divert attention, a small bomb blew up at 12:30 pm across the street in front of the hotel. Then the sirens went off causing chaos in the street and the whole area.

Hearing the sirens, we waited for my father to arrive home or call informing us of his whereabouts as was customary whenever there was a siren in such turbulent times. But at exactly 12:37 pm came the deafening extremely loud frightening sound of the explosion that shook all surrounding buildings, sending us jumping up about 30 cm off the ground, as our house was not far away from the hotel.

Among the dead was my father Jules Gress, senior assistant treasurer, who happened to be at the Secretariat, only to attend a 45-minute meeting. That meeting violently shattered our family and changed the course of our lives, leaving me and my three younger brothers behind.

That day started for us as no different from any other, except that my father was not feeling well but he was determined to attend to his duties. How little did I know that he was later to go to the King David Hotel to meet his death.

However, the full impact of such atrocities was felt throughout our lives until this present day 75 years later. Not only was my father killed, but we were evicted from our house in Talbieh in 1948. Thus, marking the start of Al-Nakba.

As reflection of our tragedy, it is sad and painful to see that the King David Hotel, where my father was killed in 1946, has become a sumptuous hotel for Israel to receive dignitaries and various people from all over the world.

*

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

All images in this article are from The Jordan 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

.

 

***

If you’re a working stiff with some sense of rhyme or reason, you should feel them near. They come in all shapes and sizes, these predators.

For starters we have the ever-present War Sharks. These are the gung ho wave the flag gang, made up of Pentagon sharks and the super rich (along with their political and media lackeys) who would just love to continue phony wars and wars on terror.  Oh,  need we forget the new one, or redux of the old one: A Cold War with Russia and China?  These folks never met a military budget increase that they did not love. Most of these jokers are your traditional garden variety of Chicken hawks that don’t mind bombing the **** out of foreign cities and foreign citizens. They really don’t care much for whatever pawns… oh, scuse me, US soldiers, are sent home in boxes.

Next, and not least at all, we have the Corporate sharks. These folks, from the CEO down through the executive sector of the company, reap in most of the extra money which could have gone for raises, across the board, to the 99 % of their workforce, excluding the execs.

The CEO we know is in the black for mega millions per year, PLUS stock options and other perks. Well, his or her top execs also get $ millions or $ hundreds of thousands in salaries, plus the perks and of course the stock options. Then they sell us the tripe that America has a ‘Free Market’ with competition. Imagine how this writer’s cable bills have reached over $200 monthly for what… mostly crap?

Plus, I have to sit and watch countless commercials because those who run this corporate empire made sure to allow more and time devoted to them. In the old days this baby boomer remembered watching a NY Giants football game on the boob tube one Sunday afternoon. There was a time out called and I saw singer Julie London singing a Marlboro cigarette tune. It lasted but ONE MINUTE and right back to the field of play as the Giants broke the huddle. ONE MINUTE!  My $200 bucks buys me the opportunity to watch upwards of FIVE MINUTES  of commercials per timeout.  And those damn pharmaceutical commercials, bombarding us with drugs that HALF OF THEM  should never have been allowed on the market! Imagine how much money those car insurance companies are earning with the preponderance of inane commercials?

Sadly, though it should be the backbone of America, small businesses have too many sharks running them. Since the % of American working stiffs that are unionized in private business is less than 10%, large and small businesses can have a ‘Field day’.

I recall a neighbor who worked for a small cabinet business. He and the few other co-workers were under the auspices of the owner, who felt he alone should reap the fruits of their labor. So much so that when the business was doing well, the owner, instead of handing out raises and bonuses, went out and leased two BMWs, one for each of  his children, who really didn’t even work there! One wonders how many similar sharks made out through the PPP payroll protection program, instead of passing ALL the money to the employees?

Finally, for purposes of this column, I come to the political and media sharks.

Since many members of both Estates are millionaires, how in the hell can those people know what it is to live in these uncertain economic times? We have a nation of hundreds of millions of Renters, with little or no protection from  the Landlord. Many who own homes may still be either underwater or close to foreclosure.

Does one think that a millionaire politician or millionaire media personality can really ‘Feel your pain’ as mega millionaire Bill Clinton liked to say? These sharks, regardless of being with the Republicans or Democrats, only care about, to put it bluntly, Serving the empire. If it means banging the drum for a new Cold War or ‘Military intervention’, they will do so. Remember, war or the threat of war brings in lots of money… and that is what America is really all about for the sharks… without the water.

*

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 A Farruggio is regular columnist on It’s the Empire… stupid website. He is also frequently posted on Nation of Change, and Countercurrents.org. He is the son and grandson of Brooklyn NYC longshoremen and a graduate of Brooklyn College, class of 1974. Since the 2000 election debacle Philip has written over 400 columns on the Military Industrial Empire and other facets of life in an upside down America. He is also host of the ‘It’s the Empire… Stupid‘ radio show, co produced by Chuck Gregory. Philip can be reached at [email protected]

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research. 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Upside Down America: Billionaire and Political Sharks with No Water
  • Tags:

How the COVID Scam Is Perpetrated: Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

July 26th, 2021 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

All Global Research articles 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.

***

.

I have provided numerous documented detailed accounts demonstrating the lack of evidence supporting the official Covid narrative.  The next time you hear Big Pharma’s propagandists say “believe the science,” ask them what science.

When believers in the official narrative and Covid vaccine are confronted with facts, they retreat to a second line of defense.  If the Covid threat is exaggerated and the vaccine unsafe, why did all the doctors and nurses get vaccinated? If the vaccines are unsafe, why haven’t the predicted deaths and injuries showed up?

The answer is that all the doctors and nurses are not vaccinated, do not believe in the extent of the “pandemic” or the hyped threat of Covid—indeed, many regard the hype and vaccine as greater threats than Covid—and the adverse effects of the vaccines are showing up.  The believers in the narrative just do not know it because the presstitute scum suppress the information and do not report it unless to ridicule and denounce it as “disinformation.”

All doctors and nurses are not vaccinated.  For example, here is a report of an entire hospital—200 doctors and 1,500 nurses—on strike in protest of the Macron nazi’s attempt to force them to be vaccinated: see this. 

As for the alleged belief in the Covid narrative by doctors and medical personnel, here are 1,500 health professionals who say Covid is the “biggest health scam of the 21st century:” see this. 

A survey by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons finds that 60% of doctors are not vaccinated: see this. 

There are two stronger reasons than doctors’ belief in the efficacy and safety of the vaccine that explain why some doctors are vaccinated.  One is that they get vaccinated in order to save their practices.  Their fear-driven, terrorized patients are afraid to be examined by a doctor who hasn’t been vaccinated.

The other reason is that the main consequence of Obamacare was the buy-up of independent practices by hospital chains and health care organizations.  This transformed independent doctors into employees who have to follow guidelines.  Many who have ignored guidelines by treating patients with HCQ or Ivermectin and by refusing vaccination have been fired. The big organizations for convenience and liability reasons follow whatever is the line of NIH, CDC, FDA, and WHO.  In other words, coercion displaces medical judgement.

As for the adverse effects of the vaccine, EudraVigilance, the European Union’s database of suspected drug reaction reports covering 27 European countries, reports that as of July 17, 2021, there have been 18,928 deaths and 1,823,219 injuries: see this. 

In the US the VAERS database reports a total of 463,457 adverse health effects among all age groups following Covid vaccination, including 10,991 deaths and 48,385 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and July 9, 2021: see this. 

A CDC whistleblower has revealed in a sworn statement under penalty of perjury that the VAERS deaths released in the report are understated at least by a factor of five and that the actual figure in the VAERS database as of July 9, 2021, is 45,000: see this. 

In response to the large numbers of deaths and adverse reactions associated with the vaccines, America’s Frontline Doctors filed a federal lawsuit to curtail emergency use of Covid vaccines: see this. 

The British counterpart to the US VAERS is called the Yellow Card system.  It is operated by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency.  Based on this database, researchers at the Evidence-based Medicine Consultancy (EbMC) have concluded that the Covid-19 vaccines are “unsafe for humans.”  The research group’s director, Dr. Tess Lawrie concluded: “The scope of morbidity is striking, evidencing a lot of incidents and what amounts to a large number of ill:” see this.

Dr. Lawrie arrived at this conclusion based on the Yellow Card data for the first four months of 2021 during which the UK recorded 888,196 adverse vaccine events and 1,253 deaths.

Authorities acknowledge that the reports in the databases of adverse vaccine effects are massively underreported, capturing only from 1-10% of adverse vaccine effects. One reason for the underreporting is that it is not easy to report an adverse vaccine event. The reporting doctor or health organization has to be determined and persistent. The reporting takes time and energy from other demands.  Consequently, there are pressures not to report.

In the case of adverse effects associated with the Covid vaccine, more powerful forces restrict reporting. Democrats do not want the adverse reactions reported.  They have groomed Fauci as the hero who saved us from Trump’s rantings about HCQ and saved all of us from dying from Covid by getting a vaccine out in time. Health care organizations and medical associations that have complied with the official narrative want to protect their credibility from adverse reports in order to avoid providing grounds for employees and members to voice divergent opinions. 

A colleague says that her son experienced cardiac failure and blood clot following his vaccination, which kept him hospitalized for 22 days with his life hanging in the balance. The adverse event is not being reported to VAERS.  The doctors or hospital administrator have avoided reporting to VAERS by attributing his case to an “unknown virus.”  Her son refuses to report the case because he is an ideological Democrat and Democrats have made Fauci and the vaccine their issue.

My colleague also says that her cousin, who lost the use of his legs immediately after the vaccine just as did my friend, then lost the use of his arms the next day, had a heart attack on the way to the ER, and another heart attack 3 days later that killed him.  The doctors won’t report it to VAERS.  The cousin’s wife, an ideological Democrat, defends the vaccine and will not report the case either.

Let’s take the most optimistic case that VAERS, Yellow Card, and EudraVigilance capture 10% of adverse Covid vaccine effects. That means that databases covering the US and part of Europe through about the middle of July 2021 would reveal 299,190 deaths if all deaths were captured by the reporting systems and 639,280 deaths if the whistleblower’s correction of the VAERS deaths is used.

The databases covering the US and part of Europe would show 22,866,760 injuries.

Assuming the UK reporting also captures 10% of adverse events, during the first four months of 2021 the British experienced 8,881,960 adverse effects and 12,530 deaths.

These large numbers are from a small part of the world. They don’t include Russia, China, India, the rest of Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, Canada, Australia. If the same underreporting is characteristic of these areas, the deaths and injuries from the vaccine far exceeds those from Covid.

Play around with the numbers.  Assume that the vaccine adverse reporting systems capture 50% of averse events.  We still have a situation far worse than Covid.

There are two final damning facts.  One is that never before has a vaccine been left in use that had anything close to the official adverse reporting numbers of the Covid vaccine.  Why hasn’t the vaccine been pulled out of use?

The other damning fact is that the requirement for emergency use of an untested and unapproved vaccine is that there are no known cures.  We have known from the beginning that there are two safe and inexpensive cures—HCQ with zinc and Ivermectin with zinc.  To clear the way for a vaccine, these treatments used by many doctors to save patients’ lives, were demonized, and successful attempts were made to prevent their use.  Now there are two more cures according to reports.  What then is the basis for continuing emergency use of the vaccines, much less forcing it on people?

Clearly the health of people is not at the forefront of the Covid drama.

It is important to understand that the vaccine controversy is not one between vaxxers and anti-vaxxers.  Most of the independent scientists and doctors who have revealed the downside of the vaccine are not anti-vaxxers and some of them even recommend the vaccine for some parts of the population.  The vaccine critics see it as an experiment with new technology that behaved differently than expected but continues to be conducted on the world’s population.

The one part of the official narrative that does seem to be true is that the virus is real and can be very dangerous to those with co-morbidities and weak immune systems. The virus can cause death and serious protracted illness.  It is difficult to judge the extent of threat, because hospitals are incentivized to report all deaths as Covid deaths even when the deceased died from other causes. Apparently there are few deaths from Covid alone.

What is most difficult to explain is the hard push for universal vaccination when we know from the databases that the vaccine is itself dangerous and we have known cures.  Recently, I have been receiving “Coronavirus World Updates.”  I did not sign up for the updates, and I do not know who is behind them. I wouldn’t be surprised if they are a Big Pharma operation. They seem to be intended to keep fear alive and to use fear to encourage more vaccinations.  See, for example: see this.

Nothing we know about Covid justifies CNN’s call to punish the unvaccinated, segregate them from society, and force them to pay for Covid tests each and every day.  Such hyperbole as this indicates that insanity has taken hold of the issue and rational discourse is impossible. See this.

Youth were largely unaffected by the original Covid.  Now vaccine advocates  claim a new “variant” is attacking the young, which raises suspicions.  The new variant is also being used for political purpose. For example, Florida’s Republican governor who avoided lockdowns and mask mandates is being accused of responsibility for a “new outbreak” in  an area of Florida where 75% of the population is vaccinated, a higher percentage than required for herd immunity. One wonders if this “new outbreak” is really the manifestation of illnesses caused by the vaccine.

In closing I will say that I think I have given a thorough explanation of the issues. It is difficult to do, because the issue was politicized by Democrats and many dissenting expert voices were censored, thus denying us the benefit of differing expert accounts. If the virus is as serious as media and public health bureaucracies have presented it to be, there should have been open debate among experts so that the public would have a chance to understand instead of being indoctrinated by one voice.

Whoever believes my explanation is defective and can do a better job, please step forward.

Additum:

This Is Admission That Covid Vaccines Do Not Protect 

Tyranny Based On An Orchestrated “Pandemic”

If herd immunity, natural immunity, and cures exist, there is no justification for mandated universal vaccination.

How can a vaccine known to be toxic and to cause deaths and injuries be mandatory?

These mandates are certainly not related to public health.  Is mass vaccination being coerced prior to the adverse effects having time to fully reveal themselves?

See this, this, this and 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.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In a July 16, 2021, White House press briefing, press secretary Jen Psaki admitted the Biden administration is violating the First Amendment by alerting social media companies to posts and accounts it believes is peddling “misinformation” about COVID injections

This kind of corporate-government collusion to censor free speech is illegal. As noted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, “The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly”

The Biden Administration wants COVID “misinformants” to be removed from all social media platforms, not just one or two

In that same press briefing, Psaki also referred to the COVID shots as “approved,” and having “gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process.” This is verifiably false. All currently available COVID injections are authorized for emergency use only. None are approved and none have finalized their safety studies

The Biden Administration’s call to censor — through public utilities and private companies — anyone who shares information about risks and the lack of benefit of these COVID injections must be rejected on ethical, legal and Constitutional grounds

*

In a July 16, 2021, White House press briefing,1 press secretary Jen Psaki admitted the Biden Administration is violating the First Amendment by alerting social media companies to posts and accounts it believes is peddling “misinformation” about COVID injections. When asked by a reporter to expound on how this flagging works, Psaki said:

“Well, I would say first, it shouldn’t come as any surprise that we’re in regular touch with social media platforms — just like we’re in regular touch with all of you and your media outlets — about areas where we have concern, information that might be useful, information that may or may not be interesting to your viewers …

So we are regularly making sure social media platforms are aware of the latest narratives dangerous to public health that we and many other Americans seeing … And we work to engage with them to better understand the enforcement of social media platform policies.

So let me give you an example, just to illustrate it a little bit. The false narrative that remains active out there about COVID-19 vaccines causing infertility … which has been disproven time and time again.

This is troubling, but a persistent narrative that we and many have seen, and we want to know that the social media platforms are taking steps to address it. That is inaccurate, false information … And that is an example of the kind of information that we are flagging or raising …

So a couple of the steps that … could be constructive for the public health of the country are providing for Facebook or other platforms to measure and publicly share the impact of misinformation on their platform and the audience it’s reaching … with all of you to create robust enforcement strategies that bridge their properties and provide transparency about rules.

You shouldn’t be banned from one platform and not others if you — for providing misinformation out there.”

In her July 15, 2021, press briefing,2 Psaki cited “The Disinformation Dozen” report3 by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which claims 65% of anti-vaccine content on Facebook and Twitter comes from 12 individuals, including yours truly.

According to Facebook, they have removed 18 million posts with “COVID misinformation,” and connected more than 2 billion users to “reliable information,” meaning state-sanctioned information. The Biden administration is not satisfied with these already staggering numbers and thinks more must be done. Specifically, as Psaki mentions, they want the “disinformation dozen” banned from all available social media platforms.

Psaki Disinforms Public About Vaccine Approval Status

In that same July 16 press briefing, Psaki also referred to the COVID shots as “approved,” and having “gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process.”4 She said:

“The public has a right to know … And we’re dealing with a life-or-death issue here, and so everybody has a role to play in making sure there’s accurate information … It’s clear there are more [steps] that can be taken …

On the foreign government piece … the State Department’s Global Engagement Center has found that Russia and China have promoted their own vaccines through messaging that undermines Western origin vaccine development programs. So, you know, that is more than just competition about vaccines.

The risk and impact there is that this type of information magnifies, you know, the risk of potential side effects associated with Western vaccines. This is what they’re — what the information — some of this misinformation is doing — and misleads the public by falsely alleging that mRNA vaccines are untested and, thus, risky, even though many of them are approved and have gone through the gold standard of the FDA approval process.”

This is verifiably false. All currently available COVID injections are authorized for emergency use only. They are not licensed or approved. At present, the emergency use authorization applies to adults and children as young as 12.5 Those two terms, “authorized for emergency use” and “approved for use,” are not interchangeable.

Biden Administration Launches Illegal Attack on Free Speech

One wonders whether the admission that they’re flagging posts and accounts they don’t like so that social media companies can remove them is an attempt at normalizing illegal government overreach. It comes across that way.

But let’s be clear. This kind of corporate-government collusion to censor free speech violates the U.S. Constitution and is illegal. As noted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in an April 5, 2021, ruling6 in which he weighed in on the ability of social media giants to control free speech:

“The government cannot accomplish through threats of adverse government action what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly … Under this doctrine, plaintiffs might have colorable claims against a digital platform if it took adverse action against them in response to government threats.”

Even if the Biden administration is not threatening social media companies with adverse action if they refuse to censor at the government’s whim, the government cannot use private companies to do something on its behalf that it is not legally allowed to do on its own.

Put another way, it is illegal for government officials to pressure private companies into censoring free speech on their behalf or at their request, since they as government officials do not themselves have the right to infringe on free speech.

The same goes for attorneys general that have publicly called for social media companies to ban posts and deplatform accounts,7 as well as the surgeon general, Dr. Vivek Murthy, who recently stated that an “epidemic of misinformation and disinformation” is putting people’s lives at risk.8,9 He too has illegally called for “technology and social media companies to address the way misinformation and disinformation spread on their platforms.”

To that end, he even released his own 22-page report,10 which advises addressing “misinformation super-spreaders” and using educational institutions, from elementary school settings through college, as well as private funders, to “monitor and address” false and misleading information. The Rockefeller Foundation wasted no time in responding by announcing $13.5 million in new funding to help with the effort.

Again, these government officials have the right to their own opinion. But they do not have the right to censor other people’s opinion and/or information, least of all published research. And since they do not have the Constitutional right to censor Americans, they also cannot ask private companies to do it for them.

Government officials are also breaking several laws by incentivizing Americans into participating in medical experimentation, and collaborating with private companies to require personnel to participate in medical experimentation. It’s truly remarkable what’s happening, and the fact that so many laws are blatantly broken in an effort to get a needle in every arm suggests something other than public health interest is at play.

Why Is Truth About Natural Immunity Banned?

I’m still on Twitter, and in recent times, the only post deleted was one in which I indicated that naturally-infected people developed robust and long-lasting immunity, and that health officials need to be honest and admit that this immunity is very powerful.11

To my post, I had attached a paper12 published in the peer-review journal Nature. However, Twitter does censor me in a different sort of way by posting a detailed warning to users who click on any links to Mercola.com that I post on Twitter that visiting my site “may be unsafe” — which is completely false.

Recovered COVID patients have robust immunity even if their symptoms were mild and subsequent antibody count is low, because latent antibody-producing cells called memory B cells for SARS-CoV-2 still exist in their bone marrow. This was shown in another Nature study.13,14 When they encounter the SARS-CoV-2 virus again, those memory cells start churning out new antibodies, which will raise the level again to eliminate the virus.

The National Institutes of Health’s website15 even declares that recovery from COVID-19 provides “lasting immunity,” and that the immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-19 had “at least 3 out of 5 immune-system components that could recognize SARS-CoV-2 up to eight months post-infection.” This research was funded in part by the NIAID, and published in the journal Science.16

Clearly, the naturally-acquired immunity narrative poses a significant threat to the mass injection campaign. The information poses no threat to public health. Quite the contrary. The more people know about this, the less fearful they will feel. If they are the ones who recovered, they will know they now have good protection. If the former COVID patient is a family member or friend, they can be at ease with those people, knowing they pose no infection risk.

If it were really about keeping people safe from infection, natural immunity would be accepted and people would be encouraged to look at studies showing most places on earth have already achieved natural immunity. But when it comes to SARS-CoV-2, they insist even those who already have natural immunity should get a COVID shot. Why? They’re already immune! And there’s no added benefit to getting a COVID injection if you have antibodies.

Researchers at Cleveland Clinic looked at this issue, concluding that people who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at least 42 days prior to vaccination reaped no additional protection from the jabs, over and above their natural immunity.17,18

Zero Benefit and All Risk for Recovered COVID Patients

Meanwhile, the COVID injection may trigger an adverse immune response in those who have already been infected with the virus, putting them at significantly increased risk of injury and death.19 As explained by Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a cardiac surgeon and patient advocate:20

“Viral antigens persist in the tissues of the naturally infected for months. When the vaccine is used too early after a natural infection, or worse during an active infection, the vaccine force activates a powerful immune response that attacks the tissues where the natural viral antigens are persisting. This, I suggest, is the cause of the high level of adverse events and, likely deaths, we are seeing in the recently infected following vaccination.”

In early March 2021, researchers at King’s College confirmed the validity of Noorchashm’s concerns. They found people who have already had COVID-19 are three times more likely to experience vaccine side effects than those who have not been exposed to the virus, and this appears true for both mRNA and DNA versions of the vaccine.21

Using data from the Kings College ZOE app, which has logged more than 700,000 vaccinations, 35.7% of those given the Pfizer injection who had previously been infected reported side effects, compared to just 12.2% of those not previously infected.

Looking at the AstraZeneca vaccine, 52.7% of previously infected had side effects, compared to 31.9% of those who had not been previously infected. Despite these documented risks, the FDA continues to recommend the COVID shot for those with natural immunity.

Vaccination Versus Natural Immunity

Public Health England has published data showing only 44 of 6,614 previously infected persons tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection a second time.22 Of those 44, only 15 developed symptoms, so it’s quite possible the remainder were simply false positives.

Either way, the risk of reinfection after recovering from a bout of COVID-19 seems rare, and the risk of reinfection is far lower than the risk of infection faced by those who are fully “vaccinated.” As reported by Israel National News, July 13, 2021:23

“Coronavirus patients who recovered from the virus were far less likely to become infected during the latest wave of the pandemic than people who were vaccinated against COVID …

Health Ministry data on the wave of COVID outbreaks which began this May show that Israelis with immunity from natural infection were far less likely to become infected again in comparison to Israelis who only had immunity via vaccination.

More than 7,700 new cases of the virus have been detected during the most recent wave starting in May, but just 72 of the confirmed cases were reported in people who were known to have been infected previously — that is, less than 1% of the new cases. Roughly 40% of new cases — or more than 3,000 patients — involved people who had been infected despite being vaccinated.

With a total of 835,792 Israelis known to have recovered from the virus, the 72 instances of reinfection amount to 0.0086% of people who were already infected with COVID.

By contrast, Israelis who were vaccinated were 6.72 times more likely to get infected after the shot than after natural infection, with over 3,000 of the 5,193,499, or 0.0578%, of Israelis who were vaccinated getting infected in the latest wave.”

Impossible for COVID Jabs to Have Favorable Impact

In a world of differing opinions and eternally evolving science, who can claim rights to the truth? The White House press secretary seems to think the Biden administration should have dibs on the truth, while in the same breath disinforming the public by referring to the COVID shots as FDA approved with “gold standard” safety studies behind them.

Health agencies and their officials also disinform the public every time they claim vaccine-induced immunity is better than natural immunity, as this runs counter to everything we’ve ever learned about virology. It may be accurate for some diseases, but it certainly cannot be said for COVID-19. There’s far more data suggesting the COVID jab is an unnecessary risk that provides negligible benefit.

Remember, healthy adults under 50, teens and children have a less than 1% chance of hospitalization and death from COVID-19, so they don’t have a medical need for this experimental injection. The overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality ratio is a mere 0.26%. Below 40 years of age, it’s 0.01%.24 Those odds simply do not make a strong argument for mass injection with an experimental gene modification tool.

What’s more, data show the absolute risk reduction for all four COVID injections is between 0.7% and 1.3%.25,26 (Efficacy rates of 67% to 95% all refer to the relative risk reduction.) Since the absolute risk that needs to be overcome is lower than the benefit that these injections can provide, mass vaccination simply cannot have a favorable impact on the population. It’s mathematically impossible.

So, while government, public health leadership and pro-vaccine advocates insist we must follow the science, they themselves are doing anything but. For a year and a half, they’ve insisted pandemic measures like lockdowns, mask wearing and gene modification injections are the only way forward, despite mountains of evidence against each and every one of those strategies.

So, it’s not about science. If it were, they’d produce studies that overwhelmingly refute the counternarrative and prove demonstrable benefits. But they don’t. Instead, they unleash personal attacks and smear campaigns to discourage people from listening to anything that doesn’t come out of their propaganda machine.

Biden Administration Wants to Monitor Your Private Texts

The Biden Administration has now gone so far as to propose SMS carriers fact check private text messages to make sure Americans don’t share inconvenient facts to friends and family.

Ironically, White House spokesperson Kevin Munoz told Politico that this move was part of the administration’s “steadfast commitment to keep politics out of the vaccination efforts.”27 Backlash was swift, from legislators and private individuals alike, but time will tell whether it was enough to make the White House reconsider.28

It’s also not about public health, because if it were, they’d accept natural immunity, and they wouldn’t be breaking the law at every turn. No, it’s all about getting a needle in every arm — science, logic and common sense be damned. The question is why.

Many of my articles over the past year have detailed evidence pointing to this mass injection campaign being a tool to usher in a new world order of surveillance, worldwide poverty and the complete removal of medical and personal freedoms.

The Biden administration’s call to censor — through public utilities and private companies — anyone who shares information about risks and the lack of benefit of these COVID injections is clearly part of that agenda, and must be rejected on ethical, legal and Constitutional grounds.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) recently posted more than 50 video presentations from the pay-for-view Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination held online October 16 to 18, 2020, and made them available to everyone for free.

The conference’s theme was “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century” and it featured physicians, scientists and other health professionals, human rights activists, faith community leaders, constitutional and civil rights attorneys, authors and parents of vaccine injured children talking about vaccine science, policy, law and ethics and infectious diseases, including coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccines.

In December 2020, a U.K. company published false and misleading information about NVIC and its conference, which prompted NVIC to open up the whole conference for free viewing. The conference has everything you need to educate yourself and protect your personal freedoms and liberties with respect to your health.

Don’t miss out on this incredible opportunity. I was a speaker at this empowering conference and urge you to watch these video presentations before they’re censored and taken away by the technocratic elite.

*

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

Notes

1, 4 White House Press Briefing July 16, 2021

2 White House Press Briefing July 15, 2021

3 CCDH, The Disinformation Dozen

5 FDA.gov May 10, 2021

6 Ruling for writ of certiorari, President Joe Biden v. Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, April 5, 2021 (PDF)

7 Washington Post April 8, 2021

8 MSN July 16, 2021

9 HHS.gov July 15, 2021

10 HHS.gov, Confronting Health Misinformation (PDF)

11 Twitter Dr. Joseph Mercola July 15, 2021

12 Nature June 14, 2021

13 Nature May 24, 2021 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-02103647-4

14 Washington University School of Medicine May 24, 2021

15 NIH.gov NIH Research Matters January 26, 2021

16 Science February 5, 2021; 371(6529): eabf4063

17 medRxiv June 5, 2021 DOI: 10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176

18 News Medical Life Sciences June 8, 2021

19 Medium February 15, 2021

20 The Defender March 23, 2021

21 The Telegraph March 5, 2021 (Archived)

22 Daily Mail January 13, 2021, Updated January 14, 2021

23 Israel National News July 13, 2021

24 Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-5352

25 Medicina 2021; 57: 199

26 The Lancet Microbe July 1, 2021; 2(7): E279-E280

27 Politico July 12, 2021, Updated July 13, 2021

28 Fox News July 13, 2021

Featured image is from Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

More than 100,000 people flooded streets in France over the weekend and multiple COVID vaccination centers were vandalized as opposition grew to the government’s most recent pandemic strategy. In President Emmanuel Macron’s latest incarnation of lockdowns, government officials have decreed that unvaccinated individuals will no longer be allowed to enter cafes, restaurants, theaters, public transportation and more.

Needless to say, people were not happy.

France’s approach is unique, but it’s just one of many countries around the world imposing new restrictions as fears grow over a new variant of COVID-19. Australia’s recent restrictions have placed half the country under strict lockdown—even though a record 82,000 tests had identified just 111 new coronavirus cases—while restaurants in Portugal are struggling to surviveamid newly imposed restrictions.

One country not making much news is Sweden.

Sweden, of course, was maligned in 2020 for foregoing a strict lockdown. The Guardian called its approach “a catastrophe” in the making, while CBS News said Sweden had become “an example of how not to handle COVID-19.”

Despite these criticisms, Sweden’s laissez-faire approach to the pandemic continues today. In contrast to its European neighbors, Sweden is welcoming tourists. Businesses and schools are open with almost no restrictions. And as far as masks are concerned, not only is there no mandate in place, Swedish health officials are not even recommending them.

What are the results of Sweden’s much-derided laissez-faire policy? Data show the 7-day rolling average for COVID deaths yesterday was zero (see below). As in nada. And it’s been at zero for about a week now.

Even a year ago, it was clear the hyperbolic claims about “the Swedish catastrophe” were false; just ask Elon Musk (also see: here, here, and here). But a year later the evidence is overwhelming that Sweden got the pandemic mostly right. Sweden’s overall mortality rate in 2020 was lower than most of Europe and its economy suffered far less. Meanwhile, today Sweden is freer and healthier than virtually any other country in Europe.

As much of the world remains gripped in fear and nations devise new restrictions to curtail basic freedoms, Sweden remains a vital and shining reminder that there is a better way.

*

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 Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune.

Featured image is from Frankie Fouganthin, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons