Global Research

Indian Doctors for Truth (IDT) have written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressing the importance of an urgent need to stop the overzealous universal vaccination drive against COVID-19.

Twenty doctors have signed the letter and highlight numerous scientific data about immunity achieved by the Indian population among both adults and children in light of the latest sero-survey done by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in Delhi along with the World Health Organization.

Based on the evidence, IDT urges the PM to immediately stop the drive for vaccination of the entire population and limit it to voluntary vaccination of only those above 60 years and/or people with severe degree of comorbidity.

The letter itself runs to five pages but the signatories enclosed 21 pages of references and evidence in support of their claims. What is presented below is a summary of some of the key points made in the five-page letter. The full letter and list of signatories can be read on the Awaken India Movement website.

The doctors argue that the first principle of medicine is to do no harm and to benefit patients. They point out that the vaccination drive is doing more harm than any good for the people of India and present the PM with scientific facts about SARS-CoV-2 related immunity and vaccination.

Those who have recovered from COVID-19 develop robust and long-lasting immunity against SARS-CoV-2, even after mild or asymptomatic infections. The chances of reinfection among these people, including from the emerging variants of the same virus, are extremely rare or non-existent. The WHO in its interim guidance released on 2 July 2021 has also recognised the fact of acquired immunity in all those who have had previous infection with SARS-CoV-2.

There is no evidence to show that those who have recovered from the infection will get any additional benefit from vaccination.

The epidemiology of COVID-19 in India is very different from other countries and varies much within the country itself: there are differences between urban and rural communities and between socioeconomic strata. There is therefore a need for policies that address prevention of COVID-19, including the policy on vaccination, which account for the situation in India.

According to available reports, the percentage of the population infected in the US, UK and similar countries is at 1-23%. In India, recent sero-surveys at Delhi and Mumbai have reported a positivity of 50-70%, indicating that a significant proportion of Indians have already been infected and will therefore not need the vaccine.

A number of reports have been published stressing that India has already achieved herd immunity. Mathematical models have explained what percentage of a population is required to be infected and varies for different populations: the disease-induced herd immunity level can be as low as 43%.

The case fatality rate (CFR) is usually reported by the government: the number of deaths per 100 confirmed cases as detected by antigen or rt-PCR test. But as renowned epidemiologist Dr John Ioannidis shows, the proper way of counting death rate in diseases with a CFR less than five is infection mortality rate.

Therefore, considering the fact of high level of infections in India, near herd immunity and very low levels of infection fatality rates, vaccinating the entire population will not serve any purpose. Moreover, given the negligible risk to children from COVID-19, trial of the vaccines for them or even consideration of approval is highly unethical.

Four recent studies indicate that almost 99.9% of the population have immune system memory from previous coronavirus infections and that, whether the actual coronavirus infection or the vaccine, the immune system gets activated and vaccines in fact can be more harmful in an already immune population.

Rapid and efficient memory-type immune responses occur reliably in virtually all unvaccinated individuals who are exposed to SARS-CoV-2. The effectiveness of further boosting the immune response through vaccination is therefore highly doubtful. Vaccination may instead aggravate disease through antibody-dependent enhancement.

The Indian government’s own operative guidelines have mentioned that “COVID-19 vaccines have limited safety data”. Moreover, adverse effects of the vaccine are found the world over. For example, as per the EUDRA report dated June 19, more than 1.3 million people in EU countries have had vaccine adverse effects and 13,867 people have died following vaccination. Furthermore, as in many countries, in India also, the death rate from COVID-19 seems to have increased with the increase in the vaccination drive.

The number of deaths per thousand population did not increase much if at all in most countries in 2020. Even in India, deaths per thousand increased 0.5% in 2019 but 0.49% in 2020. However, they seem to have increased after the vaccine drive.

Considering all the above, IDT strongly urge that the overzealous universal vaccination drive, with widespread incidences of coercion and vaccination being made mandatory for jobs and student exams, must be stopped immediately.

The doctors also call on the government to offer people above the age of 60 and those with severe comorbidities vaccination a voluntary basis with full disclosure of warnings about side effects and the lack of safety data – as mentioned in the government’s operative guidelines for COVID-19.

They call for a stop on all trials on children for the vaccine and urge the government to institute detailed studies to analyse the observation that there has been a surge in cases and deaths due to COVID-19 in India since March-April 2021, coinciding with the roll out of the vaccination drive.

A glaring omission from the IDT letter is any focus on vaccinating pregnant women. This, too, should be addressed.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This article was translated from French by the author (revised by Global Research), first published by Mondialisation.ca.

The original article in French is entitled:

Des « vaccins » au nanoGraphène, super magnétique, pour l’Intelligence artificielle et l’Internet des corps

Par Theara TruthNews, 11 juillet 2021

***

According to Theara Truth, the COVID-19 “vaccines” may contain graphene oxide, a substance which has been used in medicine – medical research for several years. 

This informative article includes numerous internet links (scientific studies and videos) demonstrating the magnetism in men and women that can be caused by the vaccination. Scientific experts have investigated this strange phenomenon affecting people who have been vaccinated, Independent teams have analyzed the contents of the vaccine in laboratories.

The AFP Factual website tried to deny the facts of magnetism despite the extensive scientific research on this question. 

AFP underlines among other things that the scientific expert 

“To support her remarks, Jane Ruby shows screenshots of documents from a German company, Chemicell, and assures us, citing her, that “magnetofection reagents are being developed. , designed and intended, for research “, and should not be used “for any drug intended for humans “…

AFP quotes other experts who deny the phenomenon including those pertaining to Big Pharma’s Pfizer which markets its mRNA vaccine worldwide. 

Should we trust a company which in 2009 was indicted by the US Department of Justice for Fraudulent Marketing  

It is worth noting that the face masks containing graphene have been recalled in Canada. 

Mondialisation.ca invites you to read this article and consult the documents cited by the author.

***

At the end of April I wrote an article entitled ‘The human bomb’: the effects of  the ‘vaccines’ on those who are not vaccinated” (for further details see article in French cited below), which described a process of contamination of the unvaccinated’ by ‘transmission of something’, allegedly the S protein [spike], particularly affecting women and the reproductive system, supported by thousands of testimonials from women, articles and scientific papers on ‘self-disseminating’ vaccines. 

The article in French was entitled: La bombe humaine: effets de la « vaccination » ARNM sur les personnes non vaccinées?

Is this a “simple”  phenomenon of “excretion” ie.  because the spike proteins are transmitted physically, by the air or the skin? That remains to be proven!

I should mention, however that Dr. Carrie Madej, as well as myself, were already talking about FREQUENCIES as the real factor in this possible “transmission”.

The following diagram describes what is happening with the vaccination.

And here is what is happening with the people who are vaccinated.

Certain facts are already proven, others are hypotheses, result of connections from all the elements of research – in my files – and of links with official documents.

We have seen hundreds of videos of people “vaccinated” putting magnets and metal objects on the vaccinated upper arm or sometimes on their foreheads. We can thus observe in these videos that:

Magnets stick.

Metal objects also stick.

Smart phones stick …

This is not “fake”. We can see that this is actually happening, as for example in these videos:

There are more and more videos which confirm the phenomenon, namely that vaccinated people experience an unusual electromagnetic effect.

Far from being a mere idea, this effect is tested by placing metal, spoons, forks, a magnet, and even a cell phone at the inoculation site. They stick to the skin of the vaccinated person.

The Dr. Pedro Chavez did an interview on the subject (in Spanish, translated into English): scroll down:

“There are more and more videos and therefore more and more vaccinated people who then suffer from an unusual effect of electromagnetism. Far from being a mere idea, this effect is tested by placing metal, spoons, forks, a magnet, and even a cell phone at the inoculation site. They adhere to the skin of the vaccinated person. Mexican doctor Pedro Chavez, who has treated and registered several patients suffering from this phenomenon (see below), says no one can explain what it may be or what causes it, all is speculation. Are the places magnetized too: the arms, the neck, the area under the collarbone, the forehead? It is also striking that this effect has been produced in patients who were vaccinated against influenza last year.

Chavez believes that to find out what happens to them, it is necessary to carry out numerous studies in the organism of magnetized people armed with frequency meters. He proposes to do them even in places where there are 5G antennas, antennas that will be activated between June and July. Very interesting conversation with the colonel and also a medical doctor Pedro Chavez. »(Extract from the text in Spanish, Translated with www.DeepL.com ) (1) Source: Madrid Market Magazine

As doctors, we are faced with the biological damage caused by vaccines, there are very extensive studies on the subject, but here we are faced with the electrophysical damage, that is, ferric particles and electromagnetism. of these particles.

On Uno TV de Mexico, the magnet is said to be fake. And, Maldita, a fact checker published that we put a magnet in their armpit and that this magnet is the one that attracted the metal particle (Hahaha…). And another said we put glue on them so that the magnet or the metal stays there. There is no one more blind than the one who does not want to see.

(source. Translated with www.DeepL.com/ )

To watch the other videos, click HERE

Objects that stick to people. Reality or fiction?

Scientific study on the electromagnetism of people vaccinated in Luxembourg:

Summary and conclusion of the survey work carried out by Amar Goudjil (European forum for vaccine vigilance / mamer, June 06, 2021)

To visit the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance website, click HERE.

*

Of course, it seems obvious that something that has strong electromagnetic properties, ranging from a “mild” to a very strong effect, has been injected (without acknowledgment) into these messenger RNA vaccines, with the aim of “boosting the passage of messenger RNA into the cell by magnetofection”. [magnetofection: a method of transfection that uses magnetic fields to concentrate particles containing nucleic acid in target cells.]

For more information, visit this site:  chemicell.com

We have since learned that it is scientifically possible to inject programmable EMF nanoparticles into vaccines or drug delivery systems.

We have found several scientific papers proving that it is feasible and that it can even lead to dopamine dependence in rats which are ‘magnetized’ in the brain and then placed in a high EMF environment where dopamine is produced, and no ‘happy’ in an environment without EMF (think ‘smart cities’).

The principle is called ‘magnetofection:

A “daring” new method uses a magnetized protein to activate brain cells in a rapid, reversible and non-invasive way.

American researchers have developed a new method to control brain circuits associated with complex animal behaviors, using genetic engineering to create a magnetized protein that remotely activates specific groups of nerve cells.

Understanding how the brain generates behavior is one of the ultimate goals of neuroscience – and one of their most difficult questions. In recent years, researchers have developed a number of methods that allow them to remotely control specific groups of neurons and probe the functioning of neural circuits.

(…)

Several previous studies have shown that proteins in nerve cells that are activated by heat and mechanical pressure can be genetically engineered to become sensitive to radio waves and magnetic fields, attaching them to an iron-storing protein called ferritin, or to inorganic paramagnetic particles. These methods represent an important advance – they have, for example, already been used to regulate the level of glucose in the blood of mice – but they involve multiple components which must be introduced separately.

Next, the researchers inserted the Magneto DNA sequence into the genome of a virus, along with the gene encoding the green fluorescent protein and regulatory DNA sequences that cause the construct to be expressed only in specific types. neurons. They then injected the virus into the brains of mice, targeting the entorhinal cortex, and dissected the brains of the animals to identify cells that fluoresce green. Using microelectrodes, they then showed that applying a magnetic field to brain slices activated Magneto so that cells produce nerve impulses.

(theguardian.com) Translated with www.DeepL.com

Using their method, published last year in Nature, biologists can turn neurons in a living animal on or off at will – quickly, repeatedly, and without an implant – by modifying cells to make them receptive to radio waves or to a magnetic field:

Flick a Switch in the Head

Using new technology, scientists are able to wirelessly control mouse brain cells with the push of a button. The first thing they did was make the mice hungry.

(Source: The Rockefeller University )

Nanographene is possibly the nanotechnology used:

Proof of injected nanotechnology:

Thanks to the scientists of Quinta columna, we can observe that these injected nanomagnets are based on graphene nanoxide: La Quinta Columna: Analysis of a vaccine vial confirms the presence of graphene nanoparticles

Note: further testing with more vaccine samples is underway and will be published soon.

See also the following references:

” Urgent announcement: COVID-19 is caused by graphene oxide introduced into the body in several ways “, June 25, 2021.

COVID vaccines in all their variants, AstraZeca, Pfizer, Moderna, Sinovac, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, etc., also contain a considerable dose of graphene oxide nanoparticles. This is the result of their analysis by electron microscopy and spectroscopy, among other techniques used by various public universities in our country.

La Quinta Columna: “Graphene oxide has its absorption band in 5G“.

“They discovered that graphene oxide nanoparticles are actually compatible with neurons and other brain cells. Graphene oxide nanotubes seek out and attach to synapses.

Graphene nanoparticles were excitable by frequencies in subjects. To be more precise: graphene nanoparticles find resonance in the 41.6 GHz microwave frequency of 5G technology. (Source:  orwell.city)

The supporters of the World Economic Forum’s  Great Reset, are promoting the so-called “Fourth Technological Revolution” based on bio-digital nanotechnology, genetics, brain implants, as well as the “fusion of humans with the artificial intelligence” (transhumanism). ( latribune.fr )

Graphene nano particles, is also a European project of millions of euros (the Graphene Flagship )

AstraZeneca is part of the Graphene Flagship. BUT the Graphene Flagship is also linked to: The “Human Brain Project”

“Graphene sensors read low frequency neural waves associated with distinct brain states”

“A biocompatible graphene-based implant safely measures and predicts brain states”

See the website  graphene-flagship.eu  and Soothing the symptoms of anxiety with graphene oxide (Relieving symptoms of anxiety through the graphene oxide)

Graphene oxide interacts with the part of the brain responsible for forming fear-related memories, which cause anxiety. It doesn’t work like a drug, by inhibiting receptor function – on the contrary, it temporarily shuts down the whole mechanism long enough to disrupt fear-related pathology in the brain, without damaging it, ”Ballerini continues. Graphene oxide interrupts signals from anxiety-related neurons without affecting surrounding neurons or cells. In other words, it just “turns off” communications between specific neurons. (Translation from English, source:  graphene-flagship.eu )

(It reminds me of the ‘soma’ in The Brave New Word! No more anxiety, all calm and docile ..)

The ‘Human Brain Project ”

This common space, supported by the GSMA and the European Commission and organized by ICFO, will showcase innovative commercial applications and the most recent prototypes in the fields of graphene, neuroscience, artificial intelligence and personalized drug development. (see this and this)

Graphene is a super electromagnetic conductor , now used in medicine, acting on the BRAIN .

“Inbrain Neuroelectronics is developing a minimally invasive intelligent neural interface which, powered by artificial intelligence (AI) and the use of big data, will have the ability to read and modulate brain activity, to detect biomarkers specific to therapy and elicit adaptive responses for optimal results in personalized neurological therapies. The investment will allow the company to conduct trials and solidify the safety of graphene as a new standard of care and medical attention in neurotechnology.” (Www.graphene-info.com)

GRAPHENE for vaccines

See this.

They tell you everything, but can you see?

Ray Kurzweil [American author, engineer, researcher, and futurist] predicts that humans will become hybrids in the 2030s. This means that our brains will be able to connect directly to the Cloud, where there will be thousands of computers, and that these computers will increase our current intelligence. According to him, the brain will be connected via nanorobots, tiny robots made from strands of DNA: “Our thinking will then be a hybrid of biological and non-biological thinking,” he said. (money.cnn.com)

The UK Ministry of Defense says:

“The ethical outlook on human augmentation is going to change and it could happen quickly. There might be a moral obligation to increase people, especially in cases where it promotes well-being or protects us from new threats. ” (www.fromrome.info)

On September 24, 2020, Boris Johnson made a statement on vaccines, nanotechnologies, and the New World Order:

Coming back to the ‘transmission’ of something to the ‘unvaccinated’, I have been thinking for weeks that it is more a question of poisoning and ‘transmission by toxic EMFs emitted by these nanomagneto graphene particles, and not because of a “physical spike protein” that would come out intact like a super ghost to attack the body nearby, flying from their mouths to your nose (not necessary), but mainly because of these magnetic nanos.

A British doctor makes an interesting synthesis: nanomagnetic particles manage to cross the blood-brain barrier and are lodged in the brain. (www.brighteon.com)

Source: https://forlifeonearth.weebly.com/vaxxines–genocide.htm

What’s going on?

a) SOMETHING goes from person to person

b) or NOT really, but the FREQUENCY at which it is transmitted, passing, and / or WELL that frequency can be deployed ANYWHERE.

In Russian, US and European medicine, also the great pioneers of frequencies, electromagnetic fields, in army studies, we know that any frequency corresponds to an organ or a disease or a specific symptom or a pathogen. It can be used to heal or destroy anyone.

See :

• 1976 NAVAL MEDICAL RESEARCH REPORT
• 3,700 REFERENCES ON THE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF MICROWAVE RADIATION

Bibliography of recalled biological phenomena (“effects”}) and clinical manifestations attributed to microwave and radio-frequency radiation: compilation and integration of the report and of seven supplements

Source:  ehtrust.org/

This is used in electromagnetic wars. (riskgroupllc.com)

So what is this scientific witchcraft for? Magnetic nanos are used to push messenger RNA deeper into cells and produce more ‘spike proteins’ [Spike]?

Yes, very possible, but who can prove it to us? Have unvaccinated ‘contaminated’ people been analyzed for the spike protein invading their cells? No.

The point is, these injections change the electromagnetic field of the unconscious victims of the jabs.

 “Recently, magnetically reactive HYDROGEL, as a type of smart hydrogels, has been introduced in biomedical applications to enhance the biological activities of cells, tissues or organs. This is mainly attributed to its magnetic reactivity to the EXTERNAL magnetic field and to obtaining functional structures to remotely regulate the physical, biochemical and mechanical properties of the medium surrounding cells, tissues or organs. “

Source

See also another related study

Conclusion

The ‘Vaccine’ which is not a vaccine, has nothing to do with the ‘virus’, with a ‘cure’ which ‘protects’.

Many people around the World are now fully aware of the trend in post-vaccine deaths and injuries. The most recent figures are the following

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 17 July 2021 – 18,928 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.8 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 7 July 2021 -1,470 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 9 July 2021 – 10,991 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2 million injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 31,389 Covid-19 injection related deaths and almost 5 million injuries reported so far in July 2021.

Nota Bene: It is important to be aware that the official figures above (reported to the health authorities) are but a small percentage of the actual figures.

Only between 1% and 15% of post-vaccine victims are reported.

Nanographene, even inhaled, is very toxic and linked among other things to the formation of thromboses, pulmonary fibrosis, brain damage, loss of smell and taste!

See this and this.

What is the purpose of installing nano graphene in the human body? (if he/she survives)

“Graphene is the most likely nanoparticle for the manufacture of biomedical sensors for biodetection, bioimaging and therapeutic use, due to some of its stimulating qualities such as remarkable ability to process in aqueous media, functional surface properties, surface enhanced Raman scattering, cell growth capacity and certainty of biocompatibility. This study highlights the state of the art and the future prospects of graphene for its use as a sensor in miniaturized and biomedical detection devices for bioimaging, biodetection and diagnostic applications. ” Source

There is another significant (gigantic) goal which is being pursued:

“there is the fact that these ‘nanomagneto’ of Graphene, these ‘bio sensors’, can respond and communicate with an external EMF signal” in their own words, and  can be used for ‘neuro modulation’ (Article and video, la Quinta Columna, see this.

And without ‘internal sender receivers, how could 5G’ read minds?

THEY SAY: 5G is a technology that can ‘read’ thoughts’ and ‘insert thoughts’.

The Chilean president Sebastian Pinera  has stated that:

“Machines will be able to insert thoughts and feelings thanks to 5G. “

Watch the video in Spanish with English subtitles here. or click screen below.

An undisclosed goal, a secret in the hands of the transhumanist technocratic elites?

Translation by the author. Revised and edited by Global Research.

*

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

All images in this article are from Theara Truth News

A peer-reviewed study by the Environmental Working Group recommends stringent health-based exposure standards for both children and adults for radiofrequency radiation emitted from wireless devices. EWG’s children’s guideline is the first of its kind and fills a gap left by federal regulators.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health, relies on the methodology developed by the Environmental Protection Agency to assess human health risks arising from toxic chemical exposures. EWG scientists have applied the same methods to radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices, including cellphones and tablets.

EWG recommends the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, adjust its woefully outdated health standards for wireless radiation, last revised a quarter-century ago, well before wireless devices became ubiquitous, heavily used appliances synonymous with modern life. The recommendation draws on data from a landmark 2018 study from the National Toxicology Program, or NTP, one of the largest long-term studies on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure.

EWG’s new guidelines, the first developed in the U.S. to focus on children’s health, recommend that children’s exposure overall be 200 to 400 times lower than the whole-body exposure limit set by the FCC in 1996.

The EWG recommended limit for so-called whole-body Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR, for children is 0.2 to 0.4 milliwatts per kilogram, or mW/kg. For adults, EWG recommends a whole-body SAR limit of 2 to 4 mW/kg, which is 20 to 40 times lower than the federal limit.

The FCC has not set a separate standard for children. Its standards for radiofrequency radiation set a maximum SAR of 0.08 watts per kilogram, or W/kg, for whole-body exposure and an SAR for localized spatial peak – the highest exposure level for a specific part of the body, such as the brain – of 1.6 W/kg for the general population.

The NTP studies examined the health effects of 2G and 3G wireless radiation and found there is “clear evidence” of a link between exposure to radiofrequency radiation and heart tumors in laboratory animals. Similar results were reported by a team of Italian scientists from the Ramazzini Institute.

EWG scientists say that more research is needed on the health impacts of the latest generation of communication technologies, such as 5G. In the meantime, EWG’s recommendation for strict, lower exposure limits for all radiofrequency sources, especially for children.

When the FCC established its radiofrequency radiation limits, following the passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, relatively few Americans, and likely no children, owned and used cellphones.

Much has changed since the federal limits were set, including technology and how these devices are used. A survey completed by the nonprofit Common Sense Media in March 2020, just before the start of the Covid-19 spread in the U.S., found that 46 percent of 2- to 4-year-olds, and 67 percent of 5- to 8-year-olds, had their own mobile devices, such as a tablet or smartphone.

With remote learning, a necessity during the Covid-19 pandemic, phones, tablets and other wireless devices became a part of life for young children, tweens and teens nationwide.

“The FCC must consider the latest scientific research, which shows that radiation from these devices can affect health, especially for children,” said Uloma Uche, Ph.D., EWG environmental health science fellow and lead author of the study.

“It has been 25 years since the FCC set its limits for radiofrequency radiation. With multiple sources of radiofrequency radiation in the everyday environment, including Wi-Fi, wireless devices and cell towers, protecting children’s health from wireless radiation exposures should be a priority for the FCC,” she added.

Reviewing 5G and other aspects of wireless technology should be the focus of public health agencies, noted Cook. “It is long past time the federal government made exposure to 5G wireless devices safe. We strongly believe those exposures deserve far more investigation and scientific rigor than has been applied to date.”

“The evidence shows that children absorb more radiofrequency radiation than adults, and the developing body of a child is more vulnerable to such effects,” said Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., EWG’s vice president for science investigations and co-author of the study.

“More research on the safety and sustainability of wireless technology is essential,” added Naidenko. “Meanwhile, there are simple steps everyone can take to protect their health, such as keeping wireless devices farther from their bodies.”

There are a number of easy, precautionary steps consumers can take until the government conducts the rigorous scientific assessment the issue deserves, which should have occurred years ago.

“Based on our review of the health risks and the inadequacy of current standards to protect children, while the science evolves, it is perfectly reasonable for parents to consider minimizing or eliminating radiofrequency radiation sources at home by relying more on wired internet access, and to urge schools to take comparable steps to reduce classroom and campus exposure,” said Cook.

Other health-protective tips for consumers who want to reduce radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices include using a headset or speaker, texting instead of talking, and limiting the time children spend on smart phones.

Find all of EWG’s tips to reduce exposure to wireless radiation here.

EWG’s recommendation for limits for radiofrequency radiation exposure is its latest effort to advance the public dialogue about science-based standards that protect public health.

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

The so-called Pegasus Project, which hit media headlines, has highlighted India in a clutch of countries where snooping of the telephones of citizens is widely practised as state policy. 

The Washington Post, which spearheaded the Pegasus Project,  proposes to monitor the responses from these 10 select countries. Presumably, these are early days. In fact, Hungary, one of these 10 countries, has thrown the gauntlet down at WaPo posing some uncomfortable questions:

“Have you asked the same questions of the governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Germany or France? In the case you have, how long did it take for them to reply and how did they respond? Was there any intelligence service to help you formulate the questions?” read more 

Very pertinent questions, indeed. Snooping is one of the oldest peccadilloes of man — as ancient as prostitution, perhaps. It becomes responsible voyeurism but a predatory state can abuse it. I will narrate an incident to reinforce this point. 

The year was 1992. About two months into my assignment as the head of the Iran-Pakistan-Afghanistan Division in the External Affairs Ministry, one afternoon I had an unannounced visitor in South Block who was in charge of India’s “counter-intelligence.” After pleasantries over a cup of tea, he put me at ease by coming straight to the subject to state that he had no business to transact with me but simply was curious to get acquainted with me. 

He said — I won’t mention his name out of great respect for my departed colleague’s rare integrity and moral fibre — the IPA Division fell in the ambit of his “charge”, given the high sensitivity of the work for national security. He said he wanted to meet me in person after listening to my phone conversations, watching my functioning and lifestyle and even digging into my past, sensing I was someone with whom he could walk with into the night.  

That was my first “encounter” in real life with snooping. It didn’t jolt me as we had just returned after the assignment in Islamabad, and snooping was taken as a fact of life in inter-state relationships. 

As time passed and my IB friend and I became close personal friends, I got to know things that I have no option but to carry to my grave. Now, all those shenanigans took place under Congress governments. Therefore, even if the present government indeed did all that the Pegasus Project alleges, it was only “business as usual”. This is one thing. 

Second, the questions that Hungary flung at WaPo are very relevant. The ex-DIA whistleblower Edward Snowden has reacted to the Pegasus Project calling for a global moratorium on the international spyware trade. read more 

But entrenched powers never abdicate. Knowledge is power and the power to blackmail or defang adversaries or act in real time gives decisive advantage. Without such advantage, US President Donald Trump couldn’t have possibly murdered Iranian general Qassem Soleimani or Barack Obama decapitated Osama bin Laden! 

The root problem is that national interests get arbitrarily defined by ruling elites. Obama thought it was in America’s “enlightened national interests” to tap German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s private cell phone. Clearly, snooping is not limited to autocracies or post-modern authoritarianism. 

Thus, selectively maligning Hungary and India is intriguing. Why so? The two countries are democracies with traces of post-modern authoritarianism, perhaps. Both are what American strategists call “global swing states.” 

Succinctly put, the global swing states are influential democracies that provide most significant opportunities for the US foreign policy in the early 21st century, since they possess the capability and legitimacy to bolster the interlocking web of norms, institutions, rules, and relationships that for six decades preserved peace among the great powers, fostered economic prosperity, and facilitated the spread of freedom.

But the present global order confronts numerous challenges, some emanating from China’s rise and others from a diverse set of international developments. These challenges hold the potential to seriously fragment the international order in a way that the US and its allies will suffer the consequences. 

Hungary and India offer great potential as partners to extend the global order not only in their common commitment to democratic institutions but also in their growing economies and their geographical locations in their respective regions that is highly strategic. Therefore, the choices they make whether by way of taking on new responsibilities as Washington’s allies or their preference for free-ride could, in aggregate, decisively influence the trajectory of today’s world. 

This gives them a greater impact than their population or economic output might otherwise warrant and explains why they are prioritised in the US strategic calculus. If push comes to shove, Washington will not hesitate to use coercion or even “regime change”. 

Hungary and India are swing states with assertive nationalism. For the uninitiated, Hungary is the first European country to use China’s the COVID-19 vaccine Sinopharm, and it recently signed an agreement to open a Chinese university campus in Budapest by 2024, which would make the Shanghai-based Fudan University the first Chinese university campus in Europe. 

Sinopharm is an effective vaccine and is readily available, and China is open to technology transfer. Hungary plans to produce Sinopharm vaccine locally in a big plant being set up at a cost of US$193 million in the eastern town of Debrecen that would make the country self-sufficient in vaccine production from next year at vastly more economic terms than if it were to import Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Moderna, etc. 

Fudan ranks among top 100 world universities and will help raise the standard of higher education in Hungary, providing courses to 6,000 students and the $1.8 billion project will be met through a $1.5 billion loan from a Chinese bank. 

Hungary calls this the strategy of “Eastern Opening”, which favours increased cooperation with countries like China and Russia. Clearly, there is disquiet that Hungary is transforming as “a kind of advanced bastion of Eastern great powers in the European Union.” The US Embassy in Budapest expressed reservations over the Fudan university coming to Hungary “given Beijing’s proven track record of using academic institutions to advance a malign influence agenda and stifle intellectual freedom.” 

Again, last year, Hungary negotiated a $2 billion loan from China’s Exim Bank for the construction of a railway line between Budapest and Belgrade, as part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Hungary also hosts Huawei’s largest supply centre outside China! 

The Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has maligned western powers for engaging in “liberal imperialism” and his right-wing populism has become a serious obstacle to EU cohesion and US-EU consensus over China. 

Of course, Prime Minister Modi has been tactful and took the “Chanakyan” route, but his pursuit of independent foreign policies generates an anxiety syndrome in the American mind. What annoys Washington is that unlike Orban, who is openly defiant, Delhi followed an overtly pro-American foreign policy that convinced the folks in the Beltway that they nettled a crucial global swing state in “Indo-Pacific”. read more 

Under EAM S. Jaishankar’s watch, India did go out of the way to harmonise with Washington. Former US President Trump pointedly named Jaishankar at the “Howdy Modi” mega event in Houston for making profound contributions to US-Indian partnership. 

But then, in the multipolar world setting in the Age of Internet, Chanakyan diplomacy has limitations. Washington will not allow Delhi to wriggle out of its embrace, and has lately begun to taunt Modi Government, knowing the latter’s sensitivity to its international “image”.

The recent hype in India’s ties with Russia, especially the welcome for Sputnik V vaccine, and the high level meetings through 2021 to give swagger to the special partnership would have set alarm bells ringing in the Beltway. read more

Despite sustained efforts by the US lobbyists in the media to turn the pitch of Sino-Indian tensions into hostile mode, Delhi walks the fine line. India’s ambivalence on QUAD is plain to see. There is no progress on the trade and economic agenda for advancing Biden’s Keep America Great project. The US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is scrambling to visit Delhi.

Delhi is not performing as a swing state to strengthen Washington’s dual containment of Russia and China. Sure thing, the Empire strikes back! WaPo, Guardian, Amnesty, etc. are old cold-war era flagships. WaPo is reputed to be wired into the US intelligence establishment. 

India’s tragedy is, alas, it is a divided house today. Large sections of opinion are averse to saying a nice word about Modi Govt, especially progressive forces who can otherwise sense the hidden agenda behind the Pegasus Project to pressurise India.

All Global Research articles 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 creation of new structures for domestic rule that are militarized, invisible to the public and offer no possibility of appeal to the judicial is the defining characteristic of the Biden administration. The Atlantic Council’s report “Domestic violent extremism and the intelligence challenge” (May 2021) is the locus classicus for many new arguments made by the administration at congressional hearings and think tank seminars as camouflage for a radical transformation of law enforcement into a division of the intelligence structure. For that reason, the report deserves special attention.

The author of the report, Mitchell D. Silber, is no stranger to the art of pushing the envelope for tyranny in American policy. Deeply connected to Israel, and to foundations linked to Israel, Silber served as director of intelligence analysis for the NYPD (New York City Police Department). 

Silber was never a police officer who walked a beat. He established his policy credentials by serving on a task force of the Council on Foreign Relations addressing terrorist financing for 9/11 and then went on to be compensated for his hypocrisy during a gig as expert on “capital markets intelligence” at the Carson Group, a private equity firm that serves the super-rich. 

In the Atlantic Council report, Silber draws on policy proposals he made previously in his controversial report “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat” for NYPD. That report was condemned (and eventually removed from the NYPD website) by the Brennan Center for Justice because of the radical religious and racial profiling that he proposed for local law enforcement, including the suggestion that common Islamic religious practices indicate extremism.  

This new report for the Atlantic Council on “domestic violent extremism” presents a fantastical description of the “intelligence failures” leading up to the “storming of the Capitol Building” on January 6, 2021 and it concludes with recommendations for even more bureaucracy to track, and to punish, American citizens.     

What we know for certain is that on January 6, 2021 confused photographs and videos of people, dressed up in costumes associated with white nationalist extremism, cavorting in and around the Capitol Building and jostling with police, was released to the corporate media. The images were accompanied by stories that described the intentions of these “extremists” to storm the Congress and to stop the final certification of the presidential election. 

Those involved have not been interviewed by more objective sources, and never allowed to tell their side of the story. The individuals photographed are not identified by name, or granted an opportunity to explain their actions.  

The corporate media accepted without condition the story of a violent riot and five deaths, but as I have written, the entire tale is dubious. 

In Silber’s hands, however, the event becomes a justification for big bureaucratic budgets. He explains that this “intelligence failure” means that we need a DVEAU (Domestic Violent Extremism Unit) under the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), an existing bureaucracy that currently reports to the Director of National Intelligence. The timing of the proposal was linked to the announcement by DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on May 11, 2021 that a domestic terrorism branch will be revived within DHS Intelligence & Analysis (I&A).

Silber uses evocative acronyms like DVE (domestic violent extremism) and REMV (racial or ethnically motivated violence) that give legitimacy to the establishment of an unaccountable shadow government that will shove its snout deep in the Federal trough, while setting the stage for the oppression of domestic opposition by intelligence agencies unaccountable to the judicial branch.  

Screenshot from Atlantic Council

That is to say, the institutions that will sprout from the seeds sowed by this report will be free to decide that an American citizen is engaged in domestic extremism and then to monitor, and to interfere, without any court approval.

This proposal to unleash the intelligence apparatus against American citizens did not emerge in a vacuum. The foundations for unaccountable domestic law enforcement are being laid down at precisely the moment citizens are awakening to how the COVID19 vaccine regime is being enforced by government officials who promote dangerous substances as medical necessities. That is to say, the campaign against DVE (domestic violent extremism) is being unleashed at precisely the moment that the collapse of governance in the United States is becoming manifest.  

The “intelligence failure” jig to the tune of “old wine in new bottles” 

Silber’s report assumes that 1/6 was a domestic variation of the 9/11 “intelligence failure” that can be best solved by a “reform of the structure of the Federal government” that will subject all American citizens to direct control by the director of national intelligence. 

The analogy between 1/6 and 9/11 he falls back on is apt in the sense that both events were media shows orchestrated by insiders to force through a radical restructuring of the Federal government that ended accountability and that ushered in an empire of shadows completely detached from the Constitution. 

Silber recommends that a large chunk of law enforcement should be woven into the “intelligence community” and that it must take a “forward-leaning stance” towards domestic terrorism. The term “forward-leaning stance” suggests a focus on “precrime,” the “connecting the dots” process whereby the associations between citizens, comments made by citizens in emails, or in social media, are fed into supercomputers that follow biased algorithms and then are used to tag, and to convict, the innocent in advance. 

For example, if a citizen has been posting on Facebook about the dangers of COVID19 vaccines and then she runs a red light the next day, that action can be interpreted by the government as an act of domestic terrorism because of the presence of such social media postings. Appeals to science, or to the Constitution, can be denied by faceless actors at DVEAU. 

It is no accident that Silber describes the imagined terrorists behind 1/6 as “Born in the USA,” a reference to Bruce Springsteen’s song about the frustrations of working-class whites. The report is a gambit to open the door to the identification of all white working-class people as the equivalent of Al-Qaeda if they question COVID19, 9/11 or the tyranny of global finance. Needless to say, a twisted version of civil rights and anti-racism can also be employed in this operation so as to make this delta strain of fascism feel “progressive” for the weak-minded. 

Silber paints vivid pictures of networks of connected “domestic terrorist” cells who practice “leaderless resistance” as they adhere blindly to “bizarre conspiracies.” These networks of terrorists seem to be a cut and paste from previous Atlantic Council reports on the response to 9/11, such as “The Post 9-11 Partnership: Transatlantic Cooperation against Terrorism” (December, 2004). 

The myth of “leaderless resistance” in Islamic terrorism was of tremendous help in securing juicy budgets for mass surveillance. The fact that leaderless resistance is a political impossibility does not pose much of a problem for these opaque bureaucracies as their activities will never be made public, or be subjected to external review. 

Silber’s attitude towards the Constitution is revealing. He laments that the Constitution gives law enforcement “less latitude” than is required to address these new extremists and he regrets that the current mood in America does not support a “Patriot 2.0” aimed at domestic terrorism. 

The assumption is that law enforcement and intelligence must stop terrorism, domestic and foreign, and that they are hobbled by an outdated Constitution. The reality is that if we take the Constitution out of the policy loop, there will no longer be any rule of law, or any legitimate government left. Without a constitution, the distinction between government agencies, contractors and organized crime will disappear entirely. 

The white nationalist domestic threat is not a hoax, but it is exaggerated throughout the report. There is complete silence, by contrast, about the proven links between global finance and the Federal government in the promotion of a for-profit prison-industrial complex, nor is there any mention of the tens of billions of dollars that have disappeared into the Homeland Security and “intelligence community” black hole. 

It there was any take over of the Capitol, it was by the swarms of private contractors that gather there to feast on bloated Federal budgets. But Silber transforms them into rational organizations that protect citizens. 

Silber hammers home the theme of the “effectiveness of the current intelligence community architecture” in his report. “Architecture” is the precise term that was used after 9/11 to push through the radical privatization of the Federal government in congressional committees. Some of us still remember those heady days when lobbyists for the Patriot Act argued that accountability and transparency were outdated concepts that kept intelligence from preventing the next terrorist attack. 

Silber’s time in private equity also leaks through in the paper. He no doubt finds a ready audience for his financialized language among readers of the report. It is no secret that congressional staff members are rewarded with opportunities to make big bucks for a few years at hedge fund or private equity firms in return for their services in relatively low-paying positions in the Congress. 

Silber quotes Frank Taylor, former head of intelligence at DHS, concerning the 1/6 incident:   

“There is no explanation that I can give for the failure to produce analytical products.”

“Analytical products” is not a law enforcement term, but rather the jargon used in private equity. The use of such jargon in Washington is in line with the assumption on the part of the bureaucrat that to work for the Federal government is an extension of servicing a private equity firm, or a contractor. That truth is driven home by the domination of the Biden administration top positions by “products” of just four consulting firms linked to private equity: WestExec Advisors, Pine Island Capital Partners, The Asia Group and the Albright Stonebridge Group. 

The Report’s conclusion

The Atlantic Council report concludes with four concrete suggestions for responses to the new threat of domestic terrorism that are certain to have contractors licking their chops. 

1) The creation of a new bureaucracy within the I&A (intelligence and analysis) unit of DHS to be assigned the impressive acronym of OSMAU. The functions of this “Online Social Media Analysis Unit” are not detailed, and no suggestion is made as to how it will be kept accountable or transparent. The context suggests, however, suggests that OSMAU will serve as a “meta” fusion center where the postings by American citizens in social media are collected, and files are created in advance for just about every citizen that can be used to support just about any charge at a future date. 

2)  The establishment of a bureau for DVEAU “Domestic Violent Extremism Analysis” that will track and interfere in the lives of American citizens based on their correspondence and their postings. This intelligence bureau dedicated to domestic law enforcement will not be accountable to the FBI, the Justice Department, the DHS, or to the courts, but rather will be embedded in the opaque National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). 

3) The DVEAU “Domestic Violent Extremism Analysis” unit will report directly to the Director of National Intelligence, following a chain of command completely detached from the Department of Justice and from the court system. As a result, because intelligence is an extension of the military, the Posse Comitatus Act (1878) that limits the use of the military in domestic law enforcement will cease to be in effect. 

4) A new position of Deputy Director of National Intelligence will be created and that Deputy Director will be tasked with “domestic warning” (as a “national warning officer”) for terrorism. This Deputy Director will be authorized to declare that the actions of an American citizen, or group of citizens, engage in activities that constitute the equivalent of an act of war and that the Federal government will be able to take retaliatory steps in secret, without the approval of the courts. 

Silber imagines that this Deputy Director will identify “a rapidly metastasizing domestic terrorism threat” and take immediate action (such as the authorities supposedly failed to do on January 6th). 

This final analogy of “metastasis” is telling. Most certainly the analogy to the spread of cancer is apt. 

Silber is engaging in classical psychological projection when he uses that term. The true cancer killing the United States government is the spread of for-profit contractors that search for, and create, domestic threats which they feel entitle them to take actions at home in the manner that a commander in Afghanistan would do without the encumberment of the Constitution.

But that true institutional cancer is a taboo subject that can never be named by the high priests. Instead, the Atlantic Council report serves as a performative ritual, a speech act, that projects the cancer within the Federal system onto a leaderless set of domestic terrorist cells which must be suppressed if they question the legitimacy of COVID19 vaccines, or cast doubt on just about anything. 

***

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 US Provisional Government/usprovgov.asia.

Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.

Featured image is from KSLA-12

I Shall Fear No Evil

Why we need a truly independent candidate for president

Author: Emanuel Pastreich

Paperback ISBN: 9781649994509

Pages: 162

Click here to order.

.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Syria is about to blow wide-open. Several days ago, Turkey bombed a residential area in Aleppo, followed by an Israeli bombing of the south of Aleppo, and the Turkish backed terrorists in Idlib bombed residential areas in the Latakia Province.  Many experts feel the area is on the doors of full scale military action in Idlib, to free the civilian population from the occupation of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the former Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria, and now backed by Turkey.  The Russian-Turkish deal to open the M4 highway from Latakia to Aleppo has never been implemented by the Turkish, and the Russians are fed up with terrorists taking shots at Russian patrols, and passenger buses and trucks.

Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse has interviewed Fra Hughes in an effort to get the back-story to this unfolding drama in Northern Syria.

Fra Hughes was born and lives in Belfast, Ireland. He is an activist, author, and journalist. He has written ‘My Walk with Palestine’ and ‘Voices from Donbass’. He has visited, Gaza, the Occupied West Bank, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Venezuela, and the Donbass Republics of Lugansk and Donetsk. He is anti-imperialist by his politics.

*

Steven Sahiounie (SS):  The Israeli occupation keeps launching airstrikes on Syria. In your opinion, what is their goal from all these airstrikes?

Fra Hughes (FH):  Israel and Zionism are a cancer in the Middle East and West Asia. Like all cancers, if they are left untreated they will eventually kill the host. The host is Palestine and Israel’s continued illegal annexation of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and historic Palestine is the very reason Syria is under attack from both Israel and the West.

The premeditated war launched on Syria in 2011 at the behest of the west and led by Saudi Arabia and now Turkey was fundamentally to destroy a strong Arab bulwark against the expansionist designs of Israel within the region.

The dream of destroying Syria has failed. Thanks to Russia, Hezbollah, and Iran the country has been stabilized. The fight to liberate Syrian territory continues.

While Syria has been effectively balkanized between America, Isis, the Kurds, and Turkey it is no longer capable of challenging Israel’s perceived military supremacy in the region.

The attacks by Israel are designed to limit Syria’s response to the ongoing terrorist threats within its borders.

The aim is to disrupt supply lines. To terrorize the population of Damascus where most of the aerial bombings occur. To continue to support terrorist elements within Syria.

To keep the Syrian Arab Republic and its elected Leader Dr. Bashar Al Assad under military pressure. To put pressure on the Iranian presence in Syria and to continually provoke Damascus into a military response so Israel can then use its American arsenal of weapons to destabilize and further destroy the infrastructure and command and control capabilities of the Syrian Arab Republic. To further demoralize the Syrian people and create Gaza-style imprisonment and bombardment of the Syrian people. Damascus cannot fight ISIS, the Turks, Saudi Arabian money, America, and Israel all at the same time.

SS:   American President Joe Biden promised to pull the American troops out of the Middle East in his election campaign, but until now he has not pulled out of Syria and Iraq, and he is still stealing the Syrian oil. What is his goal by not leaving Syria and Iraq?

FH:  Obama was partly elected on the promise of closing down Guantanamo Bay. A promise never realized. All politicians make promises in opposition that they never intend to implement.

Biden was Vice President to Obama. He simply used America’s unpopular wars in Iraq and Syria as a populist vote-winning slogan to get himself elected to the office of President of the United States. I have no doubt that even while pursuing this election tactic he was already planning on staying in the region.

Political pundits and analysts continually refer to America’s military adventures around the world and the cost of these aggressions as if they are reasons for America not to go to war?  History has proven conclusively that wars are fought for profit, not ideology.

There is a price to go to war and a profit to be made.

Lincoln famously said ‘I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe’.

The taxpayers of Britain and America paid to destroy Iraq and Afghanistan. The industrial-military complex made billions of dollars of profit for its shareholders.

The taxpayers of Iraq and Afghanistan are paying to have the country rebuilt. Construction companies, oil companies, consultancy companies, private security firms, and a myriad of other contractors alongside international monetary loans and the cost of the continuing occupation all make profits for those who instigated financed, and conducted these wars.

America is stealing Syrian resources that belong to the Syrian people and their custodians in the Syrian government.

Monies that should go to social, education, and health projects for the Syrian nation are being stolen for profit. This is old-style imperialism where the aggressor steals from those they have militarily occupied. America steals the oil and the wheat from Syria in a two-pronged attack. The oil money goes to America and they deprive the Syrian economy and the Syrian government of much-needed revenue. The wheat is exported for profit also going to America and deprives the Syrian economy of much-needed revenue and the people are denied a basic food staple thus putting further punitive pressure on inflationary pressures that in turn impact the ability of the government and the people to have food security.

By staying in the region America is continuing to defend Zionist interests and destabilize Israel’s self-declared enemies and steal the national resources of occupied countries while championing the capitalist corporate interests of American companies.

SS:    The tension in northwest Syria between the Turkish occupation and the radical Islamic terrorists from one side, and the Syrian and Russian army on the other side, is on the highest level. In your opinion, will Syria and Russia start the military operation to liberate Idlib from the Turkish and their terrorists?

FH:  The Syrian Arab Republic and its elected President Dr. Bashar Al Assad have publicly stated their intention to reclaim all Syrian territory currently under the control of foreign and domestic terrorists.

If the Syrian Arab Army does not retake Idlib and all other occupied lands, Syria will in effect be balkanized. That would suit America, the west and Israel. Syria needs the political and military assistance of Russia to do this.

Erdogan will not leave voluntarily nor will the terrorist forces he arms supplies and helps finance. Erdogan is another regional leader hell-bent on expansionism.

After the failed American-inspired coup to remove him, Erdogan turned towards Russia, and if Putin tells him Russian forces will help liberate Idlib and other areas I do not think Erdogan will go to war with Russian forces

Putin is in Syria to prevent ISIS-affiliated Jihadists from being directed towards its border as Russia would be next in line for the American financed mercenaries to attack.

The Syrian leadership has been very adept at allowing mercenaries, many of whom are just there for the large monthly pay packet to leave disputed areas alive.

This offer will again be forwarded to those who want to survive a sustained campaign of military assault from the Syrian Arab Army.

I do hope they leave all contested areas peacefully to prevent a huge loss of civilian life and a further humanitarian crisis.

SS:    The Syrian people have been suffering for 10 years from the US and EU sanctions. Do you think that the United States will lift the sanctions off of Syria?

FH:  There is no chance of America lifting the sanctions. The only hope for the Syrian people is for other countries like Iran, Russia, and China to bypass the sanctions and an axis of resistance global alternative to American hegemony be established. Using the Yuan as the world’s reserve currency and the petro-yuan is a start. All countries under sanctions from Cuba to Venezuela must form a global alliance and trade with each other to protect all those economies.

Sanctions kill. They murdered 600,000 babies in Iraq and over 100,000 people in Venezuela to date.

We must stand together against American aggression military and financial.

SS:   The west is using the Syrian refugees as a tool to put pressure on the Syrian government.  In your opinion, will Syrian refugees start to be sent home from their host countries?

FH:  I understand the economic pressures a sudden influx of returning refugees can have on Syria.

The Syrian people did not flee the Syrian government. They fled the violence and war foisted upon Syria by America, Britain, Israel, Saudi Arabia Turkey, and the west.

While America steals Syrian oil and wheat, and Turkey has stolen whole engineering plants and sophisticated modern machinery and technology, the response to the refugees by the Syrian government is, come home, we welcome you back, let us rebuild our country together. That is leadership. That is courage. That is love.

The refugees are being used as political leverage against Damascus, but together the people and its elected leaders can build a better brighter 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.

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

Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes  the mainstream media narratives on Syria. 

Voices from Syria 

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-1-6

Author: Mark Taliano

Year: 2017

Pages: 128 (Expanded edition: 1 new chapter)

List Price: $17.95

Special Price: $9.95 

Click to order

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

As the American public continues to be distracted by a wild divergence of worries and panic, ranging from never-ending Covid related restrictions to on-going massive censorship to protecting innocent school children from mandatory vaccinations and masks; almost all in some way threaten what remains of a Constitutional republic that has for more than two hundred years provided a bulwark of personal and political protections and freedom for every American citizen.  Clearly, all that is now up for grabs.   And yet, not to minimize any of those valid domestic problems, there is a global crisis that is slipping through the cracks that would, at any other time, warrant alarming headlines and mobilize public opinion. 

The Black Sea

So what exactly is the Brit’s attraction to access the Black Sea besides the misguided belief that they are still The British Empire.   It’s not like you can make a wrong turn into the Black Sea, accidentally cross through the narrow Dardanelles and then transverse the Bosporus, and voila, oops, there you are in the Black Sea with the Kerch Straits leading straight to mainland Russia –  it is not a location conducive for a quick turn around or  speedy exit.  Accessing the Black Sea is a very deliberate move with a very specific purpose as its chronology of events continue to unfold as a well coordinated political strategy, a fragment of the on-going domestic effort to takedown the United States.

Crimea Referendum

As the result of a US sponsored political coup ousting then duly-elected Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014, the residents of Crimea overwhelmingly voted to reassert its historic kinship with Russia.  However, the United States and the European Union continue to reject the outcome of a legitimate public vote as Ukraine’s puppet regime talks of initiating a military take-back.   Crimea is a peninsula in southeast Ukraine that contains the historic cities of Sevastapol and Yalta, and lies between the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov.  Regarded as a sacred and holy site, Crimea represents a spiritual identity in the history of Orthodox Christianity from 900 AD and lies adjacent to Russia which adopted its religious tenets.

Brits Enter the Black Sea

As a gesture of support for Ukraine’s goal to ‘recover’ Crimea, the Brits deployed RAF aircraft in mid-April along with a US Special Ops team as part of a NATO “air policing mission” to patrol the Black Sea.  Even as a decades-old international treaty prohibits the entrance of aircraft carriers into the Black Sea, the UK continued to establish a military presence, intent on escalating the argument between a specious Ukraine government and those pesky Russians who insist on protecting their 12 mile border within the Black Sea.

Putin – Biden Summit

Back in early June, US pretend President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Geneva for ninety minutes behind closed doors with Secretary of State Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in attendance. With low expectation for any rapprochement, each offered the following at a press conference at the Summit’s conclusion.

Biden said “The tone of the entire meeting was good, positive” with Putin agreeing “It seems to me that we did speak the same language.”  While Putin added that the talks were ‘very constructive,’ there was agreement that the US and Russian ambassadors would return to their embassy posts as well as agreement to collaborate on cybersecurity issues. Biden stressed that his agenda was “for America” and not “against Russia.”  In other words, the general assessment was that the meeting went better than had been expected.

However, despite an apparent meeting of the minds, soon after the Summit, the Brits, who were not invited to attend or participate, increased their aggression in the Black Sea  as they proceeded to test Russian resolve and the Biden Administration increased its sanctions.

HMS Defender Violates Russian Waters

On June 23, the HMS Defender, after ‘drifting’ within 10 nautical miles of Russia’s territorial waters, was reportedly buzzed by the Russians.  Soon after, a BBC reporter, who was on-board the Defender, revealed that the warship had ‘deliberately’ entered Crimean waters to ‘make a point” to the Russians.  The same reporter then  released a video which directly contradicted the British denial as the Russian Defense Ministry released its footage which it says shows The Defender being chased out of Crimean waters.  The Russians claim that a Su-M24 Russian warplane dropped bombs near The Defender to alert the destroyer of its transgression.   Prime Minister Boris Johnson touted the usual “we don’t recognize the Russian annexation of Crimea, this is part of a sovereign Ukrainian territory.”

At about the same time, two US destroyers were on their way to the Black Sea when Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov announced  “We warn the United States that it will be better for them to stay far away from Crimea and our Black Sea coast. It will be for their own good.”  Surprisingly, even the tone-deaf Biden Administration knew enough to cancel the deployment. As a result of the conflict, there was reason to question the whereabouts of the US Navy’s Sixth Fleet when the USS Dwight Eisenhower was discovered to be in the Mediterranean where it may have been prepping to join the British fleet off the Crimean coast.

Brits Defy

More recently, after the skirmish with the Defender, the HMS Prince of Wales, accompanied by a nuclear-powered submarine, the HMS Artful, joined the Defender as British Foreign Minister Dominick Raab announced that Britain would not be backing down and will continue to send warships into the Black Sea.  Raab cited unspecified Russian ‘provocations” and spoke like an old-fashioned imperialist

’we have every right to carry out peaceful passage through territorial waters of Ukraine in accordance with international laws and we will continue to act in the same way.”

In addition to luring the Russians to inadvertently cross a territorial demarcation, the Brits may also have their eye on possible seizure of Russia’s vitally valuable nuclear naval port located in Sevastapol on the Crimean coast or a daring run through the Kerch Straits leading directly to mainland Russia.  The port has been home to the Imperial Russian Navy, on and off, since 1783 until it fell into German hands during WWI and WWII.

Russian Reaction to Brit Menace

As a result of Raab’s bold assertion as well as Johnson’s cavalier dismissal, Lavrov who has served as Russia’s Foreign Minister since 2004, suggested that Russia will ‘respond harshly to unfriendly US steps’ even though the US has yet to sail into the Black Sea.  With a well-earned international reputation as a seasoned, discreet diplomat with mature judgement and judicial restraint, Lavrov went on to disclose that during the Putin/Biden Summit

“Russian leader Putin clearly stated, including in public, that the result in all directions is possible only through finding a mutual balance of interest strictly on a parity basis.  No objections were sounded at the talks in Genevawith US President Joe Biden.  However,” Lavrov continued, “almost immediately after they were over, US officials including participants at the Geneva meeting with redoubled force, started their previous lectures.”  Lavrov then imitated such as “We told Moscow; we clearly warned and outlined demands.  By the way, all these warnings come along with threats.  If Russia, within several months, failed to accept rules of the game as outlined in Geneva, it will be subject to new pressure.”   Lavrov went on to assert “The attempt to hold dialogue with us from the position of force are initially doomed to failure.  We will respond harshly and resolutely to unfriendly steps.  There is the need for fair cooperation if Washington really wants stable and predictable relations as it says…” and “ If the US continues to use force against Russia, we  will respond harshly.” 

Less-restrained-than-normal, Lavrov was suggesting that the Geneva meeting did not include any such threats or demands, that the US had not brought its A Game to Geneva and that there was no tough guy approach by Biden until the Americans left for home.  It was then that its deep state warmongers went into action and distorted the outcome.  Biden promised additional US sanctions only after the Geneva summit and Lavrov’s use of a ‘harsh response,’ in the diplomatic world, was indicative of a serious political breach suggesting that Biden is no more in control of foreign policy than Donald Trump.  Lavrov was clearly referring to the US, UK and NATO disregard of Russia’s sovereignty in the Black Sea.

After Lavrov’s comments, Ryabkov added that

“US and Britain tried to open the Russian coastal defense system; and that provocateurs who continue to stage games in the Black Sea will be ‘hit in the nose’. “

Somehow a pop in the nose would not appear to be the harsh response that Lavrov was referring to when Putin’s official spokesman Dmitry Peskov clarified Rybakov’s “ punch in the nose” comment.

“I think our intelligence certainly knows who made a decision there (ie the situation with the British destroyer).  But certainly I think such operations are basically planned by senior partners from overseas.  And President Putin explained that thus some weak spots are sounded out, both in the system of monitoring border integrity and the response system.  This is indeed so.  Was very harsh and it is clear that no provocations should be repeated, the response will be in accordance with the Charter that says ‘to sink’.”

In other words, Peskov, who is Putin’s right hand, is not only suggesting that the US is ultimately responsible for the Black Sea aggression but is also suggesting that upon further provocation, the Russians will sink a ship, presumably with its full crew on board.  Of note, Peskov speaks authoritatively only when he has been authorized to do so by Putin. He does not speak off the cuff or from his own personal opinion.   In other words, the US, UK and NATO have been warned.

With no coverage in the Mockingbird Media, the American public remains blissfully uninformed.  What exactly has Russia done in the last forty years to warrant the threat of a nuclear war?  Is the goal of Black Sea aggression to bring ‘freedom’ and democracy to Russia or is it to ‘liberate’ the Crimea?  Or is to punish Putin for being a Christian or a nationalist who believes in defending the sovereignty of his own country.  Or perhaps he is not enough of a deep state disciple or perhaps defeating the last remaining Bolseviks in the 1990s was a fatal error.

As if no second thoughts had been given to Peskov’s words, Royal Marine Brigadier Mark Totten recently announced for the entire world to know that UK Special Forces were about to begin new covert ‘politically treacherous tasks’ including maritime counterterrorist missions that will occur as partnered operations against “big state adversaries” on ‘higher risk’ missions.   In other words, Russia is being lured into the Black Sea, daring them to over-react and make a global size error of judgment or to be a strategically placed decoy so they can be blamed for any escalating military action.

*

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.

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

Featured image: HMS Defender passes through Bosphorus on what turned out to be an eventful passage to Black Sea, June 14, 2021 (Source: Indian Punchline)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

SARS-CoV-2 like many other viruses contains genetic material called RNA. RNA fragments are so small, they are difficult to detect.

The PCR test doubles the fragments in what are called cycle thresholds and keeps doubling them until they have enough genetic material to identify.

It is worth noting that the WHO issued a statement on January 20th 2020 which invalidates the RT-PCR test. This is significant because the results of PCR test are used to justify all the measures taken by governments the lockdown and the vaccination program.  For further details see Michel Chossudovsky’s article entitled: 

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

Watch the video below to know more.

*

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 Shutterstock

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

At Global Research, our intention is to continue to promote independent voices that speak out on issues too often neglected by the corporate media.

We make sure that everything is in place in order to deliver timely content to you on a daily basis.

As you may already know, we are affected by online censorship now more than ever.

To help fight disinformation and reach a broad readership, we would like to ask you, our readers, do you have suggestions on how we can improve our daily Newsletter to make it more engaging and reader-friendly?

Please send your thoughts and comments to [email protected].

Our sincere gratitude for your support!

For peace,

The Global Research Team

If you wish to Donate or become a Member of Global Research, click below.

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.

If Biden Wants to “Stand with the Cuban People,” He Can Ease the Cruel Blockade

By Prof. Marjorie Cohn, July 22, 2021

The corporate media have been bashing the Cuban government in response to the recent protests in Cuba, while President Joe Biden claims, “We stand with the Cuban people.” But they ignore or minimize the leading cause of economic suffering in Cuba: the U.S.’s illegal and punishing economic blockade that Biden has left in place.

J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve

By Doctors for COVID Ethics, July 21, 2021

Official sources, namely EudraVigilance (EU, EEA, Switzerland), MHRA (UK) and VAERS (USA), have now recorded more Injuries and Deaths from the ‘Covid’ vaccine roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began.

18,928 DEAD, 1.8 Million Injured (50% SERIOUS) Reported in European Union’s Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 Shots

By Brian Shilhavy, July 21, 2021

Never before in modern, or even ancient history, have governments around the world acted in unison to force a medical procedure upon all their populations, and silence all dissenters who try to sound the warning alarm, which include tens of thousands of doctors and scientists.

Federal Lawsuit Seeks Immediate Halt of COVID Vaccines, Cites Whistleblower Testimony Claiming CDC Is Under-Counting Vaccine Deaths

By Megan Redshaw, July 21, 2021

America’s Frontline Doctors filed a motion to stop the use of Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) COVID vaccines for anyone under 18, anyone with natural immunity or anyone who hasn’t received informed consent.

Graveyard of Empires

By Eric Margolis, July 21, 2021

Afghanistan was a war of lies, sustained by the powerful US and British media. President George W. Bush, a man of deep ignorance, launched this war to cover being caught sleeping by the 9/11 attacks.

Carbon Neutral Green Finance – China May Take the Lead into a Post-Pandemic World

By Peter Koenig, July 21, 2021

What happens in China is a different story. China is the only significant national economy – the second largest for now in absolute terms, and the largest in PPP (purchasing power parity terms) – that has put her economic and financial mechanism fully back on-stream.

The State of Our Nation: Still Divided, Enslaved and Locked Down

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, July 21, 2021

The state of our nation is politically polarized, controlled by forces beyond the purview of the average American, and rapidly moving the nation away from its freedom foundation.

Kremlin: Russian Hypersonic Missiles Reaction to U.S. Missile Shield Near Its Borders

By Rick Rozoff, July 21, 2021

Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov was cited by TASS on July 20 confirming that his nation’s development of hypersonic missiles (five or more times the speed of sound) is a direct response to the American (and NATO it should be added) interceptor missile system being deployed against his nation near its western borders.

Enforcing US Exploitation: The IMF and the World Bank

By Rod Driver, July 21, 2021

Internal documents from the World Bank state clearly that the Bank expects the conditions attached to loans to cause civil unrest. The policies are misleadingly called ‘poverty reduction strategies’, yet they have created or maintained extreme poverty in many regions around the world.

All Global Research articles 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 corporate media have been bashing the Cuban government in response to the recent protests in Cuba, while President Joe Biden claims, “We stand with the Cuban people.” But they ignore or minimize the leading cause of economic suffering in Cuba: the U.S.’s illegal and punishing economic blockade that Biden has left in place.

Every U.S. president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has maintained the blockade against Cuba. Although former President Barack Obama was constrained by the 1996 Helms-Burton Act from completely lifting the blockade — which is now exclusively within the power of Congress — he took several steps to ease its effects on the Cuban people.

In 2015, Obama loosened restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba and ended some of the economic prohibitions between the U.S. and Cuba. He removed Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism and facilitated the export of U.S internet hardware and telecommunications. Obama established increased cooperation between the two countries in intelligence-gathering, drug interdiction, scientific research and environmental protection.

But former President Donald Trump reversed the progress Obama had made and imposed 243 onerous new sanctions on Cuba as part of his “maximum pressure” strategy against Cuba. Those punishing sanctions, together with the pandemic, spelled disaster for the Cuban people. Trump also returned Cuba to the list of state sponsors of terrorism.

Trump’s actions included restricting and then stopping remittances from family members outside Cuba. They blocked cruise ships and most flights to Cuba, even though tourism is central to Cuba’s economy. They reinstated a travel ban for U.S. tourists and prevented Cuba from buying medicines and medical supplies on the world market. Trump also slapped sanctions on the transportation of oil to Cuba from Venezuela, which provided one-third of Cuba’s oil in 2019.

During his presidential campaign, Biden repeatedly hitched his coattails to Obama’s star and promised to lift Trump’s sanctions against Cuba. But Biden has refused to end any of Trump’s sanctions on Cuba, even calling it a “failed state.” Ned Price, a U.S. State Department spokesman, dismissively called the embargo the “so-called embargo” and refused to admit that the ban on remittances was hurting the Cuban economy.

“If President Joe Biden really had humanitarian concerns for the Cuban people he would eliminate the 243 measures applied by President Donald Trump, including 50 imposed cruelly during the pandemic,” Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel wrote on his Twitter account.

Purpose of Embargo Was “to Bring About Hunger, Desperation and Overthrow of Government”

“[C]urrent events in Cuba are a direct consequence of the interventionism of the US government, be it of the Democratic or Republican Party, and their plans to suffocate the country and cause disorder and chaos, to destroy the Cuban Revolution and its example,” the American Association of Jurists, a nongovernmental organization with consultative status at the United Nations, said in a recent statement.

Indeed, since the 1959 Cuban Revolution, the U.S. government has sustained a cruel economic, financial and commercial embargo against Cuba. By pressuring other countries not to trade with Cuba, it has become a blockade. The U.S. embargo of Cuba was launched by Eisenhower in response to a 1960 memo written by a senior State Department official, which set forth the U.S. strategy for regime change in Cuba. The memo said:

The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship … every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba … a line of action which, while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.

For the last six decades, the blockade has caused the Cuban people immense suffering. But it has not succeeded in destroying the Cuban Revolution.

In 1997, the American Association for World Health concluded that the blockade had “dramatically harmed the health and nutrition of large numbers of ordinary Cuban citizens” and “caused a significant rise in suffering — and even deaths — in Cuba” as a result of “critical shortages of even the most basic medicines and medical hardware.”

Over the past six decades, the blockade has caused more than $134 billion in quantifiable losses as of 2018.

The blockade violates the U.N. Charter, which enshrines the right to self-determination of sovereign states and prohibits forcible regime change.

Sanctions — or unilateral coercive measures — constitute collective punishment of the civilian population, which is prohibited by the Geneva and Hague Conventions. They also violate the Charter of the Organization of American States, which prohibits intervention in the internal or external affairs of another country and the use of economic or political coercive measures “to force the sovereign will of another State.”

Blockade Exacerbates Suffering From the Pandemic

The blockade has exacerbated the suffering of the Cuban people during the pandemic. Conditions are dire in Cuba. There are long lines for food, water and supplies. And a gasoline shortage caused by the blockade is preventing food grown in the countryside from reaching the market in the cities. Speaking to protesters on July 12, Diaz-Canel explained that they have had to convert hotels to hospitals because of the spike in COVID-19 cases. This has caused electricity shortages.

Even before the pandemic, there were serious food, medical and fuel shortages. In 2020, seven UN special rapporteurs and independent experts concluded that the blockade was “obstructing humanitarian responses to help the country’s health-care system fight the COVID-19 pandemic.”

As a result of the pandemic, Cuba is unable to buy ventilators or personal protective equipment. It can’t receive financial transfers from foreign companies and humanitarian organizations. The blockade has had a “drastic effect on Cuba’s vaccine industry” by making it difficult to obtain the raw materials to make the vaccine, according to Oxfam.

“Even so, the state’s generous and long-term investment in health care and education means it was able to develop its own COVID vaccine — only to then face a shortage of syringes, the blockade making it difficult to buy them from manufacturers,” Branko Marcetic wrote at Jacobin.

In March, 80 House Democrats urged Biden to repeal the Trump administration’s “cruel policies against the Cuban people.” They told Biden that, “with the stroke of a pen, you can assist struggling Cuban families and promote a more constructive approach by promptly returning to the Obama–Biden Administration policy of engagement and normalization of relations.”

“The embargo is absurdly cruel and, like too many other U.S. policies targeting Latin Americans, the cruelty is the point,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) said in a statement. “I outright reject the Biden administration’s defense of the embargo. It is never acceptable for us to use cruelty as a point of leverage against every day people.” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva all laid the blame for the conditions in Cuba on U.S. policy.

Black Lives Matter condemned “the U.S. federal government’s inhumane treatment of Cubans” and urged it “to immediately lift the economic embargo,” which it called a “cruel and inhumane policy, instituted with the explicit intention of destabilizing the country and undermining Cubans’ right to choose their own government,” noting that it is “at the heart of Cuba’s current crisis.”

In June, for the 29th straight year, the United Nations General Assembly condemned the U.S. embargo on Cuba. The vote was 184-2. Only the United States and Israel voted against the resolution.

The U.S. Has Defended Terrorism Against Cuba

Besides its cruel blockade, the U.S. government has encouraged and facilitated terrorism against Cuba while calling Cuba a “state sponsor of terrorism.”

Since 1959, anti-Cuba terror groups based in Miami have carried out several terrorist attacks against Cuba and people who advocated normalizing relations between the U.S. and Cuba. Those terrorist organizations include the Cuban American National Foundation, Alpha 66, Commandos F4, Independent and Democratic Cuba, and Brothers to the Rescue. They have operated with impunity in the United States — with full knowledge and support of the CIA and the FBI.

Luis Posada Carriles planted a bomb on a Cubana airliner in 1976, killing all 73 persons aboard. He has never been criminally prosecuted in the United States even though declassified FBI and CIA documents at the National Security Archive show that Posada Carriles was the mastermind of the airplane bombing.

In the face of this terrorism, five men from Cuba, known as “the Cuban Five,” gathered intelligence in Miami in order to prevent future terrorist acts against Cuba. They peacefully infiltrated criminal exile groups and then turned over the results of their investigation to the FBI. But instead of working with Cuba against terrorism, the U.S. government arrested the five men.

At trial, former high-ranking U.S. military and security officials testified that Cuba posed no military threat to the United States. None of the five Cuban men had any classified material in their possession or committed any acts to injure the United States. They were nonetheless convicted in 2001 of acting as unregistered Cuban agents in the United States and of conspiracy to commit espionage. The Cuban Five were sent to prison for many years and were eventually released.

The Obama administration removed Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. But Trump added Cuba back onto the list. The 80 House members also urged Biden “to reverse the recent politicized decision by the departing Trump Administration to add Cuba back to the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. This designation will further damage Cuba’s economy and place another roadblock in your path towards improved relations.” The letter noted that, “Cuba was removed from the list in 2015 after an exhaustive review by experts at the State Department and in the Intelligence Community, and the Trump Administration did not cite any new facts to justify their decision.” Biden says he is reviewing the designation.

It is high time for Biden to make good on his pledge to reverse Trump’s sanctions against Cuba. Congress should listen to all of the countries of the world who have repeatedly urged the lifting of the punishing blockade of Cuba. It is time to end the U.S.’s economic war on Cuba.

*

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.

Copyright © Truthout. Reprinted with permission.

Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and a member of the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers and the advisory board of Veterans for Peace. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral, and Geopolitical Issues. 

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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.

***

This was first published in May 2021.

“The risk-benefit calculus is therefore clear: the experimental vaccines are needless, ineffective and dangerous. Actors authorizing, coercing or administering experimental COVID-19 vaccination are exposing populations and patients to serious, unnecessary, and unjustified medical risks.” Doctors for Covid Ethics, April 29, 2021

An explosive new study by researchers at the prestigious Salk Institute casts doubt on the current crop of gene-based vaccines that may pose a grave risk to public health. The article, which is titled “The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, shows that SARS-CoV-2’s “distinctive ‘spike’ protein”..”damages cells, confirming COVID-19 as a primarily vascular disease.” While the paper focuses strictly on Covid-related issues, it unavoidably raises questions about the new vaccines that contain billions of spike proteins that could greatly increase the chances of severe illness or death. Here’s an excerpt from the article dated April 30, 2021:

“In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls. (Note– “Vascular endothelial cells line the entire circulatory system, from the heart to the smallest capillaries.”)

The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to mitochondria (organelles that generate energy for cells), causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented.

Previous studies have shown a similar effect when cells were exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but this is the first study to show that the damage occurs when cells are exposed to the spike protein on its own.” (“The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness”, Salk.edu)

The new research paper is the equivalent of a hydrogen bomb. It changes everything by confirming what vaccine critics have been theorizing for months but were unable to prove.

Now there is solid evidence that:

1. Covid-19 is primarily a disease of the vascular system (The vascular system, also called the circulatory system, is made up of the vessels that carry blood and lymph through the body.) and not the respiratory system.
2. The main culprit is the spike protein. (Spike protein–“a glycoprotein that protrudes from the envelope of some viruses” Merriam-Webster “Like a key in a lock, these spike proteins fuse to receptors on the surface of cells, allowing the virus’s genetic code to invade the host cell, take over its machinery and replicate.” Bruce Lieberman)

Simply put, if Covid-19 is primarily a vascular disease and if the main instrument of physical damage is the spike protein, then why are we injecting people with billions of spike proteins?

Here’s how architect and author, Robin Monotti Graziadei, summed up these developments on you tube:

“So, we have been told for the last year, that the only role the spike protein was supposed to play was to enter the human cells. (But) It’s clear, that that is not what they do, (since) they give you illness, vascular illness. Vascular illness can have many manifestations. They can include sinus vein thrombosis, blood clots, bruising, and longer-term conditions. Do you think it’s a good idea to bypass the first (defenses) of your immune system, …and inject… trillions of spike proteins in your cells given the information that has just been released by the Salk Institute? Think about it….

Salk Institute researchers have told us –without any ambiguity– that the spike protein is a fundamental part of the Covid-19 disease. Yes, it’s true that the spike protein with the N-protein, will not replicate. However, trillions (of these proteins) induced by the vaccine injection have the capacity to create damage in your vascular system. This is what the study says and what has been published by an extremely important center for biological studies. This is not a conspiracy theory. I think, at this stage, there is enough information to consider whether we will be told the truth in the coming days, because such information should be on the cover of every newspaper and the top story on every news channel. And what they should say is this: “The fundamental and technological basis –on which all of the vaccines that were distributed in the West– is flawed. We thought that the spike protein would only enter the cells to create antibodies so if you faced the wild virus, it would not latch onto your cells, however, we were wrong. We were wrong because the spike protein in itself, creates disease, and if you inject trillions of them into a human body, there will be manifestations of disease in many cases.” It is not safe to inject trillions of spike proteins into a muscle, because it bypasses layers of your immune system which could have potentially neutralized the virus… By crossing the threshold of the human body through the injection of these compounds, you are not giving your immune system the chance to mount a strong enough response to the spike protein in order to neutralize it. (The vaccine) will have this disease-creating spike protein in it if you agree (to take) any of these vaccines. ….It is now up to us to try to fix the mistake they have made.” (Robin Monotti Graziadei on the new Salk Institute research paper, You Tube, –See it before it is removed)

Perfectly stated and right on the money. Graziadei extrapolates the hidden meaning of the Salk report and clarifies its significance. How are the public health officials, the politicians, the media and the rest of the pro-Covid Vaxx camp going to respond to these revelations especially with the imprimatur of the Salk Institute affixed to the front of the report? Will they try to sweep it under the rug or will they try to divert the public’s attention to the ‘variant’ hobgoblin? Or will they try something else entirely, like claim that one class of spike proteins are good for you while others lead to protracted illness and death? What will they do?

Doctor Vladimir Zelenko, who has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for his use of hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 patients, had this to say:

“Do you understand what this means——we are are injecting viral genetic code for the spike protein into innocent people andiIt gets into almost every cell In the body.” (Nobel nominee, Zelenko has also been banned from Twitter.)

Indeed, that’s precisely what they’ve done. And, let’s not forget, the vaccine manufacturers have complete legal immunity for the injuries they produce. Legal immunity means moral impunity.

So what effect will these spike proteins have on the people that have gotten vaccinated?

Here’s what the Doctors for Covid Ethics have to say in their latest article that was published just this week:

“The vaccines are dangerous to both healthy individuals and those with pre-existing chronic disease, for reasons such as the following: risk of lethal and non-lethal disruptions of blood clotting including bleeding disorders, thrombosis in the brain, stroke and heart attack; autoimmune and allergic reactions; antibody-dependent enhancement of disease; and vaccine impurities due to rushed manufacturing and unregulated production standards….

...all gene-based vaccines can be expected to cause blood clotting and bleeding disorders…. The vaccines are not safe.”(“COVID Vaccines: Necessity, Efficacy and Safety”, Doctors for Covid Ethics)

There it is in black and white: “The vaccines are not safe”. Here’s more from an article at Children’s Health Defense about Professor Yehuda Shoenfeld, the Israeli clinical immunologist who is widely credited as the “father of autoimmunity.” Shoenfeld approaches the issue from an entirely different angle. Take a look:

“Shoenfeld’s primary concern boils down to what’s called molecular mimicry. There are a number of genetic sequences that are identical both in the human genome and that of SARS-CoV-2 …

The immunologists go on to draw particular attention to the identical sequences in a specific group of proteins found deep in the lungs (the site of ARDS/covid pneumonia)… This is a concern Shoenfeld …

It’s why Shoenfeld and colleagues have been banging on the drum during the vaccine development phase last year, arguing that peptide sequences used in the new vaccines should be unique and not be common to ones found in the body.

For a predisposed individual, an adverse reaction to the vaccine, Shoenfeld and colleagues argue, could be enough for them to be tipped over the edge — into autoimmune disease.One of the most obvious signals for predisposition is to already have one of the over 100 autoimmune diseases that are charging through industrialized societies. Yet, with the father of autoimmunity sounding the warnings of autoimmune risks, there is scarcely a word of caution being uttered by governments rolling out the mass vaccination programs. Shame on them.” (“Are We on the Verge of a ‘Super-Epidemic’ of Autoimmune Diseases?” Children’s Health Defense)

My limited understanding of “molecular mimicry”, is this: By injecting proteins into the body that are so similar to the Covid proteins that are wreaking havoc in the vascular system, we could trigger a situation in which the body’s immune system attacks its own organs or vascular system. Which is why the author asks: Are We on the Verge of a ‘Super-Epidemic’ of Autoimmune Diseases?

In earlier articles, we presented the views of scientists and medical professionals who anticipated the issues that are now emerging in relation to the spike protein. For example, here is an excerpt from a piece about pediatric rheumatologist, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, who said the following in a letter to the FDA:

“I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein have the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in a way that does not currently appear to be assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs….

“Before any of these vaccines are approved for widespread use in humans, it is important to assess in vaccinated subjects the effects of vaccination on the heart. As important as it is to quickly arrest the spread of the virus by immunizing the population, it would be vastly worse if hundreds of millions of people were to suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on these other organs.” (“Scientists Challenge Health Officials on Vaccinating People Who Already Had COVID”, Global Research)

We also pointed out that “gene-based vaccines release a spike protein that spreads throughout the body, gets trapped in the bloodstream and collects in the layer of cells (endothelial cells) that coat the blood vessels.” We think the new research by the Salk Institute supports this general theory.

Also, according to Dr. Hyung Chun, a Yale cardiologist, the cells “release inflammatory cytokines that further exacerbate the body’s inflammatory response and lead to the formation of blood clots. Chun has stated: “The ‘inflamed’ endothelium likely contributes not only to worsening outcome in COVID-19, but also is considered to be an important factor contributing to risk of heart attacks and strokes.”

This seems to suggest that the spike protein from the vaccine can have the same effect as the spike protein from the infection. Here’s more:

“Individuals with COVID-19 experience a vast number of neurological symptoms, such as headaches, ataxia, impaired consciousness, hallucinations, stroke and cerebral hemorrhage. But autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms….

If not viral infection, what else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19?

The most likely culprit that has been identified is the COVID-19 spike protein released from the outer shell of the virus into circulation. Research cited below has documented that the viral spike protein is able to initiate a cascade of events that triggers damage to distant organs in COVID-19 patients.

Worryingly, several studies have found that the spike proteins alone have the capacity to cause widespread injury throughout the body, without any evidence of virus.

What makes this finding so disturbing is that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines manufactured by Moderna and Pfizer and currently being administered throughout the U.S. program our cells to manufacture this same coronavirus spike protein as a way to trigger our bodies to produce antibodies to the virus.”(“Could Spike Protein in Moderna, Pfizer Vaccines Cause Blood Clots, Brain Inflammation and Heart Attacks?” Global Research)

The above quote is key to grasping what Covid really is and why the new vaccines threaten to greatly exacerbate the problem. As Chun says:

“…autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms….”

This observation is correct. The research does not indicate “viral invasion into patients’ brains”.

Why? Because–as the Salk report indicates– it is not the viral infection that is getting into the brain but the spike protein that has passed the blood-brain barrier via the vascular system.

Here’s Dr Chun again: “What else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19?”

Once again, it is not the virus but the spike protein and the autoimmune response.

Finally, Chun acknowledges that the new vaccines “program our cells to manufacture this same coronavirus spike protein as a way to trigger our bodies to produce antibodies to the virus.”

The production and distribution of these potentially-lethal injections goes way beyond mere recklessness. This is an unprecedented global catastrophe that could result in the deaths of millions. How long will this insanity continue?

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Mike Whitney is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

As many countries around the world now begin another round of lockdowns, and take steps to cut off citizens from social life if they do not consent to receive one of the deadly COVID-19 shots and carry around some kind of identification that marks them as “vaccinated,” (See: Mapping Tyranny: The Countries Where Vaccination Is Mandatory) the death tolls following these injections continue to rapidly increase.

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Amid the growing global economic digitization, Washington’s monetary system remains obsolete on some points and with a society extremely divided in opinions about what would be most appropriate for the future of the country. The Federal Reserve unconditionally supports the proposal to create a digital dollar, as it believes this is a necessary modernization of the US system, but Wall Street fears the impact of such a change in the investment routine – opposition that is shared by the banking system, with bankers fearing losses in the loans market as people will be able to take digital money directly from the Reserve.

Global currency digitalization is a process that is advancing rapidly around the world, with several countries creating digital versions of their currencies as a way to compete with the proliferation of private currencies and better meet the demands of an increasingly virtual economy. This process has accelerated particularly after the beginning of the new coronavirus pandemic. During this same period, the idea of ​​a digital dollar began to gain power in Washington – mainly as a way to make possible the dispute for economic hegemony with China, whose monetary digitalization is highly advanced.

As the US dollar is the most used currency in international trade, a project like this was expected, but resistance from some sectors remains strong. Last week, a congressional hearing was held, where Jerome Powell, head of the Federal Reserve, defended the project, emphasizing that creating a digital dollar will eliminate the need to use cryptocurrencies and stablecoins (cryptocurrencies with value determined by stable assets) in transactions. On the same occasion, Powell announced that a report will be released in September, containing the main details of the project, summarizing the risks and benefits, and starting public consultations and debates in the Congress.

The government tends to support any proposal in this regard because, in addition to an economic value, there is an increase in the American projection of power. With the digital economy advancing and with the difficulties presented by cryptocurrencies – which are commonly used for illegal transactions and financing of terrorist organizations – the digital dollar would be a useful tool to preserve US economic and monetary dominance, which is a point of strong geopolitical interest. However, with regard to the investment sector, the perspectives are different.

The banks fear a central point: the possibility of people turning directly to the Reserve to obtain digital currency, which would bring losses to traditional American banks. Undoubtedly, it is the private banks that profit most from the status quo and any change could bring instability to the banking sector. Still, there is a great fear about the possibility of security instability in transactions, generated by cyber-attacks – which are increasingly frequent around the world.

On Wall Street, fears about the digital dollar are also influenced by banks, which warn that as the Federal Reserve starts to interfere in the role of private institutions, loans will become more expensive, hurting investors in the stock market – which depend on bank loans to operate their activities. On this topic, there is an article written by Greg Bae and published in April, in which the Bank Policy Institute concludes that “the potential impact of shifting to an economic system where the government rather than the private sector determines the cost and availability of deposits, and thus of credit”.

It is interesting to note how coherent the arguments of both sides in this dispute are. In fact, the Federal Reserve’s initiative enables the creation of a system with greater state participation in the credit market and this would have impacts on the entire American economy. And, in the same sense, such changes and adaptations are necessary if the US plans to guarantee its hegemony in an increasingly digital world amidst the harsh trade war with China. In any case, there will be impacts, both on the economy and on the US global power projection.

Banks work from a conservative perspective, trying to keep active the system that most favored the growth of these institutions in history: financial capitalism. Central bank-led economic digitization looks like a disaster for the old financial system that provided banks with profits and growth in stock market operations. However, these changes are inevitable and have already been postponed for years.

Financial capitalism has been in crisis for a long time and since 2008 its very existence has been threatened. The pandemic only consolidated a long process of structural changes in the world economic order, accelerating the digitization of economies and the crisis of the current financial system – which becomes obsolete. This is not the end of the banks’ power, just a challenge as they will have to create new ways to finance loans. The adaptation period to the new system will be slow and will bring losses, leading some institutions to bankruptcy. However, this is a central point in American history, in which the US must choose between preserving dollar’s commercial predominance or maintaining the power of the banks, accepting that Washington loses economic and political influence in 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.

Lucas Leiroz is a research fellow in international law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

It appears the ideologues who installed Biden recognize they are forever bound to their dependency on COVID-19 as a tool to retain control.

Over the past 18-months, the various healthcare institutions of the U.S. government and private healthcare industry have suffered a catastrophic collapse in credibility as it relates to COVID-19. The scale of the propaganda, visible hypocrisies, transparent lies, insane dictates and fiats combined with their collective denial of common sense mitigation efforts has led to an awakening of the institutions as nothing more than politically motivated by ideology. Now, they are taking it to another level.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is now recommending that all children over 2-years-old must wear masks next school year regardless of vaccination status. Students over age 2 and staff should wear face masks regardless of coronavirus vaccination status as “a significant portion of the student population is not yet eligible for vaccines.” (read more)

A reasonable person might think that with all the evidence showing incredible psychological harm to young people who are becoming increasingly isolated, the AAP would halt their participation in the propaganda. Alas, the opposite is true. This is abusive behavior now.

*

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.

***

In Luanda, capital of Angola, hosted the 13th Conference of Heads of State and Government of the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries (CPLP) with the key objective of reviewing the historical past and discussing effective pathways for the future. Through its history, the CPLP has largely been known as an organization, besides that, much has been shrewd away from public domain including its development processes, collective challenges and achievements, and impact on global scene.

In July, Angola hosted the conference under the theme: “Building and Strengthening a Common and Sustainable Future” and the theme, without doubts, highlights the importance of building a common and sustainable future that promotes sustainable development and the effective improvement of the population’s quality of life.

During the conference, as expected, the heads of state and government had the opportunity to discuss relevant issues for the respective countries and establish a cooperation framework in line with the current international situation. A number of representatives also had the chance to address the strategic views for the organization.

According to reports, Angola takes over the presidency of the organization for the next two years (2021-2023). As the host of the 13th conference, at the same time, marks the celebration of the 25th anniversary of the founding of the CPLP organization, Angolan President João Lourenço, delivered his welcome and closing addresses full of all diplomatic niceties, reminding detailing the primary objectives and vividly itemizing various tasks as the way forward into the future.

Monitoring those issues, as contained in his speech, sparked off one significant proposal. President Lourenço launched the challenge of creating an investment bank for the Community of Portuguese Language Countries (CPLP). “We can be a relevant economic force if we work for this we have left the challenge of starting to think about the pertinence and feasibility of creating a CPLP Investment Bank.”

According to his analysis, belated though, the creation of this potential bank is in line with the intention to include a new economic and business pillar, one of the priorities of the Angolan CPLP presidency.

President of the Business Confederation of the Community of Portuguese-Language Countries (CE-CPLP), Salimo Abdula, explained that it was with “satisfaction” that he had heard the announcement from Angola’s President, João Lourenço, about fortification plans for an economic pillar among the members of the ornization.

“We want to congratulate Angola,” Abdula said. “We know that it wants to invest in a fourth pillar – the economic one, and business cooperation. This is exactly what the Business Confederation of the CPLP (CE-CPLP) has been developing for years,” he said, adding that the idea of creating an investment bank, as proposed by President Lourenço in his inaugural speech as holder of the presidency, “is welcome, it is in fact a project that the Business Confederation has been developing for some time.”

Abdula, who comes from Mozambique, recalled that in 2014, there was a conference in Lisbon attended by representatives of central and commercial banks from almost all CPLP member states, “under the coordination and leadership of the Confederation, with the aim of studying an investment or development bank, which could support the integration of companies and not only, but also the needs for investment in infrastructure in a large part of the countries” mainly in Portuguese-language countries in Africa.

While acknowledging that this type of project is complex and takes time to implement, Abdula noted that the Confederation had, at the time, made a proposal for the CPLP to go ahead and create such a bank. “That was during the East Timor presidency, in 2014,” he recalled. It took some time to respond but, when it did, it gave a positive response, yet to date nothing has moved forward. The CE-CPLP did not, however, give up on the idea, according to Abdula.

“We have indeed consulted some states about what type of bank would be acceptable, whether with mixed capital or public capital, and the trend is towards mixed capital, that is public and private,” he said, explaining further that it would thus be “a bank with less political interference, with a more impartial governance, in order to ensure the interests of all countries across the board.”

More recently, the Confederation took up the issue again, at a business summit it organized in May in Malabo, capital of Equatorial Guinea, a CPLP member since 2014, which Abdula noted was attended by some political leaders. According to the Confederation President, “there was a positive manifestation from the government of Equatorial Guinea that it would look at this project” and several commercial banks have showed interest in this project.

Taking his turn at the conference, Portugal’s Prime Minister António Costa discussed, at length, the agreement on free movement within the Community of Portuguese-Language Countries (CPLP) and offered an assurance that parliament will ratify at the beginning of the next legislative session in September.

“The government is thus making an immediate priority of the parliamentary ratification of this agreement as well as the respective legislative framework on free movement and on academic qualifications. As soon as the work of the Portuguese parliament reopens, we will present this agreement for ratification and also the legislative framework that will allow for speeding up both the circulation and recognition of (academic) qualifications, because this is fundamental to people’s lives,” Costa told the conference gathering.

Costa then referred to problems that have existed in the past between Portuguese-language countries, such as Portugal and Brazil. “With this agreement, we will not again have the crisis of Brazilian dentists in Portugal (as in the 1980s), or, more recently, of Portuguese engineers in Brazil,” he said, referring to two situations where there was no mutual recognition of qualifications. Costa then moved to temper expectations, saying that the framework agreement on free movement “still requires development” and further diplomatic work.

Prime Minister of São Tomé and Principé Jorge Bom Jesus also comment positively on the mobility agreement will create a great space for movement and will allow movement within the CPLP. “We have to join forces to find new solutions to old structural problems, particularly from an economic point of view,” he said.

It is necessary for bilateral meetings to discuss cooperation, share several economic dossiers, debt, investments in the areas of energy, agriculture, industry, human resources and other strategic investments, Jorge Bom Jesus said and added “These are precisely for us to join forces and face the problems because they are common, which is why the solutions also have to be common.”

For many delegates, the conference is a platform to express primarily their views and reiterated vehemently the huge untapped potentials among the members. Portuguese-Mozambican businessman Paulo Oliveira said by illustrating the fact that the Community of Portuguese Language Countries (CPLP) is a house where you must apply for a permit to go from the bedroom to the kitchen, to illustrate barriers to investment. “The way of approach is completely different from one country to another, within the CPLP, and this, sometimes delays investment that could be carried out in a faster way,” he stressed.

As a further indication of optimism, Paulo Oliveira frankly believes opening of borders to greater mobility should be gradual – without throwing the doors wide open – with businesspeople, students and cultural agents in the front line. In his argument, it is necessary to take additional collaborative efforts towards shaping business development among the members. For example, in order to enhance investments in this organization, a common CPLP visa for business people and specialized labor would be a possible mechanism. In practice, all countries have things to offer if there is a different kind of mobility.

In an interview with Portuguese News Agency Lusa in Lisbon ahead of the conference, Portugal’s Foreign Minister Augusto Santos Silva indicated that Portugal expected what he described as “firmest and most absolute solidarity” from all member states of the Community of Portuguese Language Countries (CPLP) over the situation in Cabo Delgado in Mozambique.

Asked about a strengthening of multilateral cooperation under the CPLP, the head of Portuguese diplomacy was more cautious, but noted that there are missions from Portugal and other countries underway as well as from organizations such as the European Union and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), to help with security in Mozambique.

The conference, however, saw some progressive steps. The members signed an Agreement on Mobility and on Economic and Investment Cooperation.

The agreement on mobility establishes a “framework for cooperation” among all member states in a “flexible and variable” manner and, in practice, covers all citizens. Member states are offered range of solutions enabling them to take on “mobility commitments in a progressive manner with differentiated levels of integration”, taking account of their own internal specificities in their political, social and administrative dimensions.

In this context, the “freedom in the choice of the mobility modalities, of the categories of persons covered” as well as of the countries of the community with which they wish to establish partnerships. For two decades, the question on facilitating movement has been discussed consistently among the members without any concrete decision. Strengthening economic cooperation is another thorny question still on the table.

During the conference, Namibia’s President Hage Geingob commended Portuguese-speaking countries for their effort to open up borders to foster economic co-operation and hails Lusophone unity necessary for pursuing their multifaceted ambitions. He said the agreement on mobility among CPLP member states that “is an important step in making sure that our borders remain open to strengthen and promote business and economic relations in times of the pandemic.”

President Geingob added explicitly that,

“As observer states, we join hands with CPLP members to strengthen our local, regional and global governance architecture. The values of international cooperation and multilateralism that underpin the CPLP are fundamental for the promotion and strengthening of peace and security and socio-economic development. The equality of all states cannot be over-emphasized, as stipulated in the Charter of the United Nations. Let us, therefore, continue to treasure the unity of our nations, a unity forged in blood and defined by kinship.”

President of the Republic of Cabo Verde, Jorge Carlos de Almeida Fonseca, praised the political and diplomatic coordination in improving the assertion of CPLP countries in the international arena, reiterated its commitment to strengthening solidarity and cooperation aimed at ensuring the economic and social development of the peoples.

In short communique referred to as the “Luanda Declaration” signed by the Heads of State and Government and their representatives at the end of the 13th CPLP Conference, the participants reiterated their commitment to peace and harmony, the rule of law, democracy, human rights and social justice.

The leaders welcomed the choice of the motto “Building and strengthening a common and sustainable future” for the event and pledged to promote political dialogue, exchange of experiences and cooperation, with a view to enhancing the achievements of the CPLP in all areas.

As considered an additional challenge to the fulfillment of the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals within the community, expressed regret at multiple factors hindering this development process. The CPLP reiterated the need to build public policies aimed at creating the necessary infrastructure to democratize access to new technologies, promoting training and education suitable for their use.

The Heads of State and Government decided to increase multilateral action in terms of capacity building, sharing of experiences, networking initiatives and development of partnerships, within the scope of promoting trade and investment aimed to preserve and create decent jobs, income and productive capacity.

They reiterated the importance of progressively integrating economic cooperation into the general objectives of the CPLP, as well as the consolidation of a multilateral community agenda for the sector, with a view to contributing to the economic and social development of the member states.

They adopted the Mobility Agreement between member states, an instrument that aims to effectively, contribute to greater circulation within the community, to increase cooperation relations in all areas and to promote the feeling of belonging to the CPLP.

Attended the ceremony also the Presidents Cabo Verde Jorge Carlos Fonseca, Guinea-Bissau Umaro Sissoco Embaló and Vice President of Brazil Hamilton Mourão. There were representatives of the Heads of State of Mozambique, East Timor and Equatorial Guinea, Special Representative of the United Nations François Lounecény Fall, as well as representatives of the United Nations and the Organization of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS).

There were social and cultural aspects of the conference. Portuguese President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa donated his José Aparecido de Oliveira prize, stressing that the CPLP “is a community of common principles and values” while he presented the prize awarded  by the Community of Portuguese Language Countries (CPLP), to the victims of terrorism in Cabo Delgado, northern Mozambique.

Established in 2011 and biennial in nature, the José Aparecido de Oliveira prize, named after one of the main creators of the CPLP, honors personalities and institutions that stand out in the defence, appreciation and promotion of principles and values and community objectives, as well as in carrying out studies and related research work.

Mozambique’s Leonardo Simão appointed CPLP Goodwill Ambassador, a new resolution approved at the Luanda concerns the approval of new CPLP Goodwill Ambassadors. Among those appointed for a four-year mandate, renewable for a further four years, were Leonardo Santos Simão, a former Foreign Minister of Mozambique, for the area of political and diplomatic consultation, and Filipe Silvino de Pina Zau, a University Professor and Researcher in Angola, for the Portuguese language area.

Two leading athletes from Portugal – Olympic triple-jump champion Nelson Évora, and another triple-jump athlete, Patrícia Mamona, who this year won the gold medal at the indoor European Athletics Championships, are the ambassadors for the areas of youth, sport and gender equality.

The fundamental role of CPLP Goodwill Ambassador is to “widely promote the objectives and disseminate the activities of the CPLP.” These are social and cultural developments at the 13th Conference of Heads of State and Government, chaired by Angola, so also was the signing of an agreement on free movement and the declaration of a new priority: strengthening economic relations.

With headquarters in Lisbon, CPLP is a multi-regional organization created in 1996. It comprises Angola, Brazil, Cabo Verde, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, Portugal, Sao Tome and Principe and East Timor. The CPLP Conference of Heads of State and Government is the community’s highest organ. It meets every two years and is responsible for defining and guiding its general policy and strategies.

The Associate Observer and Consultative Observer status, without the right to vote, were established in 2005. Consultative observers, of which there are now more than 100, are civil society organizations that may develop joint projects with the CPLP. Namibia is among 19 observer countries to the CPLP together with Uruguay, Senegal, Georgia, Japan, Turkey, Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Hungary, Mauritius, Argentina, Chile, Italy, Andorra, France, Luxembourg, Serbia, and the United Kingdom.

*

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

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a frequent and passionate contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The US-led war in Afghanistan looks to be ending, and not a day too soon. America’s father, Benjamin Franklin, wisely wrote: ‘No good war; no bad peace.’

Yet for 20 years, the United States waged all-out war against this small, remote, impoverished state whose only weapons were old AK47 rifles and the boundless courage of its fierce people.

In my first book about Afghanistan, ‘War at the Top of the World,’ written after being in the field with the anti-Soviet ‘mujahidin’ warriors, I called them ‘the bravest men on earth.’ Now, some 21 years later, I repeat this title.

For the past two decades, the Afghan nationalist mujahidin have faced the full might of the US empire: waves of B-1 and B-52 heavy bombers; fleets of killer drones, constant air strikes from US airbases in Afghanistan, Central Asia and the Gulf; 300,000 US-financed Afghan mercenary troops; up to 120,000 US and NATO troops and other US-paid mercenaries; the brutal Communist-run Afghan secret police, regular government police, Tajik, Hazara and Uzbek militias, hit squads sent by the US and Britain, plus famine and disease. Use of torture by western forces was rampant.

All this to defend the US-installed Afghan puppet governments whose main business was protecting the nation’s growing opium trade which made Afghanistan the world’s largest exporter of opium/morphine that was processed into heroin. Another proud moment for Washington which, in the 1970’s had been up to its ears in Indochina’s opium trade, and later in Central America’s cocaine business.

Afghanistan was a war of lies, sustained by the powerful US and British media. President George W. Bush, a man of deep ignorance, launched this war to cover being caught sleeping by the 9/11 attacks. Bush blamed Osama bin Laden, former US ally, and Afghanistan’s Taliban government for 9/11, though the Afghans were likely not involved with it.

The only proof of bin Laden’s involvement was a number of fake videos that I believe were made by Afghanistan’s Communist-run intelligence service or its former KGB bosses. When I pointed out these videos were fakes, CNN blacklisted me from further broadcasting. So too did Canada’s CBC TV and the Sun chain after I warned Canadian troops were being sent to Afghanistan under false pretenses.

Officially, the US lost 31,376 dead and seriously wounded in Afghanistan; Canada lost 158 dead; Britain 456 dead; the Afghans god knows how many. Estimates range from, 100,000 to one million. Two million Afghans reportedly died during the decade-long Soviet occupation. Almost anything that moved was bombed.

The known cost for this useless war was 2 trillion US dollars, plus hundreds of millions in secret payments to hire ‘volunteers’ from US allies to fight in Afghanistan. This was almost all borrowed money hidden in the US federal debt.

What next? The US is trying to find a way to stay engaged in Afghanistan via air attacks from its bases in the Gulf and possibly new ones in Central Asia. The world’s premier military power simply cannot endure the humiliation of defeat in Afghanistan, particularly so by a bunch of Muslim mountain warriors. All those US and British ‘experts’ who championed the Afghan war are now hiding their faces, as they did after the Iraq debacle.

America’s war party is trying to find ways to keep the conflict going by raising phony alarms about girl’s schooling, translators and woman’s rights. But we hear nothing at all from these pro-war hypocrites about the murder, rape and dowry killing of thousands of women in India each year. How many misinformed Americans know that Taliban was a religious movement formed to stop the rape of Afghan women and brigandage during the bitter 1990’s civil war? I was there and saw it.

What next? As US power wanes, CIA will try to bolster separatist movements among Afghanistan’s Tajik and Uzbek minorities. Iran will arm and finance the Shia Hazara minority. Still Communist dominated Tajikistan and Uzbekistan will support their ethnic brethren in Afghanistan. Most important, India will intensify intrigues in Afghanistan where its powerful intelligence agency, RAW, is increasingly active.

Meanwhile Pakistan quietly supports Taliban which, like a quarter of Pakistanis, is of Pashtun ethnicity. China for once does not know what to do in Afghanistan: it wants to block expansion of Indian influence in the subcontinent but deeply fears militant Islam and its rising influence in Chinese-ruled Xinjiang, formerly Turkistan.

So, Americans may have not seen the last of Afghanistan, one of the greatest follies of US foreign policy. To paraphrase the great Talleyrand, the US war in Afghanistan ‘was worse than a crime, it was a mistake.’

*

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: An April 8, 2013 memorial service for Anne Smedinghoff at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan. Anne was killed in an insurgent attack on Saturday April, 6. 2013 while traveling to donate books to a school in Qalat, Zabul province. (Photo by Musadeq Sadeq/U.S. State Department)

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Greenland is abandoning its ambition of 50 years of becoming an oil-producing nation, suspending its oil exploration strategy because of environmental and climate concerns.

Greenland, an autonomous territory part of Denmark, has been trying to find oil reserves for 50 years, without success, and it now considers that the climate concerns are far greater than the potential benefits of becoming an oil producer, the government of Greenland says.

According to one estimate from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Greenland’s offshore area, East Greenland Rift Basins Province, likely contains a mean estimate of 31.4 billion of barrels equivalent of oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids. Of the five assessed assessment units (AUs), North Danmarkshavn Salt Basin and the South Danmarkshavn Basin are estimated to contain most of the undiscovered petroleum resources, a 2007 report from the USGS says.

Greenland has seen oil exploration since the 1970s involving major oil firms, including ExxonMobil, Shell, and Eni. None has resulted in a major discovery.

Now the left-leaning government of Greenland—a large island in the Arctic and Atlantic oceans east of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago—said it was abandoning the strategy to pursue oil resources. Greenland will also stop awarding oil exploration licenses.

Greenland’s government “has assessed that the environmental consequences of oil exploration and extraction are too great,” Greenland’s Minister of Natural Resources, Naaja Nathanielsen, said in a statement on Thursday carried by Reuters.

“It is a decision where climate considerations, environmental considerations and economic common sense go hand in hand,” Nathanielsen said, adding that suspending the pursuit of oil resources “is the right choice.”

Greenland’s government believes that the future belongs to renewables, where the territory has much more to gain, the Associated Press quoted the government as saying.

At the end of last year, Denmark said it would stop extracting oil from the North Sea in 2050 and cancel its eighth licensing round, announced earlier last year.

*

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.

Tsvetana Paraskova is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing for news outlets such as iNVEZZ and SeeNews. 

Featured image is from OilPrice.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.

***

“A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.”—Abraham Lincoln

History has a funny way of circling back on itself.

The facts, figures, faces and technology may change from era to era, but the dangers remain the same.

This year is no different, whatever the politicians and talking heads may say to the contrary.

Sure, there’s a new guy in charge, but for the most part, we’re still recycling the same news stories that have kept us with one eye warily glued to the news for the past 100-odd years: War. Corruption. Brutality. Economic instability. Partisan politics. Militarism. Disease. Hunger. Greed. Violence. Poverty. Ignorance. Hatred.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Brush up on your history, and you’ll find that we’ve been stuck on repeat for some time now.

Take the United States of America in the year 2021, which is not so far different from the United States of America during the Civil Rights era, or the Cold War era, or even the Depression era.

Go far enough afield, and you’ll find aspects of our troubled history mirrored in the totalitarianism of Nazi Germany, in the fascism of Mussolini’s Italy, and further back in the militarism of the Roman Empire.

We’re like TV weatherman Phil Connors in Harold Ramis’ classic 1993 comedy Groundhog Day, forced to live the same day over and over again.

Here in the American police state, however, we continue to wake up, hoping each new day, new president and new year will somehow be different from what has come before.

Unfortunately, no matter how we change the narrative, change the characters, change the plot lines, we seem to keep ending up in the same place that we started: enslaved, divided and repeating the mistakes of the past.

You want to know about the true State of our Nation? Listen up.

The State of the Union: The state of our nation is politically polarized, controlled by forces beyond the purview of the average American, and rapidly moving the nation away from its freedom foundation. Over the past year, due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, Americans have found themselves repeatedly subjected to egregious civil liberties violations, invasive surveillance, martial law, lockdowns, political correctness, erosions of free speech, strip searches, police shootings of unarmed citizens, government spying, the criminalization of lawful activities, warmongering, etc.

The predators of the police state have wreaked havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives. The government does not listen to the citizenry, refuses to abide by the Constitution, and treats taxpayers as a source of funding and little else. Police officers shoot unarmed citizens and their household pets. Government agents—including local police—remain armed to the teeth and act like soldiers on a battlefield. Bloated government agencies continue to fleece taxpayers. Government technicians spy on our emails and phone calls. And government contractors make a killing by waging endless wars abroad.

Consequently, the state of our nation remains bureaucratic, debt-ridden, violent, militarized, fascist, lawless, invasive, corrupt, untrustworthy, mired in war, and unresponsive to the wishes and needs of the electorate.

The policies of the American police state continue unabated.

The Executive Branch: All of the imperial powers amassed by Donald Trump, Barack Obama and George W. Bush—to kill American citizens without due process, to detain suspects indefinitely, to strip Americans of their citizenship rights, to carry out mass surveillance on Americans without probable cause, to suspend laws during wartime, to disregard laws with which he might disagree, to conduct secret wars and convene secret courts, to sanction torture, to sidestep the legislatures and courts with executive orders and signing statements, to direct the military to operate beyond the reach of the law, to act as a dictator and a tyrant, above the law and beyond any real accountability—were inherited by Joe Biden.

Biden has these powers because every successive occupant of the Oval Office has been allowed to expand the reach and power of the presidency through the use of executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements that can be activated by any sitting president. Those of us who saw this eventuality coming have been warning for years about the growing danger of the Executive Branch with its presidential toolbox of terror that could be used—and abused—by future presidents. The groundwork, we warned, was being laid for a new kind of government where it won’t matter if you’re innocent or guilty, whether you’re a threat to the nation or even if you’re a citizen. What will matter is what the president—or whoever happens to be occupying the Oval Office at the time—thinks. And if he or she thinks you’re a threat to the nation and should be locked up, then you’ll be locked up with no access to the protections our Constitution provides. In effect, you will disappear.

Our warnings continue to go unheeded.

The Legislative Branch:  Congress may well be the most self-serving, semi-corrupt institution in America. Abuses of office runs the gamut from elected representatives neglecting their constituencies to engaging in self-serving practices, including the misuse of eminent domain, earmarking hundreds of millions of dollars in federal contracting in return for personal gain and campaign contributions, having inappropriate ties to lobbyist groups and incorrectly or incompletely disclosing financial information. Pork barrel spending, hastily passed legislation, partisan bickering, a skewed work ethic, graft and moral turpitude have all contributed to the public’s increasing dissatisfaction with congressional leadership. No wonder only 31 percent of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing.

The Judicial Branch: The Supreme Court was intended to be an institution established to intervene and protect the people against the government and its agents when they overstep their bounds. Yet through their deference to police power, preference for security over freedom, and evisceration of our most basic rights for the sake of order and expediency, the justices of the United States Supreme Court have become the guardians of the American police state in which we now live. As a result, sound judgment and justice have largely taken a back seat to legalism, statism and elitism, while preserving the rights of the people has been deprioritized and made to play second fiddle to both governmental and corporate interests. The courts have empowered the government to wreak havoc on our liberties. Protections for private property continue to be undermined. And Americans can no longer rely on the courts to mete out justice.

Shadow Government: Joe Biden inherited more than a bitterly divided nation teetering on the brink of financial catastrophe when he assumed office. He also inherited a shadow government, one that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country. Referred to as the Deep State, this shadow government is comprised of unelected government bureaucrats, corporations, contractors, paper-pushers, and button-pushers who are actually calling the shots behind the scenes right now.

Law Enforcement: By and large the term “law enforcement” encompasses all agents within a militarized police state, including the military, local police, and the various agencies such as the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. Having been given the green light to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts, America’s law enforcement officials, no longer mere servants of the people entrusted with keeping the peace but now extensions of the military, are part of an elite ruling class dependent on keeping the masses corralled, under control, and treated like suspects and enemies rather than citizens. As a result, police are becoming even more militarized and weaponized, and police shootings of unarmed individuals continue to increase.

A Suspect Surveillance Society: Every dystopian sci-fi film we’ve ever seen is suddenly converging into this present moment in a dangerous trifecta between science, technology and a government that wants to be all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful. By tapping into your phone lines and cell phone communications, the government knows what you say. By uploading all of your emails, opening your mail, and reading your Facebook posts and text messages, the government knows what you write. By monitoring your movements with the use of license plate readers, surveillance cameras and other tracking devices, the government knows where you go. By churning through all of the detritus of your life—what you read, where you go, what you say—the government can predict what you will do. By mapping the synapses in your brain, scientists—and in turn, the government—will soon know what you remember. And by accessing your DNA, the government will soon know everything else about you that they don’t already know: your family chart, your ancestry, what you look like, your health history, your inclination to follow orders or chart your own course, etc. Consequently, in the face of DNA evidence that places us at the scene of a crime, behavior sensing technology that interprets our body temperature and facial tics as suspicious, and government surveillance devices that cross-check our biometrics, license plates and DNA against a growing database of unsolved crimes and potential criminals, we are no longer “innocent until proven guilty.”

Military Empire: America’s endless global wars and burgeoning military empire—funded by taxpayer dollars—have depleted our resources, over-extended our military and increased our similarities to the Roman Empire and its eventual demise. Black budget spending has completely undermined any hope of fiscal transparency, with government contractors padding their pockets at the expense of taxpayers and the nation’s infrastructure—railroads, water pipelines, ports, dams, bridges, airports and roads—taking the hit. The U.S. now operates approximately 800 military bases in foreign countries around the globe at an annual cost of at least $156 billion. The consequences of financing a global military presence are dire. In fact, David Walker, former comptroller general of the U.S., believes there are “striking similarities” between America’s current situation and the factors that contributed to the fall of Rome, including “declining moral values and political civility at home, an over-confident and over-extended military in foreign lands and fiscal irresponsibility by the central government.”

I haven’t even touched on the corporate state, the military industrial complex, SWAT team raids, invasive surveillance technology, zero tolerance policies in the schools, overcriminalization, or privatized prisons, to name just a few. However, what I have touched on should be enough to show that the landscape of our freedoms has already changed dramatically from what it once was and will no doubt continue to deteriorate unless Americans can find a way to wrest back control of their government and reclaim their freedoms.

So how do we go about reclaiming our freedoms and reining in our runaway government?

Essentially, there are four camps of thought among the citizenry when it comes to holding the government accountable. Which camp you fall into says a lot about your view of government—or, at least, your view of whichever administration happens to be in power at the time.

In the first camp are those who trust the government to do the right thing, despite the government’s repeated failures in this department.

In the second camp are those who not only don’t trust the government but think the government is out to get them.

In the third camp are those who see government neither as an angel nor a devil, but merely as an entity that needs to be controlled, or as Thomas Jefferson phrased it, bound “down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution.”

Then there’s the fourth camp, comprised of individuals who pay little to no attention to the workings of government. Easily entertained, easily distracted, easily led, these are the ones who make the government’s job far easier than it should be.

It is easy to be diverted, distracted and amused by the antics of politicians, the pomp and circumstance of awards shows, athletic events, and entertainment news, and the feel-good evangelism that passes for religion today.

What is far more difficult to face up to is the reality of life in America, where unemployment, poverty, inequality, injustice and violence by government agents are increasingly norms.

The powers-that-be want us to remain divided, alienated from each other based on our politics, our bank accounts, our religion, our race and our value systems. Yet as George Orwell observed, “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”

The only distinction that matters anymore is where you stand in the American police state.

In other words, you’re either part of the problem or part of the solution.

America is at a crossroads.

History may show that from this point forward, we will have left behind any semblance of constitutional government and entered into a militaristic state where all citizens are suspects and security trumps freedom.

Certainly, we have moved beyond the era of representative government and entered a new age: the age of authoritarianism. Even with its constantly shifting terrain, this topsy-turvy travesty of law and government has become America’s new normal.

As long as we continue to put our politics ahead of our principles—moral, legal and constitutional—“we the people” will lose.

And you know who will keep winning by playing on our prejudices, capitalizing on our fears, deepening our distrust of our fellow citizens, and dividing us into polarized, warring camps incapable of finding consensus on the one true menace that is an immediate threat to all of our freedoms? The government.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, when we lose sight of the true purpose of government—to protect our rights—and fail to keep the government in its place as our servant, we allow the government to overstep its bounds and become a tyrant that rules by brute force.

*

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 Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president The Rutherford Institute. His books Battlefield America: The War on the American People and A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State are available at www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at [email protected].

Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Three US senators, who have long campaigned against the White House’s war powers, introduced wide-ranging legislation on Tuesday aimed at curbing the president’s authority to issue arms sales, send troops into combat, and declare national emergencies without congressional approval.

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, Republican Mike Lee and Independent Bernie Sanders announced their “National Security Powers Act“, which the senators said seeks to “reclaim Congress’s critical role in national security matters”.

“I believe that we have become far too comfortable with the United States engaging in military interventions all over the world, and the time is long overdue for Congress to reassert its constitutional role in matters of war and peace,” Sanders said in a statement.

“This legislation is an important step toward reasserting that constitutional power, and I hope it will lead to a larger discussion, both in the Congress and among the public, about the uses of military force in our foreign policy.”

The legislation has three parts: one is to increase Congress’s control over the authorisation of military actions, another to reform the review of major foreign weapons sales, and a third to increase Congress’s control over the declaration of “national emergencies”, which have been used in the past by presidents to justify weapons sales or military strikes.

It would offer a series of reforms to repeal the original War Powers Resolution – passed in 1973 –  and replace it with a stronger measure that includes shortening the period in which the president can conduct military strikes without congressional approval from 60 days to 20 days.

The bill would also automatically cut off funding for such acts after the 20 days, unless the president obtains congressional approval, rather than requiring a veto-proof majority from Congress to do so.

The bill is the latest in a series of efforts by lawmakers to cut back weapons sales and push both Republican and Democratic presidents to end support for countries involved in conflicts devastating to civilians, including the war in Yemen.

‘Usurped Congress’s prerogative’

Progressive advocates and lawmakers have for years been calling for revoking the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) measure that Congress passed hastily after the 9/11 attacks. The laws gave the president broad war powers.

Former President Donald Trump used the 2002 AUMF to justify the 2020 strike that killed Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, and also invoked an obscure emergency provision within the Arms Export Control Act in order to bypass Congress and approve an $8bn arms sale to Saudi Arabia.

Lee, the Republican senator, criticised the Trump administration for assassinating Soleimani without congressional approval.

“Presidents of both parties have usurped Congress’s prerogative to determine if, when, and how we go to war,” Lee said in a statement.

“Now, America’s global standing, treasure, and brave service members are being lost in conflicts the people’s legislators never debated. In areas where the Constitution grants broad powers to Congress, Congress is ignored.”

Over the last few years, congressional efforts to roll back or repeal the authorisations for military force have failed. The newly introduced bill, if passed, would repeal all of the AUMFs.

The likelihood of the bill becoming law is unclear as it would need to pass both the Senate and House of Representatives and be signed by President Joe Biden.

Representative Jim McGovern, the Democratic chairman of the powerful Rules Committee, will be backing a companion measure in the House, according to the senators.

A version of the bill is expected to be introduced in the House by Congressman Jim McGovern, the Democratic chairman of the powerful Rules Committee.

“Everything has changed over the last few decades: when we fight, how we fight, and why we fight,” McGovern said in a statement. “I look forward to working with my colleagues and the Biden administration to put an end to endless wars, reexamine broad executive powers, and build a more safe and peaceful world.”

Biden open to repealing AUMFs

Earlier this year, the Biden administration signalled an openness to repealing laws that allow the White House to authorise military strikes without the approval of Congress.

White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said in March that Biden will work with Congress to ensure that the current AUMFs are “replaced with a narrow and specific framework that will ensure we can protect Americans from terrorist threats while ending the forever wars”.

Psaki had also appeared to applaud an effort by Senator Tim Kaine to introduce legislation aimed at repealing the authorisations.

Biden announced in February an end to offensive support for the Saudi Arabia-led coalition in Yemen. However, the administration said it remained committed to protecting Riyadh’s territorial sovereignty, and lawmakers and rights advocates had questioned what the definition of offensive support means.

Rights groups also lambasted the administration after it had approved a $200m arms sale to Egypt around the same time news emerged that Egyptian American activist Mohamed Soltan’s relatives had been detained by Egyptian authorities. Advocates again voiced dismay when the administration approved a $735m arms deal to Israel after the Israeli military targeted a building housing media offices during an offensive on Gaza – where Israel killed at least 248 Palestinians, including more than 60 children.

“More than ever before, presidents are sending men and women into battle without public debate, and making major policy decisions, like massive arms sales, without congressional input,” Murphy said in a statement.

“Before it’s too late, Congress needs to reclaim its rightful role as co-equal branch on matters of war and national security. The bipartisan National Security Powers Act will make sure that there is a full, open and public debate on all major national security decisions, such as war-making, arms sales and emergency declarations.”

*

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.

***

How the pandemic will be reshaping the world, especially in terms of economic recovery and especially the western world, remains to be seen. So far, western economic, social and health restructuring policies are chaotic, disorganized and totally uncoordinated. Western countries are skipping from lockdowns to “opening up” back to lockdown, from the first covid-wave, to the second and the third and now approaching the fourth. Looks like there is no end in sight.

One could almost think they do it on purpose, to keep people confused and easily manipulated.

What happens in China is a different story. China is the only significant national economy – the second largest for now in absolute terms, and the largest in PPP (purchasing power parity terms) – that has put her economic and financial mechanism fully back on-stream. Consequently, the Chinese supply chain – on which the rest of the world largely depends – i.e., on pharmaceuticals to 90% – works again in full force. It is rather western ports that are still – or again? – partially closed to receive cargo container ships, especially from China, causing dangerous supply shortages at home.

China is moving forward, always creating and leading initiatives, despite all odds, harassments, outright interferences and lie-based “sanctions” from the west. In this context and already looking into the future, into a post-covid future, China is displaying her Green Agenda, towards a carbon neutral – not only China – but world.

Following the idea of President Xi Jinping, of promoting a New Era of Eco-civilization, the Eco Forum Global Guiyang, for short EFG, has been held successfully for 10 sessions since its inception in 2009.

As a side line – Guiyang, according to the Nature Index, is one of the top 500 science cities in the world by scientific research outputs.

EFG is the only international high-profile forum in China themed on Eco-civilization at the state-level.

Let me venture saying, the Eco Forum Global Guiyang is, so far, the only international forum of such tenor and action that may and hopefully will expand into a global movement aiming at drastically reducing the world’s carbon footprint – in short, accelerating the objective of making our civilization, our life on earth, carbon neutral – and, thereby, healthier.

To be clear, “Green Finance” is often confused, especially in the west. For example, investing in electric cars, when most of the electricity is made from not only unrenewable but also highly toxic CO2-producing hydrocarbon – is not a Green Investment. This is still predominantly the case in Europe and North America.

This does not even take into account the environment-unfriendly mining and often unhealthy work-conditions of exploiting and manufacturing lithium into car batteries.

The world’s chief energy source, hydrocarbons, has hardly changed in importance in the last 30 years or so. It still amounts to about 85% of all energy used in the world. This just indicates that so-called “green investments”, especially in the west, are mostly “fake” green investments, a new mode of sheer profit-driven capitalism.

These “green” investments have not even come close to a zero-carbon balance. To the contrary. The production of “green investments” used generally hydrocarbon, which lowers the energy efficiency drastically. This is clearly demonstrated in the low energy efficiency of electric cars, on average 35% to 40%, versus cars using straight petrol or gas-based energy.

This is, of course, not to advocate the continuous use of hydrocarbons. Quite the opposite. But strongly suggests investing in research to come up with real novel carbon neutral, or even carbon negative sources of renewable energy. Such investments most likely do not yield “instant profit”, as is the key incentive and neoliberal investment motive, but such research investments are directed towards long-term societal benefits for all humanity.

*

Real Green Investments are for example, exploiting renewable and carbon-free sources of power, such as hydropower – wind, solar and tidal energy, with the latter taking advantage of the natural and eternal movements of the sea.

China will also continue being a world example of building “Green Cities”; investing in parks and “green housing” – housing units with plant façades – that absorb urban CO2 emissions from industry and transport.

These are Green Investments, as long as their dependence on hydrocarbon energy is way below the CO2 output of the Green Investment itself.

The traditional, huge, costly, and maintenance-heavy hydropower dams ought to make way for a new generation of hydropower production: namely, small, localized, low-maintenance and even mobile hydropower plants. The latter for use in desertic and monsoon-type flash-flood prone areas. A prime example is Yemen, one of the world’s most arid countries, where floods come when it rains, but where perennial water flows are rare.

Finally, the real challenge is investing and researching in a new generation of exploiting solar energy…. the most efficient way of using solar energy – is by photo synthesis. This is what plants do to convert the energy of the sun. An estimated 95% energy efficiency might potentially be achieved, as compared to the current use of solar panels with a best-case of energy efficiency of 30% or less.

Imagine the energy freedom humanity would gain by exploiting solar energy by photo-synthesis! Almost unthinkable. But not impossible by any means. When sincere minds come together, impossible dreams become reality.

In addition, the production of solar panels which have a limited life, requires enormous quantities of energy – energy which is currently mostly produced by hydrocarbons. Plus, solar panels have an average life span of 25 – 30 years, after which they need to be destroyed – or recycled, both are energy-dependent and environmentally challenging.

President Xi Jinping in his address for the 100-year Anniversary said –

“We must unite and lead the Chinese people in working ceaselessly for a better life.” And, further “We must uphold and develop socialism with Chinese characteristics.”

These words signal, creating a new model for human advancement that is leading the way into a Green China – a China where socioeconomic development meets the concept of carbon neutrality. This sounds like a challenging but terrific initiative – one of many – for China leading the way into a post-covid era.

President Xi further stated –

“We must ensure and enhance public wellbeing in the course of development, promote harmony between humanity and nature, and take well-coordinated steps toward making our people prosperous, our nation strong, and our country beautiful.”

China may want to take this a step further. Using the Belt and Road Initiative through joint efforts, and joint ventures in Green Investments, inside, as well as outside Chinese borders, thereby providing the world with new opportunities towards improved and carbon-free standards of living. The focus always being on mutual benefits.

True to President Xi’s words:

“We must continue working to promote the building of a human community 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.

This article was originally published on New Eastern Outlook.

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.

All Global Research articles 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 purpose of a military conquest is to take control of foreign economies, to take control of their land and impose tribute. The genius of the World Bank was to recognize that it’s not necessary to occupy a country in order to impose tribute, or to take over its industry, agriculture and land. Instead of bullets, it uses financial maneuvering. As long as other countries play an artificial economic game that U.S. diplomacy can control, finance is able to achieve today what used to require bombing and loss of life by soldiers” (Michael Hudson(1))

The IMF and The World Bank

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank were created at the end of World War 2. Both are involved with lending money to poor countries. Originally their purposes were separate but over time they have expanded their roles so there is now considerable overlap. Their founders wrote that they should protect and improve jobs, incomes and standards of living in all countries; help countries grow and trade in sensible ways; and develop the productive resources of all member countries.(2) If they had focused on these ideas, the world might now be a much fairer place for billions of people. Unfortunately, they have not. Due to their complex voting structures they are dominated by rich countries, particularly the US. They impose US financial and economic systems on other countries. One of the leading experts on US Imperialism, Michael Hudson, has explained that their purpose was to make other countries economically dependent on US exports, particularly grain and food, and US finance. As long ago as 1959, both the IMF and the World Bank were described as:

US puppets used to control other countries.(3) 

Early participants complained that the US was:

manipulating the voting, by getting subservient followers to push through decisions against serious opposition.(4)

Even the US Treasury Department has admitted that the World Bank: 

“is an institution solidly dominated by the United States, faithfully promoting not only strategic US economic goals, but short-term political objectives as well.”(5)

None of the people who run these institutions are democratically elected. Many are government insiders. The first full-time President of the World Bank was John McCloy. He had been US Assistant Secretary of War from 1941-45.(6) A later head of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz, was one of the most extreme voices for the use of America’s military might abroad, and supported some of the world’s most brutal dictators. He supported the Indonesian President, Suharto, who was slaughtering hundreds of thousands of people.(7) A former chief economist for the World Bank, Lawrence Summers, actually wrote a memo where he suggested that dirty industries should move to less developed countries because ill people in poor countries are worth less than ill people in rich countries.(8)

Using Conditions to Destroy Economies, Creating Civil Unrest and Even War 

When these organisations lend money to poor countries, they insist that the borrowers change their policies as explained in earlier posts. This is known as conditionality, which means privatization, austerity (less spending on government services) and free trade (inadequate regulation). A key policy of the IMF has been to ensure that governments are unable to control movements of money in and out of their country, despite the evidence that this has repeatedly caused financial crises around the world.(9) World Bank loans are used specifically to increase the exports of poor countries, particularly crops, when those countries should instead be focussing on food security. These conditions have now been applied to over 100 countries. We have seen that these policies often create large price rises, so ordinary people cannot afford basic necessities. They have resulted in so many job losses that people in South Korea nicknamed the IMF I’M Fired.(10)

Internal documents from the World Bank state clearly that the Bank expects the conditions attached to loans to cause civil unrest.(11) The policies are misleadingly called ‘poverty reduction strategies’,(12) yet they have created or maintained extreme poverty in many regions around the world. The United Nations ‘Human Development Report, 2000’ showed that at the end of the 1990s, over 50 countries had lower per person incomes than at the end of the 1980s.(13) Poverty has increased significantly in countries that have followed these policies.(14) The most successful developing countries, such as China and Malaysia, have made good progress by ignoring IMF demands. In particular, they retained strict controls on the movement of money in and out of the country.(15)

These policies can have devastating consequences that go beyond economic. Both Rwanda and Yugoslavia had large-scale wars in the 1990s. The mainstream media usually provides simplistic explanations about underlying ethnic tension. They rarely mention that living conditions in both countries were made much worse by IMF conditions, and this contributed greatly to civil unrest.(16) Rich countries, led by the US, took advantage of these problems to make the situations even worse. In the case of Yugoslavia, the US used the civil unrest as an excuse to go to war, claiming that it was for humanitarian purposes. Yugoslavia was divided and conquered by the US and their allies.

Insiders Know That Their Policies Cause Chaos 

Both the IMF and the World Bank are regularly criticised by campaign organisations. They are also criticised by their staff. Internal assessments within both the IMF and the World Bank show that the policies do not work, and that IMF staff have disagreed with their bosses on many occasions.(17) Former top-ranking insiders have admitted that the policies do not work, and that these institutions are blinded by free-market ideology.(18) Insiders have even come forward to explain that the IMF “cooked the books.” They lied about the economies of poor countries to convince governments that they had to change their policies.(19) One insider summarised the situation by saying:

“Everything we did from 1983 onwards was based on our new sense of mission to have the South privatized or die. Towards this end we created economic bedlam in Latin America and Africa in 1983-88.”

In the year 2000, the former chief economist of the World Bank, Joseph Stiglitz, wrote a landmark book entitled ‘Globalization and its Discontents’, where he explained in detail how the policies create poverty. This forced the issue into the mainstream media. The IMF and World Bank frequently claim that they are changing, but the most recent analyses show that they are still enforcing similar policies.(20) At an important meeting in 2002, following the terrorist attacks of 2001, US negotiators told World Bank staff “you’re either with us or against us” and made it clear that the future role of the Bank was as a US tool to enforce privatisation in other countries.(21)

Immense Power Distorts Politics 

It has been difficult for poor countries to avoid coming into contact with these organisations, as many of them have needed to borrow money at some point. The reason these organisations are so powerful is that very few banks will lend to a country if the IMF does not give its seal of approval to that country’s financial affairs. This power is extraordinary. Before presidential elections in South Korea, all four candidates had to sign agreements stating that if they were elected they would follow IMF policies. If they refused to sign, the IMF would not lend the country any money. In Brazil, President Lula also signed a similar agreement before he was elected.(22) This type of interference in politics is clearly undemocratic.

Countries Trying to Escape 

A few countries have been trying to escape from this interference. Seven South American countries, led by Venezuela, have tried to form their own Bank of The South, so that they can borrow money in future without having to go to the World Bank or the IMF. So far this has not been successful.(23)

In 2003 Thailand managed to pay off its outstanding IMF debt. It then listed the laws that it had introduced because of the IMF and revoked them all, having recognised that these laws were intended to benefit foreign corporations.(24) Similarly, in 2020 the people of Costa Rica protested against IMF austerity and the government was forced to change policy.(25)

Argentinian President Nestor Kirchner said in 2006:

“no way in hell are we going to make an agreement again with the IMF.”(26)

Unfortunately, in 2016 Argentina had a different President, Macri, who was described as a US puppet(27) and he again made new arrangements with the IMF. People have been protesting against the IMF and World Bank for decades, but these organisations are proving to be very effective tools to enforce exploitative economic policies.

*

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) Michael Hudson, ‘The IMF and World Bank: Partners in Backwardness’, 5 July 2019, at https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/07/05/the-imf-and-world-bank-partners-in-backwardness/ 

2) Ngaire Woods, The Globalisers

The exact purposes are stated as “facilitate balanced growth of international trade, stimulate employment and real income” 

3) Ngaire Woods, The Globalisers

The exact phrase is “US serving control instruments over the economic and financial policies of other countries, particularly under-developed ones”

4) Ngaire Woods, The Globalisers

The exact phrase is “organising cohesive blocks of subservient followers”

5) Bello et al, Development Debacle, p.198, cited in Ellen Augustine, ‘The Phillippines, the World Bank, and The Race to the Bottom’, in Steven Hyatt, A Game As Old As Empire, p.192

6) Yves Smith, ‘Michael Hudson discusses the IMF and World Bank: Partners in Backwardness’, Naked Capitalism, 4 July 2019, at https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/07/michael-hudson-discusses-the-imf-and-world-bank-partners-in-backwardness.html

7) Noam Chomsky, ‘Selective Memory and a Dishonest Doctrine’, 22 Dec 2003, at https://chomsky.info/20031222/

8) Lawrence Summers memo, 12 December 1991, at http://www.whirledbank.org/ourwords/summers.html

9) ‘Michael Hudson discusses the IMF and World Bank: Partners in economic backwardness’, interview by Bonnie Faulkner, 4 July 2019, at https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2019/07/michael-hudson-discusses-the-imf-and-world-bank-partners-in-backwardness.html

10) Ha-Joon Chang, Bad Samaritans, p.156

11) Greg Palast, ‘Coruscating Criticism of the Free Market Ideology of the IMF’, 27 April 2001, at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/newsnight/1312942.stm 

12) Ngaire Woods, The Globalisers, p.48

Mark Curtis, Trade for Life

These policies were originally called Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs)

13) UN, ‘Human Development: Is The Glass Half Full Or Half Empty’, World Chronicle, Program No.906, 25 August 2003, at https://www.un.org/webcast/worldchron/trans906.pdf 

14) Lori Wallach and Patrick Woodall, Whose Trade Organization, p.161

15) George Monbiot, The Age of Consent, p.148

16) Michael Chossudovsky, The Globalization of Poverty, pp.103-124 for Rwanda, pp.257-278 for Yugoslavia

17) Michael Hudson, ‘The IMF and World Bank: Partners in Backwardness’, 5 July 2019, at https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/07/05/the-imf-and-world-bank-partners-in-backwardness/ 

18) Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine, p.273

19) Davison Budhoo, cited in Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine, pp.164-165 and p.260

20) https://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/2019/06/what-are-the-main-criticisms-of-the-world-bank-and-the-imf/

21) This was part of the PSD (private sector development) initiative for radical privatization, particularly services, especially health, education and water. See Nancy Alexander, “The US on the World Stage: Reshaping Development, Finance and Trade Initiatives,” Citizens Network on Essential Services, 2002, cited in Walden Bello, ‘The Capitalist Conjuncture: Overaccumulation, Financial Crises and the Retreat from Globalization’, in Achin Vanaik, Selling US Wars, p.48

22) For Korea see, Jeffrey Sachs, cited in Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine, p.270

For Brazil see, James Petras, Rulers and Ruled in the US Empire, p.193

23) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_the_South

24) ‘Disengaging From The Fund: Possible and Worthwhile?’, 5 April 2004, at www.brettonwoodsproject.org/art.shtml?x=42237

25) ‘Costa Rica resoundingly rejects IMF’s ‘austericidal’ recipe’, 10 Dec 2020, at https://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/2020/12/costa-rica-resoundingly-rejects-imfs-austericidal-recipe/ 

26) Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine, p.457

27) Lucho Granados Ceja, ‘The 5 biggest puppets of the United States in Latin America’, Telesur, 26 May 2016, at https://www.telesurenglish.net/analysis/The-5-Biggest-Puppets-of-the-United-States-in-Latin-America-20160523-0037.html 

Featured image is from Atlanta Black Star

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov was cited by TASS on July 20 confirming that his nation’s development of hypersonic missiles (five or more times the speed of sound) is a direct response to the American (and NATO it should be added) interceptor missile system being deployed against his nation near its western borders.

He was quoted warning:

“If you remember, the president [President of Russia Vladimir Putin] has repeatedly said that, unfortunately, we have observed a gradual dismantling of the entire document[ed/able] system of strategic security in the past decades and even over a longer period.”

On June 9 TASS cited President Vladimir Putin stating American anti-ballistic missile interceptors based in Romania and Poland could strike Moscow in 15 minutes if a warhead was added to them; which, notwithstanding Western disclaimers not to do so, could be easily done. Russia has not been invited to inspect the missiles in Romania, for example. Paraphrasing the head of state, the TASS report disclosed the above threat is eminently practicable “because the missile defense launch systems stationed there can be used to carry out strikes as well.”

In 2012 the Pentagon installed an Army Navy/Transportable Radar Surveillance (AN/TPY-2), a Forward-Based X-Band Transportable surveillance radar in Kürecik, Turkey, which was transferred to NATO command as part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach which also includes the Standard Missile-3 IIA interceptors in Romania.

What the Russian government never mentions, however, is that the Barack Obama administration’s European Phased Adaptive Approach consists of more than what it is also referred to as: Aegis Ashore. The Aegis Combat System includes stationing Standard Missile-3s (SM-3s) on warships. The U.S. Navy has 62 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and 22 Ticonderoga-class cruisers equipped to carry and launch SM-3s, with more under development.

Under NATO auspices the U.S. bases four of the destroyers at the Naval Station Rota in Spain, with that number to be raised to six, for deployment in the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea. Four of the American Aegis destroyers and a cruiser have been sent to the Black Sea so far this year.

In recapitulating the comments of the man he speaks for, Peskov stated:

“What’s more, we have been confronted with certain steps by the United States and NATO that have actually impaired the existing parity: this relates to creating ballistic missile defense positioning areas, deploying interceptor missile systems in Romania and other countries in the close vicinity to our borders. These are the systems that can also launch strike missiles. That is, all these steps have been taken to dismantle the existing parity. This has required measures to ensure Russia’s security and guarantee the continuation of the existing parity. This is what has been done.”

Anyone reminded of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 would be justified in making the connection.

In a transparent effort to deflect attention and reverse the responsibility for the current crisis, as potentially dangerous as can be imagined, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby has recently said, “Russia’s new hypersonic missiles could potentially lead to destabilization and pose a significant risk because they can carry a nuclear charge.” As though Russia had already based the missiles in Canada across Lake Erie from the U.S.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has regularly warned that the land-based Aegis Ashore ballistic missile system in Eastern Europe was a violation of existing agreements between the U.S. and Russia and that the American launchers used for it could launch more than has been claimed they would or will.

*

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.

All Global Research articles 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.

***

After months of NIH objecting, and after seeking Court intervention, ICAN’s attorneys have won a motion which now forces the NIH to unredact and disclose safety-related data they tried to withhold from Moderna’s Phase 1 clinical trial report.

As a result of a FOIA request, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provided ICAN a copy of an internal 322-page Safety Summary Report along with over 700 pages of Appendices to that report, detailing safety data from Moderna’s Phase I clinical trial for its and NIAID’s COVID-19 vaccine.  This report was previously shared with ICAN supporters and was the first and only time we are aware of that this report was made public.  It can be downloaded here.

After reviewing the report, ICAN challenged the redactions made within the document, explaining their importance to the public.  NIH fought back but the Court, in its June 24, 2021 decision, ultimately ruled in ICAN’s and the public’s favor holding that the “NIH cannot articulate a sufficient privacy interest to justify redacting” the information that it did and that “the public interest in seeing the full data outweighs any individual privacy concerns” of the clinical trial participants.  The unredacted data will be provided within a few days and ICAN will immediately make it available so that everyone can see what information is being withheld from the public.

ICAN also challenged the adequacy of the agency’s search and believes there are likely more responsive documents in NIH’s possession.  To address this issue, ICAN has now filed additional FOIA requests to obtain copies of these documents, and any new productions will be shared.  ICAN will never rest in its fight to expose the truth regarding these products or in demanding full transparency and full informed consent for any and all vaccines, especially as these manufacturers seek FDA licensure for these experimental COVID-19 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.

Featured image is from Public Domain

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

“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.

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.” 

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

***

But how do these vaccine passports really work?

Vaccine passports are just a digital certificate showing your COVID-19 vaccination details. Ask President Macron …

Watch the short video below.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

How do we stop this neo-feudal re-imagining of society? How do we play chicken with a regime that appears to hold all the cards? At this point it is clear that regaining our freedom depends entirely on the government losing the support of the crowd. To use the words of Hans Christian Andersen’s timeless folktale from 1837, we need to shake our frightened fellow citizens out of their stupor by getting them to see that “the emperor has no clothes” but, more importantly, we need everyone who sees it to be willing to say it out loud.

So, in this essay, I am going to dissect the psychology of dissent.

Winning Hearts and Minds – How to Open the Mind to Doubts

Data plays an important role in changing hearts and minds, but only as a secondary ingredient. We are fighting a psychological battle, not an intellectual one.

Data will help those who start to ask questions, but first they need to ask their first question. First there needs to be a seed of doubt. Data will not plant that seed of doubt. Data does not have the power to break the spell.

A frightened mind seeks certainty because certainty feels safe, which is why a frightened mind rejects anything that undermines the feeling of certainty. Uncertainty is scary. This desire for certainty makes people savagely hostile to conflicting data and capable of entertaining the wildest of logical fallacies. The facts simply do not matter to their feelings. People only begin to seek out data after the spell begins to break. Something else must first plant that initial seed of doubt.

Uncertainty is uncomfortable so if it cannot be pushed aside, then and only then will the mind enlist rational thought processes to work through the dilemma in order to regain a sense of certainty. That is the psychological game we need to play. We need to create the sense of uncertainty that forces our frightened peers to enlist their rational minds. Once doubt sets in, the data will take them the rest of the way.

Thus, the willingness to look at data is merely the second step along each individual person’s journey to recognizing that the emperor has no clothes. Much of our effort in this battle for our freedom has been focused on that second step. More data. But the first step along that path requires planting the initial seed of doubt. How do you seed doubt without data?

The simple reality is that this first step is fought with symbolism, with herd psychology, and with the courage to bear the cost of speaking out when others will not. Navigating this first step is the focus of this essay because that is where we are falling short.

To plant a seed of doubt, to help people take that first step, it is not what you say that matters so much as being seen to say it, out loud, in public, in a way that allows you to be identified and counted, and being willing to face the music when the world can see what you really think. And saying it over and over again, relentlessly, until enough voices join in, until the counter chorus can no longer be dismissed as fringe. Doubt is created by breaking the illusion of consensus.

This first seed of doubt happens on a deeply subconscious emotional level. There are three different ways that it can happen:

Many only start to ask questions after getting their first COVID vaccination. As they begin to feel safe, they regain their ability to think, which gives rise to questions and doubts. It is why the regime is creating a hyperventilating drumbeat about “variants” and stoking hysteria about the unvaccinated. The regime is trying to keep the vaccinated in fear in order to prevent them from regaining their ability to see clearly and think independently.

Doubt can also be created when someone’s personal experience doesn’t match the propaganda that they’ve been fed. The regime is fighting that part of the battle for us. When someone is injured by a vaccine, sees a loved one trapped in isolation in a nursing home, or is at risk of losing their business to lockdowns, doubt in the narrative begins to creep in. There is only so much pain that anyone can bear before their certainty in the regime begins to waiver.

And doubt can be created simply by depriving someone of the illusion of consensus. Remember Hans Christian Andersen’s folk tale. It was a child that broke the illusion because it was unafraid to say out loud that the emperor’s fine gown didn’t exist, that he was wearing nothing at all. Data didn’t break the illusion. All it took was a pointed finger, a well-timed laugh, and the courage to speak out.

Doubt creates conflicting emotions that can only be resolved by enlisting the rational mind. Doubt leads the mind to seek out data, not the other way around. The regime is doing everything it can to prevent the fearful from thinking. This is a psychological war.

A Glimpse of Two Futures

The outcome of this psychological war will determine the world that you, your children, and your grandchildren will live in. So, before I dig deeper into the psychology of how to win this war, it is worth reminding ourselves of what is at stake because it is easy to lose sight of the big picture when we are so focused on debunking government lies and fighting vaccine passports, masks, and social distancing restrictions. The courage to make a difference in this psychological war comes from understanding the long game that is being played.

This is a war about the role of government. It is about your freedom to think, to speak, and to ask questions, and about whether your individual autonomy is downgraded to a conditional privilege or whether it remains a right. It is a war about whether you are to remain a citizen or become a subject. It is about who owns you, you or the state.

The question at the forefront of this psychological battle, accelerated by the lens of COVID, is about whether we will remain a society based on legal equality and inalienable rights or whether, in the name of safety, equity, and political correctness, we will allow ourselves to be reduced to a society of masters and servants, as was the norm throughout much of human history, with the masters granting or withdrawing conditional privileges to pursue whatever they perceive as the greater good.

Herdsmen and their cattle. Shepherds and their flock. Those who wear the imperial mantle of responsibility for the wellbeing of the herd versus those with the obligation to endure, muzzled and under a yoke, for the “greater good”.

Citizens have a voice in the rules they live by and a responsibility to take care of themselves. Cattle get fed, sheltered, herded, vaccinated, prodded onto cattle trucks, milked, and harvested. For some, freedom from responsibility has a certain appeal, but it is anything but liberty. Real freedom is not a license to do what you want to others or to take what you need from others. Real freedom is a restraint that prevents others from doing things to you and prevents others from taking what they need from you. And vice versa. Freedom draws a line between people that no-one has a right to cross. That is the freedom that is being lost.

In a free and open society, freedom is the greater good. So, in a sense, what is playing out on a grand scale is a global referendum on freedom. The consequences of this referendum will be with us long after the virus fades away. In this referendum, you don’t get to cast your vote at the polls. Your choice to speak out or stay silent in the face of the naked emperor is your vote. Both options come with terrible risks: the consequences of being bulldozed by the regime if you speak out versus the servile future that is waiting for you if you don’t.

There is no option to simply sit on the sidelines of this referendum. Silence is a choice. Those who choose silence are, in effect, signalling that their freedom is worth less to them than the discomfort of speaking out and facing the consequences. They are, in effect, legitimizing the regime’s use of intimidation by showing that it works. Yet many will nonetheless opt for the perceived safety of the sidelines out of fear of repercussions. That fear is justified and understandable. The penalties are very real in this game. But you are either swept along by the stampede or you dig your heels in. Those are your two choices. Freedom on one side. Servitude on the other.

Your disapproval about all that is going on around you is irrelevant unless you say it out loud and take a stand. Visibility. Saying it on social media from behind an anonymous avatar achieves nothing. Letters, petitions, and press releases made by associations do not speak to the subconscious minds of our frightened peers. They will not look at them. These avenues are all in the same realm as the data. They will be dismissed until after the spell begins to break.

To have a psychological impact, you have to voice your dissent in person, out there in the real world where the risk of repercussions is real. Where you can make eye contact while you are doing it. At work, at home, at school, at church, at the gym, at the mall, and out on the street. You have to say it where those who disagree with you can see you saying it. You have to be the little boy who stood in front of the crowd and pointed at the emperor’s lack of clothes. That is how democracy works in its rawest form when the institutions of liberal democracy cease to function.

Words are not violence. Words are 100% peaceful, no matter how much you disagree with them or how much you are offended by them. But censorship in any form is a form of implied violence because, without your voice, you are held hostage by your censor and have no peaceful means of self-defence.

A liberal democracy cannot function in an atmosphere of censorship. Brute force begins with censorship. Allowing yourself or others to be silenced ushers in a world where the only means of self defense is through brute force. That is what is currently being normalized under the guise of saving the world from COVID.

When speech is allowed to be is silenced, whether through cancel culture mobbing, Big Tech censorship, or outright legal attacks like those currently being attempted by the Canadian government (i.e. bill C-10 and bill C-36), it raises the cost of self-defence beyond a threshold that most people are willing or even capable of bearing.

History shows that once the norms of a liberal democracy give way to brute force politics, even if the regime does change hands, those that emerge on top are themselves rarely champions of freedom and tolerance. The only way to prevent brute force politics from becoming normalized is if the good people refuse to shut up. So, this is not just a war against bad people with bad ideas, it is equally a war to defend the only system ever invented that gives citizens autonomy over their own bodies, minds, and voices, along with the mechanism to defend that autonomy through peaceful means.

That is why the Founding Fathers made freedom of speech the very first right when they drafted the US Bill of Rights. Peaceful resolution of conflict in a civil society depends on everyone having absolute freedom of speech. In a civil society, all other rights flow from this right. Without freedom of speech, all that remains as a tool to defend yourself is brute force. Our voices are our last defense as the institutions of liberal democracy fall away. Use your voices while you still can because, if freedom of speech is lost, we will be ushering in a world governed by brute force and the tyranny will be real no matter which side gains controls over the levers of power.

A right comes with the responsibility to exercise that right when your or anyone else’s rights are under attack. Rights derive their legitimacy only through the willingness of citizens to defend them, for themselves and for each other. If the willingness to speak your mind in public is missing, you have no rights.

Read the full article 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.

***

President Joe Biden announced several months ago that the United States would end its two decades-long occupation of the Central Asian state of Afghanistan.

Since the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon outside of Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001, the U.S. government has been at war with several countries and organizations all of which are within the oppressed regions of Africa, Asia, Latin American and the Caribbean.

The U.S. intervention in Afghanistan began clandestinely in the late 1970s when the administration of former President Jimmy Carter authorized efforts to undermine the socialist-oriented government which was aligned with the then Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). By the early 1980s, the administration of President Ronald Reagan escalated the interference in Afghan affairs by training, funding and providing diplomatic cover for the armed opposition groups in the country.

It was during these counter-revolutionary policy implementations towards Afghanistan and the Soviet Union that the al-Qaeda grouping was founded. These same forces which today Washington calls “terrorists” were in fact the by-product of imperialism.

Several other NATO countries joined the U.S. in its occupation of Afghanistan beginning in October 2001. Germany, France, Canada, Britain, among others have all had troops deployed in Afghanistan as part of the Pentagon-led military operation. All of these NATO countries took casualties in the war against the Afghans fighting to end the presence of foreign troops.

The Taliban, which is an Islamic-oriented movement, was in control of Afghanistan in 2001 at the time of the U.S. invasion. Even though they were bombed out of the capital during the early onslaught of the intervention, the organization remains intact two decades later after being subjected to the military prowess of NATO.

Official statistics supplied by the U.S. government indicates that approximately 2,300 troops were killed in action in Afghanistan while there were 30,000 wounded. These figures do not take into consideration the number of people who died later from their wounds or others who perished resulting from mental health issues stemming from serving in an unjust imperialist war.

The number of Afghan fighters and civilians killed since 2001 has been estimated by some sources to be around 71,000 people. This in all likelihood is a conservative estimate considering the massive bombing operations carried out by the Pentagon and its NATO allies.

One study on the impact of the Afghan war says the following:

“As of April 2021, more than 71,000 Afghan and Pakistani civilians are estimated to have died as a direct result of the war.

The United States military in 2017 relaxed its rules of engagement for airstrikes in Afghanistan, which resulted in a massive increase in civilian casualties. The CIA has armed and funded Afghan militia groups who have been implicated in grave human rights abuses and killings of civilians. Afghan land is contaminated with unexploded ordnance, which kills and injures tens of thousands of Afghans, especially children, as they travel and go about their daily chores. The war has exacerbated the effects of poverty, malnutrition, poor sanitation, lack of access to health care, and environmental degradation on Afghans’ health.” (See this)

Consequently, this announced withdrawal, notwithstanding the military and intelligence personnel which will remain in Afghanistan to protect the U.S. embassy, the Kabul airport and continue the training of the local security forces installed by Washington, the country has been devastated by this imperialist war. The U.S. should be forced to pay reparations to Afghanistan for the destabilization, occupation and plunder of this country since 1979.

Iraq and Syria: Imperialism Must Withdraw in Line with the Desires of the People

Since 1990 the U.S. government has blockaded Iraq initially citing the seizure of Kuwait by the former leadership of President Saddam Hussein. A full-scale invasion of Kuwait and southern Iraq in early 1991 killed hundreds of thousands of people.

For the next twelve years, the Iraqi people endured enormous suffering due to the draconian sanctions imposed by the United Nations at the aegis of Washington. By 2003, under the pretext of disarming the Baathist government in Baghdad, the administration of President George Bush, Jr. invaded Iraq where U.S. troops still remain albeit in smaller numbers up until today.

Although successive administrations have declared the withdrawal of “combat troops” from Iraq, the Pentagon wants to guarantee that the influence of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the broader “Axis of Resistance”, which encompasses Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and other states, does not gain complete control of the region. After the beginning of destabilization efforts by the U.S. in Libya and Syria, the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (or Syria), popularly known as ISIS, was created.

ISIS and its affiliates have been waging war against the civilian governments in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. The group has never attacked the State of Israel which is the principal source of instability in the Middle East. Israel is backed by the U.S. through billions of dollars in direct aid, military assistance, preferential trade deals and diplomatic cover.

Official U.S. statistics say that nearly 4,500 Pentagon soldiers have been killed in Iraq. While at the same time up to a million or more Iraqis have died although these figures have never been acknowledged by the Pentagon. Efforts to destabilize Iraq continue on a daily basis. (See this)

A report from Reuters on July 20 illustrates that:

“A suicide bomber killed at least 35 people and wounded dozens in a crowded market in the Sadr City neighborhood of Baghdad on Monday, the eve of the Eid al-Adha festival, security and hospital sources said. More than 60 people were wounded, a police source said. Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attack, the group’s Nasheer news agency said on Telegram. It said one of its militants blew up his explosive vest among the crowds. Hospital sources said the death toll could rise as some of the wounded were in critical condition.” (See this)

In neighboring Syria, the U.S. backed attempt to stage a “color revolution” starting in 2011 has failed to dislodge the Arab Baath Socialist Party (ABSP) government led by President Bashar al-Assad. Under the administration of President Barack Obama, U.S. troops were sent into Syria while periodic bombing operations were carried out. Millions of Syrians and Iraqis have been dislocated as internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees.

During the latter period of the administration of President Donald Trump, U.S. troops were moved to areas surrounding the Syrian oil fields. Reports suggest that the resources from the oil fields are being expropriated and that funds are being utilized to finance the so-called Syrian Democratic Front (SADF), a Kurdish militia ostensibly fighting against both Turkey and the government in Damascus.

Under the current Democratic administration of President Joe Biden, the occupation and bombing of Syria and Iraq continues. On June 28, the Wall Street Journal reported:

The U.S. conducted airstrikes in Syria and Iraq against two Iranian-backed militias that the Pentagon said were mounting drone attacks against U.S. troops. The Pentagon said operational and weapons-storage facilities had been struck near the Syria-Iraq border at three locations that it said had been used by the Kata’ib Hezbollah and Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada militia groups.”

The Syrian and Iraqis governments have both asked the U.S. and its allies to withdraw their forces from the region. Why are U. S. troops still in Iraq and Syria? They were not invited by any government in these countries which have served for decades.

Impact of Pentagon Funding and War Policy on the Workers and Oppressed in the U.S.

Conditions for most people in the U.S. have continued to decline since the period after the conclusion of the occupation of Vietnam and Southeast Asia in 1975. Infrastructural decline within the urban and suburban areas have resulted in depopulation of the cities and their later partial gentrification. Municipal financing has been hampered by the obligations to the banks, bonding firms and stock rating agencies. The conditions placed upon municipalities in exchange for credit and bond issuances are inherently designed to further the exploitation and oppression of the working class.

Although the U.S. has stated repeatedly that their objectives for invading and occupying geo-political regions is to restore social stability and democracy. Nonetheless, within the U.S., millions are victimized by the criminal justice system utilizing the police, prosecutors, judges, jails, prisons and the intensifying militarization of education and law-enforcement. Many of the same crowd control tactical weapons utilized abroad are being deployed against the Black Lives Matter protests which have swept the U.S. since the spring and summer of 2020.

Climate change and its impact cannot be adequately address amid a continuing pre-occupation with imperialist conquest and domination by Washington and Wall Street. The capitalist and imperialist system based in the U.S. are the source of most of the turmoil in the world in the 21st century. Therefore, people in the U.S. have a pivotal role to play in improving the social conditions of the majority domestically and on a global scale.

*

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.

by Michel Chossudovsky

ISBN Number: 9780973714715

List Price: $24.95

click here to order

Special Price: $18.00

In this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky’s 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by “Islamic terrorists”.  Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.

According to Chossudovsky, the  “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

All Global Research articles 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.

***

They keep insisting they don’t do it. But companies such as the Israeli NSO Group are global vendors for regimes, whatever stripe or colour, for surveillance tools to spy on those they deem of interest.  The 2013 revelations by Edward Snowden that exposed the warrantless world of mass surveillance by entities such as the US National Security Agency and Britain’s GCHQ caused a global rush towards encryption.  Governments, left groping in the dark, sought out private providers of surveillance devices in an unregulated market.  Not only could they get effective spyware; they could do so at very affordable prices. 

The NSO Group was one such provider.  It sees its mission was a noble thing, marketing itself as a creator of “technology that helps government agencies prevent and investigate terrorism and crime to save thousands of lives around the globe.” 

The company also emphasises their mission to target those “terrorists” and “criminals” who have gone dark.  “The world’s most dangerous offenders communicate using technology designed to shield their communications, while government intelligence and law-enforcement agencies struggle to collect evidence and intelligence on their activities.”  The group insists that its “products help government intelligence and law-enforcement agencies use technology to meet the challenges of encryption to prevent and investigate terror and crime.”

Forbidden Stories, a network of journalists with a mission “to protect, pursue and publish the work of other journalists facing threats, prison, or murder”, sees things differently.  One of the topics that figures prominently in the ranks is the Pegasus project, a collective journalism effort of global proportion coordinated by Forbidden Stories and Amnesty International’s Security Lab.  Its primary purpose: to expose the depredations of the Pegasus spyware, the golden child of the NSO Group. 

Pegasus is a rather vicious thing, enabling those deploying it to access a phone’s contents and remotely access its microphone and camera functions, turning into a surveillance device.  It was given a gloss of notoriety in 2018 when it was revealed that Saudi dissident Omar Abdulaziz had been one of its victims.  Abdulaziz claimed that communications with journalist Jamal Khashoggi, butchered by a Saudi squad of assassins in Istanbul in October 2018, were intercepted by the Saudi authorities because of the spyware.  His lawyers argued that the hacking “contributed in a significant manner to the decision to murder Mr. Khashoggi.”

On July 18, Phineas Rueckert of Forbidden Stories revealed that some 180 journalists had been selected as targets by some 10 NSO customers across 20 countries.  He begins with the Azerbaijani investigative journalist Khadija Ismayilova, whose phone was “regularly infected with Pegasus” for almost three years.  Ismayilova was baffled on realising how the security of her phone had been compromised.  “I feel guilty for the messages I’ve sent.  I feel guilty for the sources who sent me [information] thinking that some encrypted messaging ways are secure and they didn’t know that my phone is infected.”

Details are then supplied.  Both Forbidden Stories and Amnesty International were given access to a leak of more than 50,000 records of phone numbers selected by NSO clients for surveillance reasons.  The clients are a varied bunch, from those of the autocratic flavour – Bahrain, Morocco and Saudi Arabia – to the more democratic ones, such as India and Mexico.  The NSO Group, in a letter to Forbidden Stories, claimed it could not “confirm or deny the identity of our government customers” for “contractual and national security considerations”.  Rueckert admits that identifying instances where the specific phone number was compromised would be difficult short of actually analysing the device.  But, with the assistance of Amnesty International’s Security Lab, “forensics analyses on the phones of more than a dozen of these journalists – and 67 phones in total – [revealed] successful infections through a security flaw in iPhones as recently as this month.”

The Pegasus project is significant for revealing the sheer scale of espionage.  The Guardian, a participating media outlet, promisesto reveal more details about targets that “include lawyers, human rights defenders, religious figures, academics, businesspeople, diplomats, senior government officials and heads of state.”  At this writing, a rather juicy detail has come to light: the potential targeting of French President Emmanuel Macron by Morocco using Pegasus.

The NSO response to the Forbidden Stories report was snootily dismissive. The account was “full of wrong assumptions and uncorroborated theories that raise serious doubts about the reliability and interests of the sources.”  The company ducks the issue by suggesting that the information gathered on the individuals in question could have been obtained via other services.  “The claims that the data was leaked from our servers, is a complete lie and ridiculous since such data never existed on our servers.”

As for the murder of Khashoggi, old defences are resurrected.  “We can confirm that our technology was not used to listen, monitor, track, or collect information regarding him or his family members mentioned in the inquiry.  We previously investigated this claim, which again, is being made without validation.”

For an outfit such as the NSO Group, such rebuttals have proven to be meaningless.  Twin lawsuits against NSO filed in Israel and Cyprus by a Qatari citizen and by Mexican journalists in 2018 revealed extensive evidence of the company’s complicity in illegal surveillance.  NSO also failed to get the lawsuit by Abdulaziz dismissed, and was ordered to pay his legal costs, with the judge Guy Hyman calling the case “broad, especially in matters of the roots of constitutional values and fundamental rights”.  In 2019, WhatsApp brought an action against the company, claiming that Pegasus had been used to target 1400 user accounts.  For WhatsApp’s chief Will Cathcart, the Pegasus project reporting revealed “what we and others have been saying for years; NSO’s dangerous spyware is used to commit horrible human rights abuses all around the world and must be stopped.”

The Pegasus project has shed more light on the government revolt against encryption, one facilitated by private enterprise.  Left unregulated, the NSO Group and its competitors can operate with vigilante disdain and amoral proficiency.  David Kaye, former UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, has wisely called for a moratorium on the sale of such spyware, describing an industry “out of control, unaccountable and unconstrained in providing governments with relatively low-cost access to the sort of spying tools that only the most advanced state intelligence services were previously able to use”.  Control, accountability and constraint have never quite featured in the NSO Group operations manual.

*

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]

All Global Research articles 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.

***

America’s Frontline Doctors filed a motion to stop the use of Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) COVID vaccines for anyone under 18, anyone with natural immunity or anyone who hasn’t received informed consent.

America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) filed a motion July 19, seeking immediate injunctive relief in Alabama Federal District Court to stop the use of Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) COVID vaccines — Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) — for three groups of Americans.

According to a press release, AFLDS is asking to immediately stop administration of experimentalCOVID vaccines in anyone 18 and younger, all those who have recovered from COVID and acquired natural immunity, and every other American who has not received informed consent as defined by federal law.

The 67-page motion requests the judge issue a preliminary injunction pursuant to § 360bbb–3(b)(1)(C) for the following reasons:

• There is no emergency, which is a prerequisite to issuing EUA and EUA renewals for COVID vaccines.
• There is “no serious or life-threatening disease or condition.”
• Vaccines do not diagnose, treat or prevent SARS-CoV-2 or COVID.
• Known and potential risks of the vaccine outweigh their known and potential benefits.
• There are adequate, approved and available alternatives to vaccines.
• Healthcare professionals and vaccine candidates are not adequately informed.

The authors of the motion attached a declaration by a whistleblower who came forward alleging deaths occurring within 72 hours of receiving a COVID vaccine are significantly under-reported in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) maintained by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

As of July 9, reported deaths in the VAERS totaled 10,991. Of those, 4,593 occurred within 72-hours of vaccination.

The whistleblower — a computer programmer who developed more than 100 distinct healthcare fraud algorithms, and who has expertise in healthcare data analytics that allows her to access Medicare and Medicaid data obtained by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Systems (CMS) — filed a sworn statement under penalty of perjury alleging the actual number of COVID vaccine-related deaths is closer to 45,000.

The whistleblower alleged that VAERS, while extremely useful, is under-reported by a conservative factor of at least five.

In her statement, she said:

“On July 9, 2021, there were 9,048 deaths reported in VAERS. I verified these numbers by collating all of the data from VAERS myself, not relying on a third party to report them. In tandem, I queried data from CMS medical claims with regard to vaccines and patient deaths, and have assessed that the deaths occurring within 3 days of vaccination are higher than those reported in VAERS by a factor of at least 5. This would indicate the true number of vaccine-related deaths was at least 45,000. Put in perspective, the swine flu vaccine was taken off the market which only resulted in 53 deaths.”

AFLDS said the findings were shocking, and informed consent is impossible when safety data is not accurate.

In a press release, AFLDS said:

“It is unlawful and unconstitutional to administer experimental agents to individuals who cannot make an informed decision as to the true benefits and risks to the vaccine on an independent basis. They must be of an age or a capacity to make informed decisions and have been provided with all of the risk/benefit information necessary to make an informed decision.”

One of the named plaintiffs, Deborah Sobczak, the mother of a 15- and 17-year-old, said in the press release:

“My child will not be the subject of an experiment. What kind of monsters are we allowing to control us? Perfectly healthy children have developed heart inflammation, brain bleeding and even died! I have had enough. I am not sacrificing my child so a pharmaceutical company can experiment on her. This madness has to stop.”

There is no emergency warranting EUA of COVID vaccines, plaintiffs allege

According to the complaint, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary, named as one of the defendants in the lawsuit, declared on Feb. 4, 2020, pursuant to § 360bbb–3(b)(1)(C), that SARS-CoV-2 created a “public health emergency.”

This initial emergency declaration has been renewed repeatedly and remains in force today — a necessary legal prerequisite for the issuance of vaccine EUAs, the complaint states. EUA allowed the mass use of the vaccines by the American public before the completion of the standard regimen of clinical trials and FDA approval.

Plaintiffs allege the emergency declaration and its multiple renewals are illegal because there is no underlying emergency. Using HHS COVID death data, SARS CoV-2 has an overall survivability rate of 99.8% globally, which increases to 99.97% for persons under the age of 70. This is consistent with the seasonal flu, the complaint states.

Plaintiffs argue HHS deliberately inflated COVID case data

Plaintiffs allege HHS’ data is deliberately inflated. On March 24, 2020, HHS changed the rules applicable to coroners and others responsible for producing death certificates and making “cause of death” determinations exclusively for COVID.

The rule change states: “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.”

According to the complaint, HHS statistics showed 95% of deaths classified as “COVID-19 deaths” involved an average of four additional comorbidities. Plaintiffs claim the CDC knew the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death would result in COVID being the underlying cause more often than not.

Plaintiffs said the actual number of COVID cases is also far lower than the reported number due to emergency use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests, which are used as a diagnostic tool for COVID. The PCR tests are themselves experimental products, authorized by the FDA under separate EUAs. The package inserts state PCR tests should not be used to diagnose COVID.

The complaint alleges the way in which the PCR tests are being administered knowingly guarantees an unacceptably high number of false positive results.

COVID vaccine risks undisclosed and under-reported, lawsuit says 

AFLDS medico-legal researchers analyzed the accumulated COVID vaccine risk data and found migration of the pathogenic SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in the body. Yet vaccines were authorized without any studies demonstrating where the spike proteins traveled in the body following vaccination, how long they remain active and what effect they have, the complaint states.

AFLDS researchers analyzed VAERS and discovered an increased risk of death from COVID vaccines. The database indicated vaccine deaths in the first quarter of 2021 represented a 12,000% to 25,000% increase in vaccine deaths, year-on-year.

From 2009 to 2019, there were 1529 reported deaths associated with all vaccines reported to VAERS, according to the motion. In the first quarter of 2021, there were more than 4,000 reported deaths with 99% of all reported vaccine deaths in 2021 attributed to the COVID vaccine. Only 1% were attributed to other vaccines in the system.

Plaintiffs also disclosed evidence of reproductive harm, vascular disease, autoimmune disease, neurological damage and they highlighted an increased risk of harm for children with COVID vaccines to support their position.

Why the secrecy around V-Safe data?

The complaint called attention to the secrecy of the CDC’s V-Safe system — a parallel system used to track reported adverse events via a smartphone app controlled exclusively by the CDC.

Plaintiffs raised concerns that information in V-Safe exceeds that in VAERS. They claim VAERS is inaccurate because it potentially includes fewer than 1% of all vaccine adverse events, and the federal government is failing to provide data from other monitoring sources such as V-Safe, CMS and the military.

Plaintiffs stated informed consent cannot be given without understanding the risks. They said they can’t help but wonder why HHS would fail to disclose to the public critical information related to risk from it’s reporting systems, “particularly in light of the fact that they have had the time and resources to study and extend the authorizations on the vaccines, build an enormous vaccine marketing machine and roll out vaccine clinics all over the nation.”

The lawsuit was filed by several law firms, including RENZ Law. The complaint and whistleblower declaration can be read 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.

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This article was first published in February 2021.

Many of us have friends or family who plan on getting the vaccine. Maybe they truly believe they are in danger. Maybe they think it’s better safe than sorry. Maybe they just want to be able to go to the pub again.

If you know someone who is planning on getting vaccinated against Covid19, ask them these five questions. Make sure they understand exactly what they’re asking for.

1. Did You Know That We Have Never Successfully Vaccinated Against Any Coronavirus?

No successful vaccine against a coronavirus has ever been developed.

Scientists have been trying to develop a SARS and MERS vaccine for years, with nothing to show for it. In fact, some of the failed SARS vaccines actually caused hypersensitivity to the SARS virus. Meaning that vaccinated mice could potentially get the disease more severely than unvaccinated mice.

2. Did You Know It Usually Takes 5-10 Years To Fully Develop A Vaccine?

Vaccine development is a slow, laborious process. Usually, from development through testing and finally being approved for public use takes many years. The various vaccines for Covid have all been developed and approved in less than a year.

While the media are quick to offer a TON of “explainer” guides, which cite “foresight, hard work and luck” as the reasons we got a Covid vaccine so quickly “without cutting corners”, they all leave out key information.

Namely, that none of the vaccines have yet been subject to proper trials. Many of them skipped early-stage trials entirely, and the late stage human trials have either not been peer reviewed, have not released their data, will not finish until 2023 or were abandoned after “severe adverse effects”.

3. Did You Know That The Covid “Vaccine” Is Based On New Technology, Which Has Never Been Approved For Use On Humans Before?

While traditional vaccines work by exposing the body to a weakened strain of the microorganism responsible for causing the disease, these new Covid vaccines are mRNA vaccines.

mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid) vaccines theoretically work by injecting viral mRNA into the body, where it replicates inside your cells and encourages your body to recognise, and make antigens for, the “spike proteins” of the virus. They have been the subject of research since the 1990s, but before 2020 no mRNA vaccine was ever approved for use.

4. Did You Know That The Pharmaceutical Companies Can’t Be Sued If The Vaccine Hurts Or Kills Someone?

Back in the Spring of 2020 many governments around the world granted vaccine manufacturers immunity to civil liability, either by invoking existing legislation or writing new laws.

The USA’s Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) grants immunity until at least 2024.

The EU’s product licensing law does the same, and there are reports of confidential liability clauses in the contracts the EU signed with vaccine manufacturers.

The UK went even further, granting permanent legal indemnity to the government, and any employees thereof, for any harm done when a patient is being treated for Covid19 or “suspected Covid19”.

5. Did You Know 99.8% Of People Survive Covid19?

The case-fatality ratio of Sars-Cov-2 infection has been a bone of contention for months, but it is certainly much lower than all the initial models predicted.

It was originally massively inflated, with the WHO using a figure of 3.4%.

Subsequent studies have found it to be much lower, in some cases even lower than 0.1%. A report published in October in the WHO’s own research bulletin finding a CFR of 0.23% “or possibly considerably lower”.

Meaning, even according to the WHO, at least 99.77% of people infected with the virus will survive.

*

Ask your friends these questions. Give them detailed answers.

It is a rushed and untested vaccine, made using unprecedented technology, with no legal recourse should it do you harm, to treat a virus 99.8% of people will survive.

So the question that really matters is: Do you really want, or need, to take that risk?

Featured image courtesy of Off-Guardian

Attorney Files Lawsuit Against CDC Based on “Sworn Declaration” from Whistleblower Claiming 45,000 Deaths Are Reported to VAERS – All Within 3 Days of COVID-19 Shots

By Brian Shilhavy, July 20, 2021

This whistleblower has allegedly claimed, under oath, that there are at least 45,000 reported deaths that have occurred within 3 days of receiving a COVID-19 “vaccine.”

Mobilising Against the Corporate Hijack of Agriculture and the UN Food Systems Summit

By Colin Todhunter, July 20, 2021

Despite claims of being a ‘people’s summit’ and a ‘solutions’ summit, the UNFSS is facilitating greater corporate concentration, unsustainable globalised value chains and agribusiness leverage over public institutions.

The Recent Unrest in Cuba: A Textbook Example of Fake News and Media Warfare

By Marc Vandepitte, July 20, 2021

On Sunday, July 11, Cubans took to the streets for the first time in more than twenty years to express their dismay. It seemed like a spontaneous action, but on closer inspection there’s a bigger picture here.

COVID Cases Are Surging in the Most-Vaxxed Countries, Not in the Least-Vaxxed

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, July 20, 2021

Dr. Robert Malone, who pioneered the mRNA vaccine technology is concerned that the countries with the smallest percentage of their population vaccinated have the fewest number of new Covid cases.  Countries with the largest percentages of population vaccinated have surging numbers of new Covid cases.

Government Advisor Admits Masks Are Just “Comfort Blankets” that Do Virtually Nothing

By Steve Watson, July 20, 2021

As the UK Government heralds “freedom day” today, which is anything but, a prominent government scientific advisor has admitted that face masks do very little to protect from coronavirus and are basically just “comfort blankets”.

The Sorry History of Residential Schools in Canada: A Consequence of the Third British Conquest in North America

By Robin Philpot, July 20, 2021

The First Nations of Manitoba chose the right target when they toppled the statue of Queen Victoria in front of the Manitoba Legislature following discovery of the graves of more than 1000 indigenous children around three residential schools.

Vaccine Passports Were Planned Even Before the Pandemic Began

By Great Game India, July 20, 2021

What these roadmap talk about is not just some document that would restrict your entry or movement to certain places. What they envision is an entire COVID eco-system, a future where each and every aspect of your life is monitored and regulated as per the whims and fancy of these Pharma Overlords.

All Global Research articles 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.

***

TO: Boris Johnson PM, Mark Drakeford FM, Nicola Sturgeon FM, Paul Gican MLA,

Chris Whitty CMO, Dr Frank Atherton CMO, Dr Gregor Smith CMO, Dr Michael McBridge CMO

Sajid Javid MP and Eluned Morgan MS

AND: JCVI, MHRA, Children’s Commissioners and Children’s Charities

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Ohio-based Attorney Thomas Renz was one of several speakers this past weekend at a conference in Anaheim, California, where he announced that with the help of America’s Frontline Doctors, he was filing a federal lawsuit in Alabama based on a “sworn declaration, under threat of perjury,” from an alleged whistleblower who claims to have inside knowledge of a cover-up of reported deaths filed with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is operated by the CDC.

This whistleblower has allegedly claimed, under oath, that there are at least 45,000 reported deaths that have occurred within 3 days of receiving a COVID-19 “vaccine.” Renz states that this report of 45,000 deaths is just from “one system” that reports to VAERS.

This would be significantly greater than what the CDC is currently reporting, which is 10,991 deaths, and many of those are beyond 3 days following the shots. See: CENSORED: CDC Records Almost 12,000 DEATHS in 7 Months Following COVID-19 Injections

Renz also states that he believes Google, Facebook, and Twitter are “complicit with causing death” due to their censorship, and he stated “I cannot wait to sue you, over and over again.”

The video of Attorney Renz’s presentation is a bit strange, as the person who introduces Attorney Renz asks the crowd:

How many of you are tired of Dr. Fauci? He’s a Luciferian weasel.

And yet, Renz never once mentions Fauci, and in his speech he makes a couple of vague references to Brett Kavanaugh, and apparently his confirmation hearings, which he is somehow trying to tie into what the CDC whistleblower is revealing, although I failed to see a strong connection there.

This is obviously a Christian Pro-Tump crowd, although there were several speakers who are in the Health Freedom movement as well, such as Dr. Judy Mikovits and Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

The entire second day of the conference, which was apparently on Saturday, July 17, 2021, seems to have been livestreamed on Rumble here.

It is over 9 hours long.

We have uploaded a clip just under 10 minutes long of Attorney Thomas Renz’s announcement and discussion of the lawsuit and CDC whistleblower.

This is from our Bitchute channel, and it should also be up shortly on our Rumble channel.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Despite claims of being a ‘people’s summit’ and a ‘solutions’ summit, the UNFSS is facilitating greater corporate concentration, unsustainable globalised value chains and agribusiness leverage over public institutions. As a result, more than 300 global organisations of small-scale food producers, researchers and indigenous peoples will gather online from 25-28 July to mobilise against the pre-summit.

The Civil Society and Indigenous Peoples’ Mechanism (CSM) for relations with the United Nations Committee on World Food Security is working to eradicate food insecurity and malnutrition. According to the CMS, the UNFSS – founded on a partnership between the UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF) – is disproportionately influenced by corporate actors, lacks transparency and accountability and diverts energy and financial resources away from the real solutions needed to tackle the multiple hunger, climate and health crises.

The CMS argues that the UNFSS is not building on the legacy of past world food summits, which resulted in the creation of innovative, inclusive and participatory global food governance mechanisms anchored in human rights, such as the reformed UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS).

Promoting industrial agriculture

Those who contribute most to world food security, smallholder producers, are the most threatened and affected by the corporate concentration of land, seeds, natural and financial resources and the related privatisation of the commons and public goods.

And these processes are accelerating: the high-tech/data conglomerates, including Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Google, have joined traditional agribusiness giants in a quest to impose a one size fits all type of agriculture and food production on the world. Digitalisation, artificial intelligence and other technologies are serving to promote a new wave of resource grabbing and the restructuring of food systems towards a total concentration of power.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is also heavily involved, whether through buying up huge tracts of farmland, funding and promoting a much-heralded (but failed) ‘green revolution’ for Africa, pushing biosynthetic food and new genetic engineering technologies or more generally facilitating the aims of the mega agrifood corporations.

Under the guise of saving the planet with ‘climate-friendly solutions’, helping farmers and feeding the world, what Gates and his corporate associates are really doing is desperately trying to repackage the dispossessive strategies of imperialism wrapped in the language of ‘sustainability’ and ‘inclusivity’.

Through various aspects of data control pertaining to soil quality, consumer preferences, weather, and land use, for example, and e-commerce monopolies, corporate land ownership, seed biopiracy, patents, synthetic food and the undermining of the public sector’s role in ensuring food security and national food sovereignty, global agricapital seeks to gain full control over the world’s food system.

Smallholder peasant farming is under threat as the big-tech giants and agribusiness impose lab-grown food, genetically engineered (GE) soil microbes, data harvesting tools and drones and other ‘disruptive’ technologies. The model being promoted desires farmerless industrial-scale farms being manned by driverless machines, monitored by drones and doused with chemicals to produce commodity crops from patented GE seeds for industrial ‘biomatter’ to be processed and constituted into something resembling food.

The CMS notes that these are false ‘solutions’ that seek to bypass and undermine the peasant food web which currently produces up to 70% of the world’s food, working with only 25% of the resources. Moreover, these false solutions do not address structural injustices such as land and resource grabbing, corporate abuse of power and economic inequality. They merely reinforce them.

Towards food sovereignty

More than 380 million people belong to the movements protesting against the UNFSS. They are demanding a radical transformation of corporate food regimes towards a just and truly sustainable food system. They are also demanding increased participation in existing democratic food governance models, such as the UN Committee for World Food Security (CFS) and its High-Level Panel of Experts. The UNFSS threatens to undermine CFS, which is the foremost inclusive intergovernmental international policy-making arena.

There is an intensifying fight for space between local markets and global markets. The former are the domain of independent producers and small-scale enterprises, whereas global markets are dominated by increasing monopolistic large-scale international retailers, traders and the rapidly growing influential e-commerce companies.

It is therefore essential to protect and strengthen local markets and indigenous, independent small-scale producers and enterprises to ensure community control over food systems, economic independence and local food sovereignty. With this in mind, the CMS is calling for a radical agroecological transformation of food systems based on food sovereignty, gender justice and economic and social justice.

Agroecology is practised throughout the world. As numerous high-level (UN) reports have argued over the years, this approach improves nutrition, reduces poverty, contributes to gender justice, combats climate change and enriches farmland. With no need to purchase proprietary inputs (chemicals, seeds, etc) and its outperforming of industrial agriculture, agroecology represents a shift towards genuine food sovereignty and thus a direct threat to corporate agribusiness.

During the online mobilisation against the pre-summit, participants will share small-scale food producers and workers’ realities and their visions for a human rights-based and agroecological transformation of food systems. In doing so, they will highlight the importance of food sovereignty, small-scale sustainable agriculture, traditional knowledge, rights to natural resources and the rights of workers, indigenous peoples, women and future generations.

More information about the online mobilisation from 25-28 July can be found on the FoodSystems4People website.

*

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.

Colin Todhunter is an independent writer and analyst specialising in development, food and agriculture based in Europe/India.

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Photographic proof!

The shots being referred to as ‘vaccines’ are absolutely poisonous, and the proof is now here!

Dr. Jane Ruby appears at Stew Peters Show with another bombshell report. UK doctors now have indisputable proof showing exactly what these shots are doing to your blood.

Watch the interview below.

*

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

Featured image is from Shutterstock

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The United States has been subject to shelling and IED attacks regularly, following its June 27th attack on positions of Iraqi and Syrian ‘resistance’ groups.

Washington’s responses were much more seldom.

However, on July 18 a suspect US strike targeted the border line between Syria and Iraq where Iranian-backed forces are known to be deployed.

The pinpoint strike destroyed a Toyota pickup truck of the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units (PMU).

No human losses were reported as a result of the strike.

The UAE-based al-Arabiya TV network reported that the targeted truck was loaded with weapons and ammunition.

However, sources close to the PMU said that the truck was carrying logistic supplies.

Syria’s state outlet, SANA, reported that the attack had been carried out by a US combat drone.

This isn’t the first incident of this kind.

On May 22, a combat drone targeted a vehicle in the western region of Iraq, near the border line with Syria.

The vehicle, also a Toyota pickup truck, was allegedly carrying weapons.

Late on July 13, a similar strike targeted a military crossing at the border.

Very little is known about the strikes, but it is suspected that the US carried out all of them via combat drones.

The United States’ convoys are regularly targeted by IEDs all throughout Iraq, and there’s seldom been any human injuries.

On July 17th, Turkey, Washington’s ally, had one of its convoys targeted in Iraq.

As a result, two Turkish soldiers were injured in the IED strike, alongside with one member of the Kurdish Asayish force.

The Turkish military, which has been combating the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in northern Iraq for many years now, maintains a large military camp in Zilkan.

It carries out frequent operations against the Kurdish groups in the nearby areas, despite constant condemnations by the Iraqi government.

While the groups behind the US attacks are unknown and the PMU is suspected, the attack on Turkey was likely carried out by the PKK.

The PKK could be considered a group allied to the United States.

This is due to the fact that the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are mostly comprised of the People’s Protection Units (YPG), and according to the CIA, the YPG is the Syria wing of the PKK.

In Syria, the SDF is fighting against ISIS, sometimes even in joint operations with the US.

Late on July 16, the US-led coalition and the SDF carried out a successful counter-terrorism operation in the town of Diban in the southeastern countryside of Deir Ezzor.

Meanwhile, the SDF are frequently targeted not only by Turkey, but also by the various tribes in the areas under their control in northeastern Syria.

The various situations along the Iraqi-Syrian border, as well as in the Kurdish regions of both countries, are incredibly chaotic, with many conditional alliances that are barely holding the status quo.

All sides are reportedly trying to contain ISIS, who are however somehow able to continue attacking.

*

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.

***

President Joe Biden has now declared that the United States is facing an existential crisis comparable to what it experienced during the Civil War, a struggle that will produce a truly democratic form of government with universal franchise or which will result in the denial of basic rights to many citizens. And he is quite willing to address the issue employing a maximum of emotion and fear mongering unmitigated by a minimum of reasonable suasion, saying “We’re facing the most significant test of our democracy since the Civil War. That’s not hyperbole. Since the Civil War — the Confederates back then never breached the Capitol as insurrectionists did on January the 6th. I’m not saying this to alarm you. I’m saying this because you should be alarmed.”

Of course, what may have occurred on January 6^th has nothing to do with the issue currently in play, which is voting rights, though it is only one aspect of what is essentially a revolution sponsored by the Democratic Party to reorder the American political system in such a fashion as to guarantee its dominance for decades to come. Other steps will include greatly increased immigration, a war on so-called domestic terrorists and decriminalizing or choosing not to prosecute many felonies committed by party constituencies.

The voting rights legislation currently before Congress includes the interestingly named For the People Act and its successor the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, both of which would seek to restore certain unconstitutional aspects of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Most important, they would eliminate the ability of the states to pass legislation that creates conditions on registering and voting. The text of the John Lewis Act now before Congress refers to these steps as “discriminatory laws, needless barriers, and partisan dirty tricks.”

At the heart of the push by the Democrats is the creation of a uniform national electoral system which will essentially make it much easier for people to vote, permitting block voting, ballot harvesting and both registration and voting itself by mail. If passed, the new legislation will compel each state to adopt “automatic and same-day voter registration, voting rights for felons, no-excuse absentee balloting, mandatory early voting, and taxpayer funding for political campaigns.”

The key objections to the new voting procedure being promoted by Biden are several, largely related to its lack of any requirement for potential voters to provide information or show documentation confirming citizenship and residency or even one’s identity. The Democrats are denouncing their Republican opponents who are raising these issues as guilty of “voter suppression.” If the Democrats win the debate, it will be possible for anyone to vote in elections without having any human contact whatsoever using the mail-in ballots which are potentially susceptible to large scale fraud.

Another problem with the Biden program to nationalize voting procedures is that the there are four amendments to the United States Constitution that make it clear that it is left to the states to determine the modalities of voting. That means that even if the new voting act passes through Congress and is signed by the president there still would certainly be challenges based on its unconstitutionality. While Blue states will presumably go along with the guidance from Washington, those states still leaning Red will undoubtedly resist any nationalization of voting procedures.

It is not as if the current voting system is fraud-resistant. All too often it is not, which is why state legislatures in Georgia, Texas and several other Republican controlled states have passed new voting laws that actually require in many cases one’s physical presence to vote as well as production of documentation or information confirming citizenship and residency. They also include the purging of electoral rolls of voters who have died or moved. The new laws come as close as is reasonably possible to creating a system where voting security and integrity will be greatly enhanced, but the fact is that the Democrats are not at all interested in reducing criminal voting. They are interested in creating a permissive environment where all their presumed supporters will be able to vote without having to make any effort to do so or even be compelled to demonstrate who they really are and that they are citizens.

Prior to the recent national election, I examined the procedures to register and vote in my home state of Virginia and determined that one could both register and vote without any human contact at all. The registration process can be accomplished by filling out an online form, which is linked here. Note particularly the following: the form requires one to check the box indicating US citizenship. It then asks for name and address as well as social security number, date of birth and whether one has a criminal record or is otherwise disqualified to vote. You then have to sign and date the document and mail it off. Within ten days, you should receive a voter’s registration card for Virginia which you can present if you vote in person, though even that is not required.

It is important to realize that no documents have to actually be presented to support the application, which means that all the information can be false. You can even opt out of providing a social security number by checking the box indicating that you have never been issued one, even though the form indicates that you must have one to be registered, and you can also submit a temporary address by claiming you are “homeless.” Even date of birth information is useless as the form does not ask where you were born, which is how birth records are filed by state and local governments. Ultimately, it is only the social security number that validates the document and that is what also appears on the Voter’s ID Card, but even that can be false or completely fabricated, as many illegal immigrant workers in the US have discovered.

Prior to the November election my wife and I received unsolicited four mail-in ballots, all of which were sent to us anonymously. I examined the ballots carefully and noted that they bore no serial numbers or other forms of validation that could conceivably be used to limit the potential for fraud. In a state like Virginia, the actual mail-in ballot only requires your signature and that of a witness, who can be anyone. That is also true in six other states. Thirty-one states require only your own signature on the ballot while just three states require that the document be notarized, a good safeguard since it requires the voter to actually produce some documentation and identification. Seven states require your additional signature on the ballot envelope and two states require that a photocopy of the voter ID accompany the ballot. Some of these procedures may have been changed since the November allegation but it appears that only the handful of Republican states that are in the process of passing new voting laws are taking the problem seriously. In other words, the safeguards in the system continue at this time to vary from state to state but in most cases, fraud would be relatively easy if one is using mail-in voting. In fact, former President Jimmy Carter’s headed a bipartisan commission in 2005 that concluded that mail-in ballots constitute the “largest source of potential voter fraud” of any voting system.

Joe Biden is of course right about a crisis developing comparable to the Civil War, but what he is choosing to ignore is that his White House is carelessly feeding into what has become a growing chorus of dissent. He and his colleagues in Congress are deliberately and with malice pushing an agenda that, if successful, will lead to something like one party rule in the United States. Combine that with impending legislation and executive action to pursue “domestic extremists,” whom the Administration has also defined as “white supremacists,” it is not hard to imagine what kind of trouble is 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.

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.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On Sunday, July 11, Cubans took to the streets for the first time in more than twenty years to express their dismay. It seemed like a spontaneous action, but on closer inspection there’s a bigger picture here. For sixty years the US has been trying to bring about regime change. In recent years, they have been using social media and mainstream media in a sophisticated way to do so. Recent events in Cuba are a textbook example of this.

“Washington’s hysterical dedication to crush Cuba
from almost the first days of its independence in 1959
is one of the most extraordinary phenomena
of modern history, but still,
the level of petty sadism is a constant surprise.”
– Noam Chomsky

Digital robots

The protests last Sunday 11 July were preceded by a fierce digital campaign. Renowned Spanish IT analyst Julián Macías Tovar has meticulously researched and mapped it out. His findings are shocking.

In the days before the protests, the hashtag #SOSCuba began to circulate strongly in Florida. The SOS Cuba campaign had already been launched on June 15 in New York, with the aim of influencing the vote in the United Nations General Assembly against the US blockade against Cuba. Without success. 184 countries condemned the blockade, which has been strangling Cuba for more than 6 decades. Only Israel and the US voted against.

The worsening COVID situation in Cuba in recent weeks provided an excellent opportunity to revive the campaign. On July 5, Florida-based media platform SOS Cuba launched a Twitterstorm for humanitarian intervention in Cuba. That happened under the guidance of Agustín Antonelli. This Argentinian is a member of the right-wing foundation Fundación Libertad. This was not his first campaign. He had previously launched social media operations against Evo Morales in Bolivia and Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico.

The first account that used #SOSCuba in relation to the COVID situation in Cuba was based in Spain. On both July 10 and 11, it sent more than a thousand tweets, with an automatic rate of 5 retweets per second. This is done by so-called bots.[i]

Some of the robots used in this campaign are state-of-the-art, expensive and very difficult to detect. We should not forget that the US has recently created a special command for war in cyberspace.

In his research Tovar points out that tweets were sent to artists in Cuba and in Miami to participate with #SOSCuba: protest for the deaths caused by COVID and the lack of medical resources. More than 1100 responses were received to this tweet. Remarkably, almost all of those are from accounts that were created recently or no longer ago than one year. More than 1,500 of those accounts were created between July 10 and 11. The operation made intensive use of robots, algorithms and accounts newly created for the occasion.

With hundreds of thousands of tweets and the participation of many artist accounts, the hashtag became trending in several countries on Sunday 11 July. All that was needed were a few hundred Cubans to take to the streets.

The first demonstration in the town of San Antonio de Los Baños, 26 km from Havana, was immediately publicized in the US by Yusnaby’s account with thousands of retweets. Yusnaby (US Navy) is a typical example of an automated fake account.

All this suggests that there has been a coordinated campaign to attack the Cuban government and blame it for the hardships facing the Cuban people.

Fake news

The messages sent out into the world are full of fake news. One post, retweeted hundreds of times, shows a ten-thousand-strong crowd allegedly marching along the Malecón, Havana’s grand seaside boulevard. Reuters photo checkers found that it is actually a photo – in weak resolution – of a mass demonstration in Alexandria, Egypt Feb 2011. Zoomed in fragments show Egyptian flags.

Another piece of false information sent out into the world is the photo of protesters at the statue of Máximo Gómez in Havana. These were not counter-protesters but supporters of the Cuban revolution. Dozens of media outlets and major newspapers like New York Times and The Guardian, spread this piece of fake news. Reversing reality is a trick that has been used several times in the past on other occasions, including in Venezuela.

Yet another fabrication was that Raúl Castro had fled to Venezuela on a secret private plane. This fake message was retweeted almost two thousand times. The photo supposed to prove Raúl Castro’s flight is four years old, namely when he went to a summit abroad.

These are just a few examples. So were dozens more lies circulating on social media in recent days, including about police brutality.

Source of dissatisfaction

Due to COVID-19, tourism, the main source of income, has virtually come to a standstill. Food prices have risen worldwide. This is hard for Cuba because it has to import 70 percent of its food. The latest sugar crop was also disappointing. In addition, Trump had further tightened the economic blockade with 243 new sanctions. Cuba is now again on a list of state sponsors of terrorism, which makes transactions in dollars very difficult. Biden has not yet changed anything about those measures.

As a result, the country faces an acute shortage of foreign currency, which in turn causes shortages of basic goods, food and medicines. Thanks to the egalitarian system, this does not lead to famines, but Cubans sometimes have to queue for hours to get food or other goods. There are also fuel shortages and shortages of spare parts, causing power outages for hours. That paralyzes transport and it also means there is no air conditioning or refrigerator. In a tropical climate, that’s anything but pleasant.

As a result of the tightened blockade, Western Union had to close its offices in Cuba in November of last year. Many Cubans rely heavily on so-called ‘remesas’ for their purchasing power: remittances from relatives living abroad. This is the case for many countries in the South. This amounts to $500 billion annually worldwide. For Cuba, remesas have now largely stopped, as a result of which many Cubans have become a lot poorer in one fell swoop.

On top of all this misery came a fierce COVID wave. The vaccination campaign is in full swing, but the population is not yet sufficiently vaccinated to contain the infectious new virus variants. The surge of cases has put a severe strain on the health system.

Foreign sponsors

For the islanders, at least, the situation is extremely difficult. The dissatisfaction is great. According to the foreign mainstream media, the Cubans spontaneously took to the streets. By doing so, they ignore the digital campaigns we mentioned above, but there is more to the story.

A Peruvian journalist from Prensa Alternativa – El Jota has thoroughly studied the images of the demonstrations. In twelve cities between one hundred and five hundred demonstrators took to the streets. It was striking that in all those cities the same slogans were heard: against the president and for more freedom. There were no references to concrete complaints such as shortages of medicines in the nearby hospital, transport problems in their city or long queues in the stores.

Even more striking, the same banners appeared in the demonstrations with the logo of ‘Cuba Decide’. Cuba Decide is a campaign of Fundación para la Democracia Panamericana. That’s a resource-rich Miami-based NGO aimed at regime change in Cuba.

There will certainly have been spontaneous participants in the demonstrations, but the facts above indicate that the demonstrations were planned, organized and prepared. Moreover, this was done from abroad with the aim of spreading unrest and bringing about regime change. No self-respecting country would tolerate such a thing. In my country Belgium, there are severe punishments for political activity directed from abroad.[2]

Back in 2010, the US made an attempt to install a Twitter system in Cuba. According to the New York Times the purpose of ZunZuneo, as the system was called, was to “provide Cubans with a platform to share messages with a mass audience, and ultimately to be used for assembling ‘smart mobs’.” Ideal, in other words, for organizing riots.

In recent years, the U.S. government has increased its financial support of people inside Cuba and in the Cuban émigré community in Miami. This amounts to $20 million annually. Some of this money comes directly from the National Endowment for Democracy and from USAID, two organizations with ties to the CIA. Their mandate is to turn any discontent within Cuba into a political challenge to the Cuban revolution.

Media framing

The coverage of the past events in Cuba by the mainstream media is a textbook example of media framing. We highlight some aspects of it.

First, there is the vocabulary used. One does not speak of government or administration, but of ‘regime’. This suggests a reprehensible political system that should be changed (‘regime’ change). This term is never used for friendly nations, even if there are a lot of problems with democracy or human rights in those countries. In Colombia, more than 400 political murders have been committed in recent years, yet media still speak of the Colombian ‘government’. In India, camps have been built en masse to deport two million inhabitants, mainly Muslims. Yet we never hear about the ‘Indian regime’.

When it comes to Cuba, people also use the word ‘dictatorship’ without any problem or nuance, while the country has a very extensive system of consultation. No fundamental decision is taken without thoroughly consulting the population. In a dictatorship that is out of the question. Even in our political systems there is no custom or willingness to consult the population for important decisions. The current Cuban government, as well as the previous ones, have always been able to count on strong popular support, otherwise the revolution would not have survived in the extremely hostile and difficult circumstances Cuba has known.

Framing also means overemphasizing or underemphasizing certain issues. For example, the anti-government demonstrations were significantly smaller than the demonstrations in favor of the government. Below you see two pictures of demonstrations supporting the government respectively in Camagüey and in Havana. Images of such demonstrations were invisible in the mainstream media. On the contrary sometimes those images were used, as we saw above, to turn reality upside down.

In addition, the economic context and the factor of the U.S. blockade (dubbed ‘the embargo’ by the mainstream media[3]) is totally underplayed. Cuba has lost its most important trading partners and foreign investors twice in thirty years.[4] This is an economic disaster for any country. Moreover, the country has been subjected to the longest economic blockade in world history and is cut off from the use of dollars. The blockade costs the country about 5 percent of its GDP annually. Imagine a country like Belgium not being allowed to trade with the EU and to use the euro in transactions. Yet for the mainstream media, the ‘embargo’ is not an important factor. According to them, the cause of the economic misery lies in government ineptitude.

Our media like to give a forum to Joe Biden. Without any contextualization, the president of the country that keeps an economic stranglehold on Cuba is free to say that he stands by the Cuban people. President Obrador of Mexico responded that if the US really wants to help Cuba, then they must end the economic blockade. Obrador’s message did not make it into the mainstream media.

The key question

In South Africa, riots in recent days have left more than 70 people dead. In India, millions of farmers took to the streets for weeks. In Colombia, at least 44 people have been killed in protests over the past three months, another 500 have ‘disappeared’. These facts did not make the news, or barely got a mention. In Cuba, there were several thousand protesters for one day and it was prominent world news.

For serious events such as major natural disasters, massive social unrest, civil wars, coups, etc. it is obvious that they become prominent world news. If an event does not fall into such a category, then the first question we have to ask ourselves is: why is this prominent in the world press, why is this being put in the picture and why are similar events elsewhere not mentioned at all?

In other words, what makes current affairs news? And the verb is well chosen, for news is made. Or rather, a selection is made from the daily large supply of new facts and events worldwide. That selection is then presented in a framing. This selection and framing takes place within a certain ideological framework, in favor of unspoken but specific interests.

Cuba should certainly not be kept quiet in the media. There is indeed news to be found. For example, Cuba is the only small country in the world that developed its own vaccines against COVID-19. By the end of this year it will have produced 100 million doses of home made vaccines. It will export the majority to countries that need them. It would also be interesting to investigate why the country has 12 times fewer COVID deaths than the US, despite its dire economic situation and lack of medicines. Or, with the Olympics approaching, one could examine how the country has traditionally managed to win an abnormally large  amount of Olympic medals.

Apparently such articles do not fit within the ideological framework in which our media operate. Within that framework, the selection and framing of current affairs about Cuba serves primarily to bash the country. The past events are once again a textbook example of 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.

[1] The word bot comes from robot. A bot or social bot is a social media account that is controlled not by a person, but by an algorithm. Such a bot shares and reuses existing messages, for example based on certain topics and hashtags.

[2] Art. 4, §1 Law March 22, 1940 (Belgium): Any person who engages in political propaganda or any other political activity and thereby receives instructions from a foreign power or foreign organization shall be punished by imprisonment from one year to five years and by a fine from 100 to 10,000 francs, to be increased by the opdecimes.

[3] An embargo means that a country refuses to trade with another country. A blockade involves attempts to prohibit or impede trade with third countries. This is clearly the case with the U.S. economic boycott of Cuba. Still, people will use the word embargo because it sounds less severe.

[4] The first time in 1959, when the US was the major trading partner and investor in the country. In 1989 this was the case with the Eastern Bloc.

All images in this article are from the author

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Johnson & Johnson is reportedly considering using what legal experts call the “Texas two-step” bankruptcy law, a maneuver that would allow the company to create a new entity housing talc liabilities that would then file for bankruptcy to halt litigation.

Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is exploring a plan to offload liabilities from widespread baby powder litigation by creating a new business that would then seek bankruptcy protection, Reuters reported.

During settlement discussions over its talc-containing baby powder, a J&J legal representative told plaintiffs’ lawyers the company could pursue placing a subsidiary in bankruptcy as part of a strategy to settle thousands of claims linking the product to ovarian cancer.

If executed, the plan could result in lower payouts for cases that do not settle beforehand, according to people familiar with the matter.

According to the Wall Street Journal, bankruptcy can be a powerful tool for companies facing a large number of lawsuits over allegedly defective products, or other mass-tort claims. A chapter 11 filing can pressure claimants into accepting lower settlements by halting ongoing litigation and discovery proceedings, and by creating a centralized forum to value claims.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers would initially be unable to stop J&J from taking such a step, though they could pursue legal avenues to challenge it later.

A company spokesperson said Sunday that “Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. has not decided on any particular course of action in this litigation other than to continue to defend the safety of talc and litigate these cases in the tort system, as the pending trials demonstrate.”

J&J is considering using Texas’ “divisive merger” law, which would allow the company to split into at least two entities — creating a new entity housing talc liabilities that would then file for bankruptcy to halt litigation, according to Reuters.

Should J&J proceed, plaintiffs who have not settled could find themselves in protracted bankruptcy proceedings with a much smaller company. Future payouts would be dependent on how J&J funds the entity housing its talc liabilities.

The maneuver is known among legal experts as a Texas two-step bankruptcy, a strategy used in recent years by companies facing asbestos litigation.

According to Onder Law, LLC, “A Texas two-step bankruptcy is a move that’s in line with the unscrupulous tactics Johnson & Johnson has exercised for decades. If they are successful — and we don’t believe they will be — the company hopes to discharge their liability from talc lawsuits throughout the country.”

A 2018 Reuters investigation found J&J knew for decades that asbestos, a known carcinogen, lurked in its baby powder and other cosmetic talc products.

J&J stopped selling talc powder products in the U.S. and Canada last year. But as of April 2021, there were roughly 28,900 lawsuits pending in U.S. courts against the company and its J&J Consumer Inc. subsidiary, alleging talc-containing powders caused ovarian cancer and other injuries.

J&J said in its most recent quarterly report in April that the number of talc cases continues to grow.

As The Defender reported last month, the Supreme Court on June 1 rejected an appeal by J&J to reverse a $2.1 billion verdict for plaintiffs who claim the company’s talc powder products gave them ovarian cancer.

The pharmaceutical company, which developed the Janssen COVID vaccine, asked the top court to review the verdict, arguing it didn’t receive a fair trial in Missouri where the court awarded a $4.7 billion payout to 22 women who developed ovarian cancer.

The verdict was reduced to $2.1 billion in June 2020, by the Missouri court of appeals.

Ken Starr, a prosecutor representing women who sued J&J, wrote in court briefings that the pharma company “knew for decades that their talc powders contained asbestos, a highly carcinogenic substance with no known safe exposure level.”

Starr said the company could have protected customers by switching from talc to cornstarch as their scientists proposed as early as 1973, but they were unwilling to sacrifice profits for a safer product. ”

J&J claims its baby powder is safe and does not contain asbestos or cause cancer.

Yes! The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal by Johnson & Johnson to reverse a $2.1 billion verdict for plaintiffs who claim the company’s talc powder products gave them ovarian cancer.

SUBSCRIBE to #TheDefender: https://t.co/zL66Edfiw5https://t.co/CdQzph2yrQ

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) June 3, 2021

The lawsuits linking talc powder to cancer aren’t the first time J&J has been sued over the safety of its products.

Other major J&J lawsuits and recalls for faulty products include:

• 1995: J&J was hit with a $7.5 million fine for destroying documents to cover up an investigation into wrongful marketing of its Retin-A acne cream to remove wrinkles.
• 1996: The company entered into an undisclosed settlement on false claims over condom protection against HIV and other STDs.
• 2001: J&J paid out $860 million in a class action lawsuit for misleading customers about prematurely discarding its 1-Day Acuvue soft contact lens. J&J recommended they should be worn only once, although it was discovered the lenses were no different than the regular Acuvue lens that would last for two weeks.
• 2010: The drug giant was hit with a $81 million settlement for misbranding its anti-epileptic drug Topamax to treat psychiatric disorders and hiring outside physicians to join its sales force to promote the drug for unapproved conditions. The following year, J&J paid $85 million for similar charges against its heart drug Natrecor.
• 2011: Several J&J baby products were discovered to contain carcinogenic ingredients.
• 2013: The U.S. Justice Department charged the company $2.2 billion in criminal fines for marketing its autism and antipsychotic drug Risperdal for unapproved uses. Forty-five states had filed civil lawsuits against J&J in the scandal. Other serious adverse effects from Risperdal reported by the FDA include diabetes mellitus, hyperprolactinaemia, somnolence, depression, anxiety, psychotic behavior, suicide and death.
• ​​2019: A Philadelphia jury ordered J&J to pay $8 billion in punitive damages to a Maryland man, whose lawyers argued the company illegally marketed antipsychotic drug, Risperdal, and downplayed the side effect that young men using it could grow breasts. At the time, J&J was facing approximately 13,400 claims tied to Risperdal.
• 2020: Four companies, including J&J reached a $26 billion settlement with counties and cities that sued them for damages related to the opioid epidemic in the largest federal court case in American history.

2021: J&J agreed to pay a $230 million settlement with New York state that bars the company from promoting opioids and confirmed it ended distribution of such products within the U.S.

*

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

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Dr. Robert Malone, who pioneered the mRNA vaccine technology is concerned that the countries with the smallest percentage of their population vaccinated have the fewest number of new Covid cases.  Countries with the largest percentages of population vaccinated have surging numbers of new Covid cases.

See this, this and this.

Dr. Malone shares his calculations Based on CDC/VAERS data:

The Pfizer vaccine is 3-5 times more likely to cause a male 12-17 years of age to be hospitalized than Covid itself.  For a female of the same age, the vaccine is 4-5 times more likely to cause hospitalization than Covid.

Females 12-17 years of age are 72% more likely to die from the vaccine than from Covid.

Many have been asking for this. Pfizer adolescent Risk / benefit calculations based on official CDC data, forwarded to me by an actuary. Please prove these wrong? pic.twitter.com/Ao8oZXeWGn

— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) July 17, 2021

Here is another report that cannot be verified or refuted because the tyranny under which Western people live will not allow the report to be acknowledged.

According to this report, Asians have switched from vaccination to Ivermectin.

Unfortunately, the Western world has a media that suppresses dissenting views instead of bringing them into  public debate.  The only thing most Western people hear are the lies that serve establishment interests.  Western peoples are in every sense blinded by a Ministry of Propaganda.

The lying scum presstitutes, medical bureaucrats, and shills who are paid to lie for Big Pharma are trying to claim that the case surge in vaccinated countries is the new “Delta variant” while simultaneously claiming that the vaccines protect against the “Delta variant.” 

CDC director Rochelle Walensky claims falsely that “if you are fully vaccinated you are protected against severe COVID, hospitalization and death, and are even protected against the known variants, including the delta variant, circulating in this country.”  Independent scientists are suggesting that the surge in cases among vaccinated countries is caused by the vaccine itself which releases the Spike Protein into the body as does the virus.  The presstitutes continue to hide the facts, and independent experts sounding alarm continue to be censored, ridiculed, and threatened with firings.

An unfolding health catastrophe is being covered up as it happens before our eyes.

Here is the latest CDC report on adverse vaccine effects.  Remember the VAERS reporting system captures at best only 10% of the adverse vaccine reactions.  

Here is a report claiming deaths are seriously under-reported by VAERS.  As the print, TV, and NPR media are 100% unreliable along with a high percentage of the Internet media, it is difficult to know what to make of this report.

Here is a great amount of expert information about the so-called Covid vaccines and their very real dangers: see this. 

A month ago I posted Dr. Robert Malone’s concern about the dangers the vaccines present to many elements of the population.  

The grave problem that we face is that almost the entirety of the medical profession, governments, and media are invested 100% in the hype that the vaccines are the answer. They continue to call the high and rising number of deaths and adverse effects of the vaccines “rare.”

They are now blaming the astonishing number of new cases among heavily-vaccinated populations on a mutation or new variant. It is beyond their capability to consider if the vaccine itself is the cause of the new outbreak.  People this culpable in mass deceit, murder, and injuries are incapable of recognizing their mistake.  As incompetent or corrupt governments shielded the vaccine-makers from liability, there is no help for the families of those killed by the vaccine and no medical help for those injured by the vaccine.  As the corrupt medical establishment will not recognize the dangers of the vaccines, no research is being done about how to cure or ameliorate the health problems caused by the vaccines.  Instead, the health establishment continues to press forward with vaccination with many employers and universities mandating vaccination and the fool in the Oval Office wanting to send agents door-to-door to vaccinate “anti-vaxxers.” France and Greece are trying to impose Covid Passports in order to coerce their entire populations to accept vaccination with an untested, experimental, and now proven highly dangerous vaccine. Biden Demands Facebook Silence Everyone Who Questions Covid Vaccine —  see this.

We are everywhere witnessing the complete and total failure of government and public health bureaucracies.

Some doctors and scientists are concerned that the Spike proteins in the vaccines that attack the body’s vital organs will result in a high percentage of those vaccinated dying within three years, with the consequence being the collapse of societies.  Indeed, it could be too late to retrieve the situation, and the establishment is in total denial.

*

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.

***

It’s finally here! The BIG Event! That’s right, “Freedom Day” is upon us. After 17 months of a 3-week lockdown, the UK is re-opening for business.

Nobody in the press seems very excited about that. The Guardian reports on the “economic chaos” and the mathematical models predicting disaster. The Financial Times calls it “surrender day”. Reuters go with “anxiety day”. CNN call it a “huge gamble”. Nature says that “researchers” find it “alarming”.

They’re desperately trying to re-stoke a year-old panic by reporting rising numbers of “cases” as if that’s measure with any kind of meaning.

But none of that matters, because Britain can finally go back to normal.

…Except for all care home workers who are being forced to get vaccinated, of course. And all the businesses being “urged” to use Covid passes. And all the major cities still enforcing masks on public transport. And the wall-to-wall propaganda. That’s all here to stay.

…and the lockdowns might be coming back in the winter too.

All-in-all, “Freedom Day” is all mouth and no trousers, and unlikely do much to dissuade the growing number of people that believe the “virus” – if it truly exists – is being used as a pretext to impoverish millions, enrich dozens and perform a global-scale theft of basic human liberty.

We’ve been told that two protest events have been planned for today, both in London, one at 9 am and another at noon.

The former is reportedly a plan to “storm parliament”. If there’s any truth to that, we would consider it a mistake. Whilst we sympathise with anyone feeling angry, we could not recommend or endorse such action. Violence of any kind is the quickest way to discredit your position, and we’ve seen in the recent past how the MSM can twist a nothing-burger into a “violent insurrection”.

The last thing we need is for the UK to get its own “Capitol Hill Riot”, and have every lockdown sceptic branded a “domestic terrorist” or “violent extremist”.

The latter protest is intended to be peaceful, following the model of the “unite for Freedom” marches which have been a regular occurrence since lockdown began.

Freedom Day or no, there are big protests planned across the world for Saturday the 24th of July. You can click here to see which cities are involved and when to arrive.

This follows massive protests all across France this weekend, following Macron’s announcement that vaccine passes will be needed to enter all business and public transport, and that “vaccination” will be mandatory for all healthcare workers.

The resulting outcry turned the streets of Paris into this on Saturday:

Wow. Massive protests happening right now in Paris, France against Macron’s new coronavirus restrictions. pic.twitter.com/C3JIaUV7wJ

— Sarah Abdallah (@sahouraxo) July 17, 2021

There are more of us than them.#Parispic.twitter.com/8HguzwREGp

— Darren of Plymouth 🇬🇧 (@DarrenPlymouth) July 17, 2021

In Australia, truck drivers blocked the Sydney Harbour Bridge with their lorries in protest against lockdowns. And we’ve already seen both Russia and Israel have to abandon “Covid pass” programs thanks to simple, unorganized mass non-compliance.

There are definitely reasons to be hopeful; we are winning the argument, and more and more people every day are waking up the nature of their new reality.

A cynical person might even suggest that “freedom day” is nothing but a ploy, designed to trick the increasingly restless majority into thinking things are returning to normal, but also then blaming their “selfishness” when “freedom day” is inevitably followed up with “lockdown autumn” and “slavery Christmas”.

An even more cynical person might suggest that it’s just a massive social experiment, designed to see just how many people still wear masks, use hand sanitiser and social distance even though they don’t have to anymore.

But what do you think?

• Will “freedom day” make any difference?
• How long will “going back to normal” last?
• Will there be a “third wave” blamed on loosening the restrictions?
• Will you, or anyone you know, still follow the old rules, even when they’re not enforced?
• Will protests in Britain and France spread anywhere else as “vaccine passport” schemes emerge around 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.

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.

***

As the UK Government heralds “freedom day” today, which is anything but, a prominent government scientific advisor has admitted that face masks do very little to protect from coronavirus and are basically just “comfort blankets”.

Dr Colin Axon, a SAGE advisor for the government told the London Telegraph that medics have given people a “cartoonish” view of how how microscopic viruses travel through the air, and the masks have gaps in them that are up to 5000 times bigger than Covid particles.

“The small sizes are not easily understood but an imperfect analogy would be to imagine marbles fired at builders’ scaffolding, some might hit a pole and rebound, but obviously most will fly through,” Axon said.

“Once a particle is not on a biological surface it is no longer a biomedical issue, it is simply about physics. The public has only a partial view of the story if information only comes from one type of source,” Axon continued, adding “Medics have some of the answers but not a whole view.”

Noting that the “mask debate is about the particle journey,” Axon explained that “Masks can catch droplets and sputum from a cough but what is important is that SARS CoV-2 is predominantly distributed by tiny aerosols.”

“A Covid viral particle is around 100 nanometres, material gaps in blue surgical masks are up to 1,000 times that size, cloth mask gaps can be 500,000 times the size,” Axon urged.

The professor noted that

“those aerosols escape masks and will render the mask ineffective,” adding “The public were demanding something must be done, they got masks, it is just a comfort blanket. But now it is entrenched, and we are entrenching bad behaviour.”

“All around the world you can look at mask mandates and superimpose on infection rates, you cannot see that mask mandates made any effect whatsoever,” Axon further noted, adding that “The best thing you can say about any mask is that any positive effect they do have is too small to be measured.”

Axon’s comments echo those of Dr. Anthony Fauci, who wrote in February 2020 that a typical store-bought face mask “is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material.”

Fauci later reversed his position after the CDC began recommending that Americans wear face coverings. Similar recommendations were then made worldwide, with World Health Organisation officials even recommending that masks remain INDEFINTELY.

Social media networks have long censored and deleted information pertaining to the efficacy of masks, or lack thereof, despite numerous credible studies concluding that they are largely useless at stopping the spread of COVID-19.

A study in Denmark involving 6,000 participants found that “there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19,” the Spectator reported.

“1.8 per cent of those wearing masks caught Covid, compared to 2.1 per cent of the control group. As a result, it seems that any effect masks have on preventing the spread of the disease in the community is small.”

While the government says that from today masks are optional in the UK, many train companies and other businesses have said that they remain mandatory, causing widespread confusion.

*

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.

***

Three of the richest billionaires on Earth are now busily spending billions to exit our Earth’s atmosphere and enter into space. The world is watching — and reflecting.

Some commentators see our billionaire trio — Richard Branson, Jeff Bezos, and Elon Musk — as heroic heirs to the legacies of Charles Lindbergh and Sir Edmund Hillary, the first mere mortals to high jump the Atlantic alone and scale the world’s highest mountain.

Our billionaires racing into space, other charmed commentators are adding, aren’t just thrilling humankind. They’re uplifting us. The technologies that the space operations Branson, Bezos, and Musk “develop could benefit people worldwide far into the future,” says Yahoo Finance’s Daniel Howley.

But most of our commentators seem to be taking a considerably more skeptical perspective. They’re dismissing the space antics of Branson, Bezos, and Musk as the ego trips of bored billionaires, “cynical stunts by disgustingly rich businessmen,” as one British analyst puts it, “to boost their self-importance at a time when money and resources are desperately needed elsewhere.”

“Space travel used to be about ‘us,’ a collective effort by the country to reach beyond previously unreachable limits,” writes author William Rivers Pitt. “That was the Cold War propaganda, anyway, and it had an unavoidable allure. Now, it’s about ‘them,’ the 0.1 percent.”

The best of these skeptical commentators can even make us laugh.

“Really, billionaires?” comedian Seth Meyers asked earlier this month. “This is what you’re going to do with your unprecedented fortunes and influence? Drag race to outer space?”

Let’s enjoy the ridicule. But let’s not treat the billionaire space race as a laughing matter. Let’s see it as a wake-up call, a reminder that we don’t only get billionaires when wealth concentrates. We get a society that revolves around the egos of the most affluent among us and an economy where the needs of average people go unmet and don’t particularly matter.

Characters like Elon Musk, notes Paris Max, host of the Tech Won’t Save Us podcast, are using “misleading narratives about space to fuel public excitement” and gain tax-dollar support for various projects “designed to work best — if not exclusively — for the elite.”

The three corporate space shells for Musk, Bezos, and Branson — SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Virgin Galactic — have “all benefited greatly through partnerships with NASA and the US military,” notes CNN Business. Their common corporate goal: to get satellites, people, and cargo “into space cheaper and quicker than has been possible in decades past.”

Branson, for his part, is hawking tickets for roundtrips “to the edge of the atmosphere and back,” at $250,000 per head. He’s planning some 400 such trips a year, observes British journalist Oliver Bullough, about “almost as bad an idea as racing to see who can burn the rainforest quickest.”

The annual UN Emissions Gap Report last year concluded that the world’s richest 1 percent do more to foul the atmosphere than the entire poorest 50 percent combined. That top 1 percent, the UN report adds, would have to “reduce its footprint by a factor of 30 to stay in line” with the 2015 Paris Agreement targets. Opening space to rich people’s joyrides would stomp that footprint even bigger.

Bezos and Musk seem to have grander dreams than mere space tourism. They’re looking “to colonize the cosmos,” with Bezos pushing “artificial tube-like structures floating close to Earth” and Musk talking up the terraforming of Mars. They essentially see space as a refuge from an increasingly inhospitable planet Earth. They expect tax-dollar support to make their various pipedreams come true.

And how should we respond to all this? We should, of course, be working to create a more hospitable planet for all humanity. In the meantime, several egalitarian wags have been circulating online petitions that urge our terrestrial authorities not to let orbiting billionaires back on Earth.

“Billionaires should not exist…on Earth or in space, but should they decide the latter, they should stay there,” reads one petition nearing 200,000 signatures.

Ric Geiger, the 31-year-old automotive supplies account manager behind that effort, is hoping his petition helps the issue of maldistributed wealth “reach a broader platform.”

Activists like Geiger are going down the right track. We don’t need billionaires out to “conquer space.” We need to conquer inequality.

*

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.

Sam Pizzigati co-edits Inequality.org. His latest books include The Case for a Maximum Wage and The Rich Don’t Always Win: The Forgotten Triumph over Plutocracy that Created the American Middle Class, 1900-1970. Follow him at @Too_Much_Online.

Featured image is from Xinhua

All Global Research articles 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.

***

He can scant resist a slogan, but UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s insistence on describing Britain’s exit from lockdown as Freedom Day came with its usual kitschy quality.  All would be splendid as COVID-19 restrictions were lifted in the “move to step 4.”  Social contact rules would be scrapped, along with mask mandates in various public spaces.  Nightclubs could reopen; capacity limits for events and venues would be removed.  There would be a return to social responsibility or what Johnson calls protection through informed choice.

According to the government, the decision to lift most restrictions on July 19 was reached because four tests had been satisfied.  Ongoing vaccine deployment was proving a success, having “broken the link between infection and mortality.”  (Step 4 had been delayed by a month to enable more adults to be vaccinated.)  Gathered evidence showed that “vaccines are sufficiently effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths in those vaccinated.”  Infection rates did not pose a risk to a surge in hospitalisations that would place intolerable pressure upon the National Health System (NHS).  The emergence of new COVID-19 variants did not pose a threat. 

In his July 15 speech, Johnson accepted that hospitalisations and deaths would endure.  A calculus of risk was at play.  The days and weeks ahead would be “difficult” with “more hospitalisations and … more deaths but with every day that goes by we build higher the wall of vaccine acquired immunity, a wall that is now higher and stronger in this country than almost anywhere else in the world”.

The promise of Freedom Day had the effect of setting a good number of health professionals on edge.  Arthur Hosie, a Staffordshire University microbiologist, took the view that the government was essentially disarming the populace from non-pharmacological protections.  “This is a new virus to which we have had no exposure over previous years.  Mask wearing and social distancing are important – to remove them is to remove the tools we need to live with the virus.”

Authors of a July piece for The Lancet, many members of the Independent Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, excoriated a strategy that still tolerated “natural infection for others (predominantly the young)” alongside a partially vaccinated population.  “The link between infection and death might have been weakened, but it has not been broken, and infection can still cause substantial morbidity in both acute and long-term illness.”

The authors offered a range of grave scenarios.  Unvaccinated children and young people risked being disproportionately affected.  Schools faced high rates of transmission that would cause education disruption and endanger “clinically and socially vulnerable children.”  Preliminary modelling data suggested that the opening up strategy “provides fertile ground for the emergence of vaccine-resistant variants.”  The strategy would also deplete the country’s already exhausted health services and staff.  Finally, and as has always been the case, deprived communities would continue to be disproportionately affected.

With these loud warnings come a rather troubling set of statistics.  According to the Office of National Statistics one in 95 people in England has COVID.  In Scotland, the number is one in 90.  More than half a million people find themselves in isolation and infection levels lie at over 50,000 a day.

The Delta variant is also posing challenges to the wall of immunity Johnson has been promoting.  Certainly, it does not promise to be impervious, though the figures are nonetheless impressive in preventing serious illness and hospitalisations.  While the Pfizer vaccine does pack a punch in being 88% effective in stopping symptomatic disease arising from the Indian-origin strain, AstraZeneca’s offering comes in at 60%.  Public Health England has put this down to an issue of timing, as the effectiveness of the latter vaccine requires a longer interval between first and second doses.

The country’s third COVID-19 wave is causing jolts of dysfunction, largely due to the test and trace system that continues to operate.  Marks & Spencer is considering reducing opening hours to cope with staff shortages arising from infections and self-isolation directions.  A number of factories and work sites face the prospect of shutting for similar reasons.  Parts of the London Underground were closed because of the number of staff made to self-isolate after being notified via the NHS COVID-19 app.  The Rail, Maritime and Transport union secretary Mick Lynch had predicted the previous week that the capital would face “a surge in workers pinged with self-isolation instruction next week.”  A pingdemic is upon the population.

When Freedom Day came, it did not exactly arrive with a celebratory canter.  It had a very Johnsonian air of ramshackle contradiction jammed with misrepresentation, confusion and even a sense of terror.  Physician Gabriel Scally could recall no other “episode in history where a government has willingly aided and abetted the spread of a dangerous infectious disease among its own population.”

This was also freedom of a different sort.  Hundreds of thousands of people are in mandated isolation; the Prime Minister is himself isolating after his health secretary, Sajid Javid, had tested positive for COVID-19 on Saturday.  “For these people,” wrotea bleak Ross Clark for The Spectator, “it is no freedom day – it is a return to the darkest hour of lockdown.”  In fact, suggested Clark, this was worse.  “At least during lockdown we were all allowed to go to the shops, or for exercise.”

For those wishing to travel, there were also disappointments.  Travellers to so-called amber designated countries can avoid the ten day isolation requirement upon their return but must pay for testing and get a test within 72 hours of their return.   The onus is on packaged tour operators to foot that bill, should they wish to.  Independent travellers will simply have to lump it.

Jeremy Hunt, chairman of the Commons health select committee, dreads the coming autumn.  “The warning light on the NHS dashboard is not flashing amber,” he told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, “it is flashing red.”  As William Hanage of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston observed with sharp disapproval, “The decision [to open up], and the way it has been presented, repeats a pattern of foolishly promising an outcome when dealing with a highly infectious agent.”

*

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: Prime Minister Boris Johnson during a press conference on 16 March, with Chief Medical Officer Prof Chris Witty and Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance. Picture by Andrew Parsons

All Global Research articles 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 First Nations of Manitoba chose the right target when they toppled the statue of Queen Victoria in front of the Manitoba Legislature following discovery of the graves of more than 1000 indigenous children around three residential schools. Their action rang bells around the world because what was inflicted upon them in Victoria’s name was also inflicted upon other peoples, often at the same time and at the hands of the same British troops: military conquest, bloody repression, massive settler invasions, and racist domination.

The first burial at the Cowessess First Nation cemetery, where 751 graves of young indigenous residents were discovered, occurred in 1885. That was the year of the famous Conference of Berlin at which European powers met to divvy up Africa before they scrambled to colonize it.

1885 is also a watershed year in the history of the British Empire and its new Dominion, British North America, or Canada. It was the year that Empire sealed its third conquest in North America, after the conquest of Quebec in 1759-60 (also known as the Seven Year War or the French and Indian War), and the brutal repression of the Patriots Revolt in 1837-38, which was the equivalent of another conquest.

On November 16, 1885, the John A. MacDonald government hanged Louis Riel in the quarters North-West Mounted Police (now the RCMP). The hanging was cheered on by an Orange-Order-dominated Toronto, but was loudly and massively condemned in Montreal, including by Quebec Premier Honoré Mercier. “Louis Riel is my brother,” he said before a crowd said to be close to 50,000.

Riel’s crime was to have tried to federate the Métis and the Indigenous nations under a provisional government opposed to the land grab and massive settling of the North-West Territories that the Indigenous people had occupied for millennia.

Eleven days later, on November 27, 1885, the same MacDonald Government publicly hanged six Cree and two Nakota warriors at Battleford, Saskatchewan. They are Kah – Paypamahchukways (Wandering Spirit), Pah Pah-Me-Kee-Sick (Walking the Sky), Manchoose (Bad Arrow), Kit-Ahwah-Ke-Ni (Miserable Man), Nahpase (Iron Body), A-Pis-Chas-Koos (Little Bear), Itka (Crooked Leg), Waywahnitch (Man Without Blood).

Source: Cree Literacy Network

The largest public hanging in the history of Canada and burial in a common grave followed on hasty trials before an Anglo-Protestant Jury and a judge by the name of Charles Rouleau, who was in flagrant conflict of interest: his house had been burnt during the conflict.

To make the message clear, members of the hanged warriors’ nations were forced to attend so that they would never forget. In a confidential letter written seven days earlier, John A. MacDonald wrote: “The executions ought to convince the Red Man that the White Man governs. This message came in the wake of his declaration that Louis Riel “shall hang, even though all dogs in Quebec bark in his favour.”

“Canada’s first war,” as Desmond Morton describes it, was in fact the second military intervention aimed at imposing British sovereignty over the North-West Territories. The first occurred in 1870 and was aimed to eliminate the first provisional government of Manitoba, also led by Louis Riel.

Battleford Industrial School 1885 – Students assembled to watch hanging (Source: Cree Literacy Network)

A colonial conquest among many

The commander of British Troops sent to put down Riel in 1870 was Marshal Garnet Wolseley. More than a run-of-the-mill British officer, Wolseley was a symbol of the planetary—and bloody—expansion of the British Empire in the 19th century. Named Viscount Sir Wolseley in 1885 by Queen Victoria, Wolseley, before confronting Riel, had earned his colours in the murderous colonial repression in India in 1857 and in China in 1860, including the destruction and looting of the Old Summer Palace in Peking, that “wonder of the world,” as Victor Hugo described it.

After Riel, as Governor of the Gold Coast (now Ghana), he headed the British troops that took Kumase, capital city of the Ashanti Kingdom, and he razed it; he led British troops to put down rebellions in Egypt, in Khartoum and in South Africa. Wolseley, an avid supporter of the slavocracy general Robert E. Lee, is still honoured in Canada where streets in Montreal-West, Toronto, Thunder Bay, and Winnipeg bear his name as well as a town in Saskatchewan … just 60 kilometers away from the Cowessess First Nation.

In 1885, Major-General Frederick Middleton, another senior British officer and veteran of British colonial wars, headed the troops sent to crush the resistance led by the Métis and the First Nations. Like Wolseley, Middleton was an officer with the British Troops that brutally repressed the Indian uprising in 1857 against the Crown’s agent, the British East India Company. He had also led troops to put down the Maoris in New Zealand. Crushing Indigenous peoples was is specialty. His troops in 1885 consisted of the paramilitary militia known as the North-West Mounted Police, and volunteer militias, mostly Orangemen from Ontario. The British Crown wanted to avoid provoking the most powerful army in the world, the US army, by deploying formally British troops.

Without understanding the nature and context of this third British conquest, it is difficult to understand what followed, be it the imposition of the land-grab treaties—coyly referred to as “numbered treaties—the Indian Act or today’s dismal situation in which the Canadian government talks of “reconciliation” while First Nations’ leader demand justice.

“Strike at the heart of the tribal system” 

A characteristic of all conquests is that the conqueror will deploy all means to ensure the conquered peoples don’t rise again. These include deportation (as with the Acadians in 1755 in a prelude to the first conquest), confinement to reserves, subjugation, assimilation, or all of the former.

Louis Riel testifies at his trial (Public Domain)

Few have forgotten the hanging of Louis Riel in 1885, but most are unaware of the public hanging of the Indigenous warriors. These hangings are vital symbols in understanding the history of Canada, but they are but the tip of the iceberg of policies implemented by the conquering British Empire and its dominion of Canada.

Following Wolseley’s military operations in 1870, the Métis of Manitoba, who until then accounted for about 80 percent of the population, were chased away in what can be described as pogroms. The region was flooded with settlers from Ontario or the “British Isles,” including a large number of Orangemen, who obtained land that was refused to Métis. The land-grab treaties were rapidly inflicted on the First Nations—seven treaties in six years (1871-77) covering the entire territory that was to become Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta—. First nations were made to know that even if the Chiefs refused to sign, the Canadian Government would proceed whether they liked it or not.

The Indian Act was adopted in 1876 thereby making the Indigenous people “wards of the state.” This Act invested the Indian Agents—and the NWMP—with powers over the life and death over thousands of First Nations peoples. In 1880, the industrial and residential school policy began to be implemented seriously.

The Commissioner of Indian Affairs and Lieutenant Governor of the North-West Territories at the time was Edgar Dewdney, a favourite of John A. MacDonald’s (he was an executor of MacDonald’s will), and a man “profoundly attached to the empire and the British monarchical tradition,” according to the Dictionary of Canadian Biography.

From the time he was appointed Indian Commissioner in 1879, Dewdney was determined to “strike at the heart of the tribal system” by quickly opening more residential schools so as to put an end to the agitation of First Nations aimed at gaining more autonomy and improved treaties. This policy worked for many years.

The “Little Lottery”: “loyal” or “disloyal “ 

A few months after Riel was arrested, on July 20, 1885, the Assistant Indian Commissioner and former Indian Agent of Battleford, Hayter Reed, submitted a report with 15 points on “The Future Management of Indians.” He also provided a list of the nations/bands described either as “loyal” or “disloyal” with additional details about the chiefs and members suspected to have been involved in some way in the Resistance. That report became the basis of Canadian policy towards the First Nations for years to come.

It touches on everything: exemplary punishment of those who resisted (whence the public hangings); severe collective punishment, including privation of rations (starvation) and other necessities, applied to any and all who, according to the Indian agents, lacked loyalty; confiscation of horses, firearms and tools among those “disloyal” members of a nation or band; confinement to reserves unless in possession of written permission from an Indian agent; all ties between the Métis “Half-breeds” and other First Nations were to be severed and communication was to be forbidden, with the same being applied to “Canadians;” the “good” Indians (loyal) were to be rewarded with “substantial recognition” to confirm their loyalty, the “bad and lazy” ones were to lose their reserve; and more and more.

This “Little Lottery” used to control the First Nations after the Riel-led resistance resembles the one used with some success by the British Crown after the brutal repression and hangings of the Patriots in Quebec in 1837-38. The goal was to coopt a certain French-Canadian elite by using political emoluments, rewards, nominations, recognition and other crumbs. That “Little Lottery” succeeded to a certain extent in transforming revolutionary Patriots into very tame collaborators of the new regime set up by the British.

What about the churches?  

In all colonial conquests, churches play an important role in support of the military and political power. They did so in Africa, in Asia, in Latin America and in North America. In the case of British North America, the Anglican Church has always been the Crown’s favourite, as the king or queen was, and is, the Supreme Governor of that Church.

Anglican run Battleford Industrial School, Carpenter’s shop. circa 1894. (CC0)

The Catholic Church joined in. It quickly reached an agreement with the British Empire. During the Patriot’s Revolt in 1837-1838 in Lower Canada, the Catholic Church supported the British by refusing Patriots and their supporters the right to be buried in Catholic cemeteries, threatened to excommunicate them, and ordered them to comply with the instructions of the British authorities.

The churches were brought in to keep the promise made by the Government of Canada and written in the treaties to provide schools to the First Nations. They were to support a policy devised by and for the conquering power, the British Empire and its Dominion of Canada. The Canadian Government was to fund the schools, but it steadily and arbitrarily reduced funding and left it up to the religious organizations to find the minimum required to keep operating.

To fill the residential schools, a law was required to force the Indigenous families to send their children to them. Canada obliged by authorizing the Indian agents to take any school age children from their families and put them in the schools. If parents refused, the agents had the power to cut off their annuities and more. Testimony has revealed that parents who opposed sending their children were threatened with prison.

The NWMP (now the RCMP) was empowered implement the law. Testimony gathered is eloquent.

“children (who) were lured onto boats and planes without parental knowledge, sometimes never to be seen again. Uniformed RCMP pulled children from their mother’s arms; many survivors described the cattle trucks and railroad cars into which they were herded each fall. Night time knocks on the doors and invasions in search of runaway children are reminiscent of war.”

The threat of police action was often the means used to return the children to school, “it was the police who brought the runaways back to school, and now it was the threat of police action which stopped a grieving father from trying to find out what had happened to his son” (Funk, 1993: 88). Some accounts refer to how the RCMP assisted by force. “They encircled reserves to stop runaways then moved from door to door taking school children over the protest of parents and children themselves. Children were locked up in nearby police stations or cattle pens until the round up was complete, then taken to school by train” (The Role of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police During the Indian Residential School System, prepared for the TRC, 2011)

In short, Canada entrusted the churches with the responsibility to establish residential schools; the government funded them; its Indian agents and its police force were empowered to force parents to send their children to the schools and use a battery of threats.

Canada had the power to put an end to the system. But it didn’t, preferring to keep it operating for some 100 years, even though its own civil servants fully informed the government of the criminal nature of the system.

The Canadian Government knew 

Dr. P.H. Bryce was Chief Medical Officer of the Department of the Interior from 1904 until 1921, when he was forced to retire. He was responsible for the health of Indigenous children in the residential schools. He became a “whistle-blower” in 1922 by publishing a booklet titled, “The Story of A National Crime, An Appeal for Justices to the Indians of Canada, The Wards of the Nation: Our Allies in the Revolutionary War: Our Brothers-in-Arms in the Great War (James Hope, 1922, Ottawa).

But it was not the first information that became public. In 1907, based on the annual report he submitted to his superiors, The Evening Citizen (now The Ottawa Citizen) ran a front-page article titled, “Schools Aid White Plague — Startling Death Rolls Revealed Among Indians — Absolute Inattention to the Bare Necessities of Health.”

Dr. Bryce’s annual reports repeated the same observations and included urgent recommendations for the First Nations. Nothing was done. Slowl he was forced to stop producing the reports.

Tuberculosis was rampant in those years. In his reports, Dr. Bryce, who was a specialist in fighting tuberculosis, compared the death rate in cities like Hamilton and Ottawa, Ontario, with those in western reserves.

Whereas death rates in the Ontario cities were constantly dropping, in the reserves, and particularly in the residential schools, the death rates were devastating, continually on the rise. The Indigenous population was plummeting each year because of tuberculosis, but each of Dr. Bryce’s reports was snuffed out. Worse yet, representatives of the Indian Affairs Department did everything possible to prevent Bryce from speaking out in public. For instance, he was prevented from speaking to the 1910 Annual Meeting of the National Tuberculosis Association.

What about Quebec’s role in this tragedy?

Since the children’s bodies were discovered in cemeteries belonging to residential schools, people have been raising Quebec’s role in the tragedy. Some see a link because of the Catholic Church and the religious orders based in Quebec. Others point to Quebec politicians or civil servants who participated in the decision-making by the Canadian government or by British authorities or in the implementation of these policies. Some refer to the two French-speaking battalions from Quebec City sent West in 1885.

Inasmuch as individuals, members of political parties or institutions bought into the British order established in Canada in the wake of the first two military conquests and in the British imperial and colonial drive westward, they obviously bear some responsibility.

But Quebecers and French-Canadians have often fiercely challenged that order throughout the history of Canada.

For instance, in the Declaration of Independence of Lower Canada written in 1838 by the Patriot Robert Nelson, it is stated in the third article: “That under the free government of Lower Canada, all citizens shall have the same rights; the Indians will cease to be subject to any kind of civil disqualification, and will enjoy the same rights as the other citizens of the state of Lower Canada.”

The same goes for the Catholic Church, which has been challenged constantly. The British—and Canadian—authorities promoted the Catholic Church, particularly in the wake of Patriot Revolt of 1837-38. Together they hoped to suppress the revolutionary republican ideas inspired by France.

As for the two French-speaking battalions under Major-general Middleton’s command sent to put down the resistance in 1885, the British showed their true colours once again. They considered that these French-speaking troops could not be trusted to fight the French-speaking Métis and Riel, so they had them sent far away from combat in Alberta. The Quebec troops quickly learned that they were, and would always be, second class members of the institutions established in British North America (Canada). This story would be repeated over and over again.

Making Canada and English country

Following the military conquest of the West in 1870 and 1885, which allowed Britain’s Dominion of Canada to impose its sovereignty, it eliminated the French language and culture with almost as much zeal as was deployed to eliminate the Indigenous languages and cultures.

In 1890, Manitoba abolished French as an official language and shortly thereafter it prohibited the use of French in schools. (Gabrielle Roy, who was born in Saint-Boniface, Manitoba, recalls in Enchantment and Sorrow how the French-speaking sisters in her Catholic school would teach them in English, but would sometimes sneak out books in French, out of sight of zealous government inspectors.)

Saskatchewan and Albert became provinces of Canada in 1905, but the bilingual status that had applied to the North-West Territories was eliminated. A few years later, use of French in government, in courts and in schools was prohibited.

Everything old is new again

In their fight against the British Empire, Canada’s First Nations and the Métis were not alone; the French-Canadians/Quebecers were not alone either. They were peoples who represented obstacles the European powers, intent on expanding their empires around the world, had to remove. In that sense, they were objective allies of the Chinese, the peoples of India and other Southern Asian countries, the Maoris of New Zeeland, the indigenous peoples of Australia and the United States, and the peoples of Africa.

One hundred fifty years later, the same European and North American powers, including Canada, are attempting to restore their hegemony in these same places, though they are meeting vigorous resistance worldwide. The methods used include lecturing these countries on human rights, applying murderous sanctions, and threatening to bomb and intervene militarily in any countries that prefer political and economic independence to the hegemony of great powers.

Today, as in the past, these powers have neither the right nor the moral authority to do what they are doing, but that will not stop them.

One lesson to be retained from the sorry history of residential schools in Canada is that our solidarity must also mean that we will not allow ourselves to be dragged into imperialist drives against other countries and peoples in 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.

Sources

Bryce, P.H. The Story of A National Crime, An Appeal for Justices to the Indians of Canada, The Wards of the Nation: Our Allies in the Revolutionary War: Our Brothers-in-Arms in the Great War. James Hope, 1922.

Dictionnaire biographique du Canada.

Hay, Travis, Blackstock, Cindy, and Kirlew, Michael. Dr. Peter Bryce (1853-1932): whistleblower on residential schools, CMAJ, 2 March, 2020.

Kelly, Stéphane. La petite loterie. Comment la Couronne a obtenu la collaboration du Canada français après 1837, Les éditions du Boréal, 1997.

LeBeuf, Marcel-Eugène. Au nom de la GRC. Le rôle de la Gendarmerie royales du Canada sous le régime des pensionnats indiens, rapport réalisé dans le cadre de la CVR, 2011

Momudu, Samuel. « The Anglo-Ashanti Wars (1823-1900). Black Past. 24 mars 2018. https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/anglo-ashanti-wars-1823-1900/

Morton, Desmond. A Military History of Canada, From Champlain to Kosovo, Fourth Edition. M&S, 1999.

Ogg, Arden. An infamous anniversary: 130 years since Canada’s Largest Mass Hanging 27 November 1885. Cree Literacy Network. https://creeliteracy.org/2015/11/26/130th-anniversary-of-infamy-canadas-largest-mass-hanging-27-november-1885/

Reed, Hayter. Memorandum for the Hon(ourable) the Indian Commissioner Relative to the Future Management of the Indians. 20 July 1885.  http://iportal.usask.ca/index.php?sid=168308311&id=33613&t=details

Stonechild, Blair; Waiser, Bill. Loyal Till Death, Indians and the North-West Rebellion. Fifth House Publishers, 2010

Wolseley, Garnet. “General Lee”. Lee Family Digital Archive. https://leefamilyarchive.org/reference/misc/wolseley/index.html

Featured image: Cairn erected in 1975 marking the Battleford Industrial School cemetery (CC BY-SA 4.0)

All Global Research articles 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 28, 2021

Following a citizen’s petition, a Lisbon court was forced to provide verified COVID-19 mortality data, reports AndreDias.net.

According to the ruling, the number of verified COVID-19 deaths from January 2020 to April 2021 is only 152, not about 17,000 as claimed by government ministries.

All the “others” died for various reasons, although their PCR test was positive.

“We live in a fraud of unprecedented dimensions,” wrote Dias.

“The data are from the Sistema de Informação dos Certificados de Óbito (Death Certificate Information System – SICO), the only such system in Portugal. The reference to 152 death certificated issued ‘under Justice Ministry supervision’ is spurious, as all death certificates are issued under Justice Ministry auspices, being the only institution that issues them.

“In response to a popular suit, a court order was required for the Ministry to respond, desperate not to denounce the fraud.

“All those responsible for handling data from ‘cases’ and ‘deaths’ can, thereafter, only be tried for the crime if there is any dignity remaining in the rule of law,” he continued.

“If these figures are of the same order of magnitude for other countries as well, and there is no reason to assume otherwise, then the plague is a deception of unprecedented proportions and crimes committed against humanity on a huge scale have been committed 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 iStock

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Russia /Venezuela

The U.S.-led colonial terror in Haiti since 2004 has been so terrible and horrific, that during countless anti-corruption, anti-imperialist demonstrations, the people of Haiti burned the U.S. flag and lifted up the Russian flag asking for help. But for thirteen (13) intolerable years, from 2004 to 2017, Russia voted at the U.N. Security Council to play along with the U.S. colonial conquest in Haiti. It’s true that Russia has oftentimes rhetorically responded as if they sympathize, but given every chance to recognize Michel Martelly and Jovenel Moise’s illegitimacy they have not ever rejected these colonial puppets as  de facto presidents put in by the Core Group, UN and OAS, as the people of Haiti have, en mass and very loudly. Let’s say that first.

A month (35 days) after Jovenel Moise received and accepted the letters of appointment for the new Russian Ambassador to Haiti, Sergey Melik-Bagdasarov, he was assassinated.

Sergey Melik-Bagdasarov is the Russian Ambassador to Venezuela. This Haiti rapprochement to Venezuela through Russia would not please the United States who pushed Jovenel Moise to betray a traditionally close Haiti relationship with Venezuela to recognize the un-elected imposter Juan Guaidó as president over the duly elected Venezuelan president, Nicolas Maduro. This unprecedented appointment of a Russian ambassador to Haiti who also is the primary Russian agent in Venezuela probably gave the Western Core Group of nations running Haiti brain aneurysms.

A seeming deepen bilateral cooperation relations with Haiti and Russia may have sealed Jovenel’s fate. Especially after the pains the U.S.-led Core group nations took to destroy the PetroCaribe fuel program in Haiti by allowing and rewarding its PHTK Legal Bandits, like Jovenel Moise and Michel Martelly, to allegedly embezzle billions of the $4billion Venezuelan fuel deal while providing the Haitian people with no successful social reform programs as Venezuela intended and thus, ultimately destroying the legitimacy of the PetroCaribe fuel program to the glee of the U.S.

⁠Turkey

Before his assassination, on June 17, 2021, Jovenel Moise, accompanied by a large delegation which included Michel “Sweet Mickey” Martelly rival, former de facto Prime Minister, Laurent Lamothe, visited Turkey.

The United States worries about Turkey’s growing friendship with Russia. Could this trip have added to the growing U.S. discontent with its puppet president and sealed Jovenel’s fate on many fronts: angering many former political friends, the Lebanese/Syrian oligarchs in Haiti who dislike Turkey’s attacks on Syria opposition and the U.S.-Core Group nations whose relationship with Turkey president Recep Tayyip Erdogan is almost as bad as their relationship with Venezuela’s Maduro?

There are many threads here to unpack in this newest neocolonial atrocity and foreign abuse of Haiti. There’s the Middle Eastern oligarch role vs the local politicians, the regional actors, the internationals, the personal. But Moise’s new relationship with Russia and even Erdorgan, the president of Turkey, a hated U.S. enemy would please the warmongering Western Core Group nations whatsoever. Nor, would such an African foray please the Lebanese-Syrian-Israeli billion oligarchs in Haiti who are both overseers of the Black masses locally for empire and victims/useful pawns in the U.S.-led balance of power game against Syria and who work with the DEA/State department/Pentagon/CIA/FBI to use the Colombian drugs profits to financed U.S. wars domestically and all over the planet, including to finance the opposition to Bashar Al-Assad.

Turkey is not seen as a reliable NATO ally because it nakedly protects its own interests. Still remembers itself as the Ottoman Empire and thus not in awe or providing due NATO deference to nations it formerly owned in Europe and Asia.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan met with President Jovenel Moïse of Haiti, who is in Turkey for the Antalya Diplomacy Forum. (Source: tccb.gov.tr)

Recall that back in August 2020, Jovenel and Erdogan strengthened Haiti and Turkey cooperation ties with the signing of seven agreements:

• Memorandum of Understanding for the formation of the political consultation mechanism between the ministries of foreign affairs;
• Memorandum of Understanding for cooperation between Chancellery Diplomacy Academies;
• Memorandum of Understanding on Disaster Management;
• Memorandum of Understanding for Economic Cooperation;
• Memorandum of understanding for cultural cooperation;
• Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation on Archives;
• Memorandum of Understanding for Technical Cooperation.

U.S. corporations work hard to control all energy projects in the Caribbean and use the U.S. military, CIA/DEA/FBI, Israeli-Mossad mercenaries to enforce their corporate monopolies. Former de facto president, Michel Martelly, put in illegally under the Obama/Biden/Hillary Clinton administration, signed a contract for an Israeli military company (HSL) to “protect” Haiti borders, land, air and sea. (Where was their border surveillance satellites and communication spying technology on that July 7, 2021 assassination?)

I know the United States works hard to control the energy sector in Haiti. Their minions even came after the tiny solar powered clean water project I put together, after the earthquake  and UN imported cholera, to help the people have some electricity and clean water.

So imagine the Western confederate Core Group rage, absolute rage when, in November 2020, Jovenel Moise and his Turkish counterpart Reccep Tayyip Erdogan reportedly had telephone conversations as part of negotiations for the establishment of two floating power plants capable of extending electricity services to Port-au-Prince and Cap Haitian. See, Jovenel not only visited Turkey to complete preparations for these projects and signed other unknown agreements with a close friend of Russia the U.S hates, but we recall that back in March 2021, the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Cavusoglu also visited Haiti as part of a regional tour and issued an official invitation to Haitian leaders.

Yep, it’s not far fetch then, to see the Jovenel Moise assassination is nothing more than a desperate message, delivered by the enraged United States and Core Group hitmen and hitwomen, directly or indirectly, to all Haitians and regional actors in the Americas. The message is if you try to find allies to counter U.S. domination; if you try to leverage a bilateral relationship and new opportunities for local progress and development for Haiti through Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, Turkey, Iran or North Korea against, for instance, the U.S.’ weaponized charity, fake humanitarian aid and (de)mock-kkracy charades in Haiti. If you do, if you resist our total domination and corruption, we will gouge out both your eyes, break your neck, your arms and your legs. (See, Haiti President Jovenel Moïse shot 12 times, “eye blown out” and, 2019: How America’s relationship with Turkey fell apart – The NATO allies’ partnership has devolved into a “slow-motion car crash.”)

Jovenel Moise – A War Criminal Looking To Save His Own Skin 

Just a few weeks ago, I spoke to a source who told me Jovenel was looking for a way out. He didn’t want to spend the rest of his life running away from war criminal charges for all the massacres he presided over for the Colonists while in power. Jovenel tried to push an amendment to the Haiti constitution that would give him immunity from prosecution after his term was over. The U.S. did not strongly support his referendum, finally came out to publicly hold their support. Jovenel could have also been afraid of an indictment for money laundering and drugs which the DEA/CIA/CoreGroup nations held over him his entire term in office.

Jovenel saw the handwriting on the wall and started to look for new allies to leverage against his Western handlers to save his skin after he’d finish doing the U.S. dirty job in Haiti and his term was over.

Let’s be clear, the colonial puppet, Jovenel Moise, murdered his people, was an indicted drug money launderer and used toxic gas against school children, pregnant women, protesting demonstrators. He used the foreign-trained militarized police and sold-out media to silence and censor demonstrators.

During their terms in office, Jovenel Moise and Michel Marterlly, are known and hated by the Haiti masses for hiring white foreign mercenaries who used head-to-toe black balaclavas mask and outfits to cover all skin color. These foreign mercenaries disguised themselves as Haiti police and/or Haiti gangs to kill the poor. They would also sit atop of high peaks to use drones and long distance snipers fire to kill peaceful demonstrators and to assassinate Jovenel’s and the CoreCroup’s political opposition, at will.

We’ve lost so many people. In the last two years alone, Jovenel Moise’s local, colonial forces and death squads forces conducted at least nine massacres against poor communities protesting the nationwide persecution and corruption.

Since February 7, 2021 when his illegal term in office was over, Jovenel Moise, with the near silence of the enabling international community, illegally fired Supreme Court justices he feared could lead a transitional government and indiscriminately presided over the murder of judges, lawyers (i.e. Monferrier Dorval), journalists, human rights activists and any civil society sector that got in his way.

Jovenel Moise was an imposter. He was an Antonio Sola-consultant created U.S. puppet who was sold to Haitians as a successful entrepreneur. a banana grower.

But his Agritans company was a fake business created by the internationals simply to put him in power. Michel Martelly, his mentor, funneled state funds into Agritans to prop up Moise and his presidential campaign in 2015-16. Moise campaigned for the presidency with Guy Philippe, a convicted drug smuggler today serving time in U.S. federal prison.

Guy Philippe like Jovenel Moise was a CIA asset. Guy Philippe was used in Haiti as a paramilitary leader to take down Haiti’s democratically elected president, Jean Bertrand Aristide and bring in the proxy United Nations disastrous 17-year Haiti occupation that ended its direct UN proxy rule in 2017. But now the Colonist who staged Jovenel Moise’s death and its narrative are also staging a “request” for U.S. troops to be deployed to Haiti.

Of course the Haitian people want no further foreign intervention. But we don’t have the media platform and political platform, UN mission head, Helen Lalime has in Haiti. This former head of Africom now the leader of the UN’s BINUH mission in Haiti, is the person who told Haitians that the successor to Jovenel as president is the George Soros, NED-created, Claude Joseph.

Claude Joseph, as acting president is the one who conveniently asked for U.S. troops to Haiti! As I point out, create the disorder, come in to put back order. Wash, rinse, repeat. The Colonists plays hero and villain. Tries to cover all the bases.

Jovenel Moise, Michel Martelly and the local bourgeoisie and Diaspora technocrats who support neocolonialism in Haiti were allowed to misappropriate and embezzle billions from Venezuela’s oil-purchasing PetroCaribe program with impunity.

This would have incensed and enraged the US-led Core Group of Western Nations and their colonized agents. The confederated “diplomats” ruling Haiti, called the “Core Group” are from Germany, France, Canada, Spain, Brazil, EU, OAS, UN and United States. This amoral cabal, with such enormous military, media and financial power, either orchestrated his assassination or turned a blind eye to allow their local billionaire overseers, the Bigio-Mevs (Syrian-Lebonese-Israeli) family mafia in Haiti, along with their gang of PHTK House Kneegrows to take him out. I can’t prove it. I’ll never get to Court with what we Haitians know. We’re censored, marginalized, brutalized. But I am sure of it. I know the enemy is not our savior. Recall, the U.S. has the biggest embassy in the Western Hemisphere in Haiti with the most footprint in the Americas. It’s the fourth largest U.S. embassy in the world.

Ironically, those who took Jovenel out are today the “investigators” of the crime. The cover-up is annoying. But the bottom line is, the Haitian masses work to take down the neocolonial SYSTEM, not just a president and those who put him in power. The people of Haiti have no interests in protecting corrupt oligarchs, nor the brutal and amoral UN-OAS-State Department’s deep state and their Coons-Conzes who are exposing themselves, killing each other off. Let the #Cleansing go on. That’s Ancestral Prayers answered!

But we’re not celebrating, for we have fought too long not to know this entire assassination project is also a US-CoreGroup psyops and flexing of power to show us citizens that even if we can see as plain as day their FBI/CIA/DEA et al, fingerprints, footprints, smoking gun in this assassination, we’re powerless to prove it and can do NOTHING about it. The perpetrators will investigate, they have the media on their payroll and will write any narrative they please, no matter how unbelievable. And the beat goes on, on and on. (“The assassination of Haiti’s leader remains shrouded in mystery: ‘We may never know’”.)

Ezili Dantò is the founder and President of Ezili’s Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network (“HLLN”), a network of lawyers, activists, concerned individuals and grassroots organizations dedicated to institutionalizing the rule of law and protecting the civil and cultural rights of Haitians at home and abroad.

*

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.

***

Let me be clear: capitalism without competition isn’t capitalism. It’s exploitation. — tweet from President Joe Biden, July 9, 2021

Capitalism is exploitation, period. Lol —a twitter response to Biden’s tweet, July 9, 2021

Not a day goes by in which major owners of capital and their political representatives do not promote illusions and disinformation about the obsolete capitalist economic system. The ruling elite and their entourage rejected economic science and embraced irrationalism, incoherence, and dogmatism more than a century ago.

They are unable and unwilling to offer any useful analysis of economic realities. Nothing they put forward helps advance public understanding of the economy. The mainstream news, for example, is saturated with endless mind-numbing nonsensical economic headlines. It is no accident that mainstream economics has long been called the dismal science.

The internal core logic and intrinsic operation of capital ensures greater poverty, inequality, and monopoly over time. This is the inherent nature of capital. It is how capital moves and develops. These catastrophes are not the result of external forces, extenuating circumstances, or “bad people” making “bad decisions.” They are not the outcome of ill-conceived policies made by self-serving, immoral, or uninformed people. These worsening problems did not arise because something is wrong with the intentions of some individuals who make antisocial decisions. Such notions are facile.

While individuals have consciousness, autonomy, self-determination, and agency, many phenomena (e.g., laws of economic development) operate objectively outside the will of individuals; they do not depend on the will of individuals. The laws of motion governing economic phenomena can be known, controlled, and directed, but not extinguished; they have to be consciously mastered, harnessed, and directed in a way that meets the needs of all.

Capital is first and foremost an unequal social relationship, not a person or a thing. This unequal social relationship is relentlessly reproduced in today’s society, preventing the healthy balanced extended reproduction of society. On the one side of this unequal social relationship are the majority who own nothing but their labor power and on the other side are a tiny handful who own the means of production and live off the labor of others.

Major owners of capital are the personification of capital, the embodiment of capital. This critical theoretical insight helps us avoid the rabbit hole of personal intentions and personal will, and allows us instead to objectively locate greed, insecurity, inequality, poverty, unemployment, endless debt, and other tragedies in the intrinsic built-in nature, logic, and movement of capital itself.

One of these is the inexorable tendency of competition to lead to monopoly under capitalism. Competition means winners and losers. By definition, not everyone can win when competing. Competition means rivalry for supremacy. Thousands compete in the Olympics, for example, but only a select few (“winners”) go home with a gold medal. It is no accident that the economy, media, and politics are heavily monopolized by a handful of billionaires while billions of people who actually produce the wealth in society and run society remain marginalized and disempowered.

This brutal reality cannot be reversed or overcome with the utterance of a few platitudes, the passage of some policies, or the creation of some agencies that claim to be able to fix the outdated economic system, especially when all of the above come from billionaires themselves.

On July 9, 2021, President Joe Biden issued an Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy (see this).

The order is about 7,000 words long and full of anticonscious statements. Disinformation pervades the entire order.

The opening paragraph begins with the following disinformation:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote the interests of American workers, businesses, and consumers, it is hereby ordered….

Here, “American workers, businesses, and consumers” are casually misequated and no mention is made of citizens or humans. The implication is that consumerism is normal, healthy, and desirable, and that workers and big business somehow have the same aims, world outlook, and interests. This conceals the fact that owners of capital and workers have antagonistic irreconcilable interests and that people exist as humans and citizens, not just utilitarian consumers and shoppers in a taken-for-granted system based on chaos, anarchy, and violence.

Disinformation is further escalated in the next paragraph:

A fair, open, and competitive marketplace has long been a cornerstone of the American economy, while excessive market concentration threatens basic economic liberties, democratic accountability, and the welfare of workers, farmers, small businesses, startups, and consumers.

“Market concentration” has been the norm for generations. Monopolies, cartels, and oligopolies have been around since the late 1800s. Mergers and acquisitions have been taking place non-stop for decades. The so-called “free market” largely disappeared long ago. Objectively, there can be no fairness in a system rooted in wage-slavery and empire-building. Wage-slavery is the precondition for the tendency of the rich to get richer and the poor poorer. It is not a recipe for prosperity and security for all.

This is also why inequality, tyranny, violence, and surveillance have been growing over the years. Moreover, what “threatens basic economic liberties, democratic accountability, and the welfare of workers, farmers, small businesses, startups, and consumers” is the ongoing political and economic exclusion of people from control over the economy and their lives by the financial oligarchy. There can be no liberty, accountability, and welfare when most people are deprived of real decision-making power and major owners of capital make all the decisions. Problems would not constantly worsen if people had control over their lives. The “best allocation of resources” cannot be made when the economy is carved up, fractured, and controlled by competing owners of capital.

Although recurring economic crises for well over a century have repeatedly discredited “free market” ideology, the 7,000-word executive order is saturated with the language of “choice,” “competition,” and “consumers.” This is the same worn-out language used by privatizers of all hues at home and abroad.

Further, while the executive order gives many examples of “economic consolidation” in numerous sectors, the government is not interested in creating a self-reliant vibrant diverse economy that meets the needs of all. It is not committed to reversing “the harmful effects of monopoly and monopsony.” Numerous antitrust laws have not stopped either. Big mergers and acquisitions have been going on for years. Rather, the executive order is an attempt to restructure economic and political arrangements among different factions of the wealthy elite; it reflects a new stage or form of inter-capitalist rivalry for even greater domination of the economy by fewer owners of capital. In other words, moving forward, the economy will remain monopolized by a few monopolies. Wealth is only going to become more concentrated in fewer hands in the years ahead. Mountains of data from hundreds of sources document growing wealth and income inequality every year.

The bulk of the executive order is filled with endless directives, strategies, rules, and suggestions for how to curb “unfair practices” and promote “fairness” and “competition.” But these all ring hollow given concrete realities and past experience.

Today, governments at all levels have been taken over by global private monopoly interests and have become instruments of decisions made on a supranational basis. There is a fine-tuned revolving door between officials from government and the private sector; they have become synonymous for all essential purposes. The same people who run major corporations also serve in high-level government positions where they advance the narrow interests of the private sector and then they leave government and return to their high-level corporate positions. There is a reason why the majority of members of Congress are millionaires. The Executive Branch in the United States, especially the President’s Office, is a major tool for the expression of the will of the most powerful monopolies. This is why billions of dollars are spent every few years to select the President of the country.

A modern economy must be controlled and directed by workers themselves. Only such an economy can provide for the needs of all and avoid endless economic distortions. Uneven economic development, “unfair” arrangements, “market concentration,” monopolies, oligopolies, and recurring crises cannot be avoided so long as those who actually produce the social product have no control over the social product. Workers have first claim to the wealth they produce and have the right to decide how, where, and when that wealth is used. Major owners of capital are historically superfluous and a big block to progress. They are not needed for a healthy vibrant self-reliant economy that meets the needs of all.

*

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

Shawgi Tell, PhD, is author of the book “Charter School Report Card.” His main research interests include charter schools, neoliberal education policy, privatization and political economy. He can be reached at [email protected].

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

From a historical perspective, Homo sapiens are an evolutionary aberrant.

Unlike other forms of life, armed with an opposing thumb and a highly developed and advanced neocortex, we have, over time, developed the capacity to destroy most organisms on planet Earth. This has been accomplished either with the energy of heat, light and power that exist inside the sun or, conversely, by slowly cooking the planet as we release fossil gases — carbon dioxide and methane.

These are the products of massive photosynthesis that millions of years ago trapped and combined carbon dioxide gas from the atmosphere into plants and organisms such as plankton and phytoplankton using chlorophyll and sunlight as catalysts. These ancient organisms were then subjected to massive geological pressures and, over eons of time, were compressed and converted into coal and oil.

Little did people know when they developed steam engines, motor cars and factories that were powered by these fossil fuels that within several centuries, such wonderful inventions which made life incredibly easy would, in the long run, threaten the biosphere with eventual extinction.

And ever since humans evolved, the male species has seen fit to harness the overwhelming power of testosterone to kill invading species, but more to the point, slaughter his fellow constituents for territorial gains, power plays and control dynamics. Yes, it is true that other male species will fight to the kill over mating imperatives, food or territorial control, but they have no access to reason, scientific knowledge and moral imperatives.

Congruent with this history, it is obvious that as we became more obsessed with gaining scientific knowledge, such wisdom would be put to better methods of killing.

So where does the human race stand now? Nine countries now own nuclear weapons, with the USA and Russia greatly predominating, owning 94 per cent of all the approximately 14,000 in the world.

Some of the largest companies in the U.S. are obsessed with designing, developing and making the most exotic and lethal weapons in the world and, what’s more, increasingly using artificial intelligence to launch and control them.

It seems inevitable that any wonderful new invention will make its way into the killing sphere.

The U.S. now spends over one trillion dollars a year on potential murder, all dressed up in the name of “national defence” which is pure rubbish. Because let’s face it, America has no enemies, Russia has joined the capitalist sphere, China is, at the moment, a little belligerent but the U.S. more so with 800 military bases in 80 foreign countries.

For the human race to survive, it is imperative that we encourage and foster friendship with all nations on Earth, that we reign in the killing testosterone instinct, that women with their nurturing hormones rapidly take control of national governments and pursuant to the teachings of the great moral profits – Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, and all others – that we rapidly learn to live in peace with each other. Or let’s face it, we are doomed and will take the wonders of billions of years of creation with us.

First published by Independent Australia

*

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 Caldicott is a pediatrician and founder of the 1978 iteration of Physicians for Social Responsibility, which won the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize as part of International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War.

Featured image is a screenshot from a Youtube video via Independent Australia

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102
Print Edition: $10.25 (+ shipping and handling)
PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

All Global Research articles 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.

***

Introduction

The [Israel based] NSO Group [surveillance group] claims that its Pegasus spyware is only used to “investigate terrorism and crime”  and “leaves no traces whatsoever”.

This Forensic Methodology Report shows that neither of these statements are true. This report accompanies the release of the Pegasus Project, a collaborative investigation that involves more than 80 journalists from 17 media organizations in 10 countries coordinated by Forbidden Stories with technical support of Amnesty International’s Security Lab.[1]

Amnesty International’s Security Lab has performed in-depth forensic analysis of numerous mobile devices from human rights defenders (HRDs) and journalists around the world. This research has uncovered widespread, persistent and ongoing unlawful surveillance and human rights abuses perpetrated using [Israel’s] NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware.

As laid out in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, NSO Group should urgently take pro-active steps to ensure that it does not cause or contribute to human rights abuses within its global operations, and to respond to any human rights abuses when they do occur. In order to meet that responsibility, NSO Group must carry out adequate human rights due diligence and take steps to ensure that HRDs and journalists do not continue to become targets of unlawful surveillance.

In this Forensic Methodology Report, Amnesty International is sharing its methodology and publishing an open-source mobile forensics tool and detailed technical indicators, in order to assist information security researchers and civil society with detecting and responding to these serious threats.

This report documents the forensic traces left on iOS and Android devices following targeting with the Pegasus spyware. This includes forensic records linking recent Pegasus infections back to the 2016 Pegasus payload used to target the HRD Ahmed Mansoor.

The Pegasus attacks detailed in this report and accompanying appendices are from 2014 up to as recently as July 2021. These also include so-called “zero-click” attacks which do not require any interaction from the target. Zero-click attacks have been observed since May 2018 and continue until now. Most recently, a successful “zero-click” attack has been observed exploiting multiple zero-days to attack a fully patched iPhone 12 running iOS 14.6 in July 2021.

Sections 1 to 8 of this report outline the forensic traces left on mobile devices following a Pegasus infection. This evidence has been collected from the phones of HRDs and journalists in multiple countries.

Finally, in section 9 the report documents the evolution of the Pegasus network infrastructure since 2016. NSO Group has redesigned their attack infrastructure by employing multiple layers of domains and servers. Repeated operational security mistakes have allowed the Amnesty International Security Lab to maintain continued visibility into this infrastructure. We are publishing a set of 700 Pegasus-related domains.

Names of several of the civil society targets in the report have been anonymized for safety and security reasons. Individuals who have been anonymized have been assigned an alphanumeric code name in this report.

To read the full article by Amnesty International 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.

Featured image is from Howie Shia/Amnesty International

All Global Research articles 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 the US-dominated Ukrainian government can confidently chart a mutually beneficial strategic partnership with China in response to feeling betrayed by its American patron following last month’s Biden-Putin Summit, then there’s no reason why the comparatively more independent and much stronger Polish government can’t do the same as well.

Ukraine recently surprised many multipolar-friendly observers, but this time in a pleasant way for once. It withdrew its signature from a politicized United Nations Human Rights Council statement last month that accused China of human rights abuses in Xinjiang, shortly after which it subsequently agreed to strengthen infrastructure cooperation with the People’s Republic in a move that some described as Ukraine agreeing to become China’s “bridge” to Europe. These remarkable developments were likely motivated by how betrayed Ukraine felt by its American patron following last month’s Biden-Putin Summit. It also suggests that if this US-dominated government can confidently chart a mutually beneficial strategic partnership with China despite the ever-intensifying New Cold War, then there’s no reason why the comparatively more independent and much stronger Polish government can’t do the same as well.

Polish-American relations, just like Ukrainian-American ones, are presently experiencing unprecedented strain following the Biden-Putin Summit and the US’ preceding waiver of most Nord Stream II sanctions. Poland’s increasing isolation from the regionally relevant Great Powers of the US, Germany, and Russia – the first two of which are jointly waging a Hybrid War aimed at overthrowing Warsaw’s conservative-nationalist government – has put the Central European leader in a precarious strategic position. The only realistic solution is two-fold, and that’s for Poland to negotiate an informal “non-aggression pact” with Russia in Belarus & Ukraine together with economically pivoting towards China. This would reduce the unnecessary US-provoked pressure along its eastern flank in parallel with showing its transatlantic patron that it has viable alternatives to American and German investment so that they don’t attempt to weaponize this to put further pressure on the ruling party.

There’s never been a better chance for Poland to pursue these solutions. The unexpectedly intensified Chinese-Ukrainian Strategic Partnership will add serious economic substance to the Warsaw-led “Three Seas Initiative” (3SI) for connecting the Adriatic, Baltic, and Black Seas by reducing this transregional network’s dependence on the US and Germany. It could also facilitate pragmatic dialogue with Russia since China might envision the Eurasian Land Bridge (ELB) across its territory as being the preferred means for more directly linking its economy with Ukraine’s. Of course, the People’s Republic could also utilize the “Middle Corridor‘s” South Caucasus infrastructure in Georgia and thenceforth across the Black Sea as a multimodal workaround in the event that Russian-Ukrainian relations remain tense like expected, but this could still be beneficial for Poland since it’ll nevertheless reduce its and the 3SI’s disproportionate economic dependence on the US and Germany.

Observers should also be aware that China’s Great Stone Industrial Park in Minsk is its Belt & Road Initiative’s (BRI) largest such project in Europe. Belarus falls within Poland’s and Russia’s overlapping “spheres of influence”, and its continental-wide economic potential through BRI can’t be fully tapped until the US-backed and Polish-led Hybrid War against its government ends. The proposed Polish-Russian “non-aggression pact” in Belarus and Ukraine could help gradually transition their zero-sum geopolitical competition there to a win-win geo-economic one focused on the concept of “competitive connectivity”, facilitated as it would be by BRI’s leading role in all four of those countries. Belarus and Ukraine could then serve as the convergence point of relevant Polish-Russian interests instead of dividing them further, thus reducing pressure on Poland’s eastern flank and therefore enabling it to concentrate more on thwarting the joint US-German Hybrid War.

With time, the ELB could become more fully developed across all four of their territories, which would lead to the natural creation of an economically sustainable trade zone between them. In other words, BRI might ultimately be responsible for bringing together the Polish-led 3SI and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) through its envisioned role in Belarus and Ukraine. This isn’t political speculation either since such a scenario is nowadays credible after US-dominated Ukraine of all countries bravely resisted its patron’s demands by confidently pioneering a new phase of strategic economic relations with China. If Ukraine could do this, then so too could Poland. In fact, they could even coordinate their complementary efforts in this respect in order to create a new center of economic gravity between them for mutually enhancing their strategic independence with time. All that it’ll take to make this more viable is political will on the part of Poland’s leadership.

*

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

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

While it may appear to be ‘every individual for himself’ in this forever shifting hall of smoke and mirrors called Covid, actually there is a process of coalescence taking place just under the surface which is heralding the emergence of what I term ‘the new resistance’. 

This new resistance is arising as a kick-back against unremitting pressure to conform to a state of engineered chaos and control which has caste the word ‘deception’ into a whole new dimension of toxicity which very few can grasp. 

We are, after all, confronted by a carefully crafted global plan entirely constructed around and upon, abject lies – from beginning to end. The first and foremost of which is to proclaim its objective as ‘saving mankind from a virulent pandemic’ which never existed in the first place. 

So gross is the degree of lie distortion that for the great majority it has proved impossible to consider that it could all be a planned heist whose barely cloaked ulterior motive is a mass depopulation event, long since planned for by the protagonists of A New World Order, now known as ‘The Great Reset’. 

The population reduction plan was given a menacingly seductive twist by attaching it to a ‘green saviour mission’ ostensibly designed to rescue the species from ‘global warming’, a grand deception which started the increasingly perverse ‘lie ball’ rolling some fifty years ago at the Club of Rome.

After one and a half years of relentless Covid ‘plandemic’ propaganda designed to scare the pants off every mortal here on Earth, we have arrived at a confluence of reactions. Those whose imaginations lack the breadth to grasp the depths of the deception and those who have recognised the game for what it is are are now sharing their knowledge and push-back plans with others.

The New Resistance is being formed by the latter grouping, who include amongst their ranks the braver doctors, nurses, lawyers, scientists and a smallish number of artists, who recognise that the very future of life itself is on the line in this macabre war against humanity.

Standing in the way of a grand expose and key legal actions to incarcerate the chief Covid protagonists, are the entire political ‘elite’, royalty, the press, leaders of notorious institutions and banking empires that administer the global policy agenda, a handful of multimillionaires and hundreds of millions of citizens of various countries who prefer to ‘live the lie’ than confront the truth.

It’s The New Resistance’s job to break-through this wall of denial via finding its weak points and instigating actions to publicly expose the criminal activities of the chief protagonists. Those involved in premeditated genocide on an unprecedented scale.

Key to the success of this operation will be the emergence of many more whistle blowers. Those who have inside knowledge and have the guts to come forward and speak openly about it. Already many professional individuals have taken this courageous step and many more are no doubt contemplating doing the same. They should not contemplate long – but step onto the platform and make their voice heard.

With no mainstream media editors daring to break-out of their straight-jacketted conformity with the lie, the job of conveying truth is a challenging one. However, a burgeoning alternative media is making ingress into mainstream territory, and with an emphasis on holding high the flag of rational observation and honest reporting, is bit by bit puncturing the ‘fake news’ wall of deception and indoctrination that has seduced and mind-controlled such a large segment of the global population.

What can each of us do to speed-up the chance of a break-through?

Here is a reminder of direct actions that can be put into effect with minimum cost:

Firstly, and as a general rule, build greater self determination not to cooperate with a system which is intent upon destroying you!

Secondly, practice ‘civil disobedience’ wherever you are being manipulated and coerced into doing something that goes against your deepest instincts of self preservation and belief. Standing firm in what one believes in is the key to all successful resistance movements. 

Thirdly, openly question the law when confronted by authorities who claim you must do this that or the other. The majority of Covid impositions are illegal under key international conventions like The Geneva Convention and the Nuremberg Convention. Use the many excellent websites giving advice on how to stand up for your rights! 

Now I’m listing simple practical actions all of us can engage in immediately:

• Draw upon the mass of high quality evidence now available to produce your own ‘short’ leaflet or newsletter for circulation in your neighbourhood. You can expose the Covid lie and ‘the Great Reset’s’ attempt to introduce a Nazi style central control agenda on humanity as a whole (see this)
• Hammer your parliamentarian/senator by letter or phone. Present him/her with facts about Covid, many of which are actually published on government websites, but ignored by political ‘leaders’ intent upon forcing conformity to the fake agenda.
• Regularly visit places where you can purchase ‘real food’, as much as possible locally and direct from the farmer and definitely avoiding supermarkets. This should be pro-ecological grown/raised foods that respect benign time honoured laws of the land and do not rely on agrichemical poisons and Frankenstein GMO gene engineering. These farmers must get our support if they are to survive and if we are to have access to safe and nourishing food.
• Find a way to start growing your own foods. This is the best of all ways to establish a measure of genuine control of your destiny. 
• Hold gatherings with others who you feel to be receptive to resisting the imposition of deeply antisocial and anti-human regulations in the name of ‘protecting’ your health and welfare – and focus attention on stopping 5G masts being erected in your neighbourhood.
• Join in with existing positive initiatives like marches, ‘meetings in the park’, distribution and displaying of strong messages via posters, stickers and flyers.

You will no doubt have further creative ideas how to form vital cells of resistance and become part of the great push-back whose growing momentum will finally topple the criminal slave drivers who have declared war on humanity and are illegally occupying the seats of power at this time.

Our passion for life will not allow us to simply sit back and passively watch irreplaceable key qualities of life crumbling away right in front of our eyes.

Now is the hour of our common calling to act bravely and collectively for the future of life on Earth. For no one’s life will be worth living if we fail to rise to the task of defeating the heartless agents of genocide holding our world to ransom.

*

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.

Julian Rose is an international campaigner against GMO and 5G, an author and organic farming pioneer. He led the campaign that prevented a ban of unpasteurised milk sales in the UK in 1989 and 1997 and, with his Polish wife Jadwiga Lopata, headed the campaign which led to GMO seeds and plants to be banned in Poland (2006). Julian’s latest book ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind’ has been widely acclaimed and can be purchased via www.julianrose.info

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

People in France who enter a bar or restaurant without a COVID pass face 6 months in jail, while business owners who fail to check their status face a 1 year prison sentence and a €45,000 fine.

Yes, really.

The punishments are part of a draconian effort by the French government to force citizens to get the coronavirus jab amidst multiple unruly protests across numerous major cities.

President Emmanuel Macron announced earlier this week that those unable to prove they’re vaccinated or a negative COVID test (at their own cost) will be banned from using public transport, entering a cinema, shopping mall, bar, cafe, restaurant and other venues from August 1st.

“People unable to present a valid health pass risk up to six months in prison and a fine of up to €10,000 (£8,500), according to the draft text of the law, while owners of “establishments welcoming the public” who fail to check patrons’ passes could go to jail for a year and be hit with a €45,000 fine,” reports the Guardian.

There will soon prison sentences attached to the new French law for vaccine passports.

If you are caught in a restaurant without proof of vaccination, you face up to six months in jail.

The restaurant owner faces up to a year for hosting you.

Does that sound extreme?

— Dr. David Samadi (@drdavidsamadi) July 16, 2021

The sanctions represent the most authoritarian move to force vaccine compliance in the west, and probably outstrip a lot of actual dictatorships in other parts of the world.

The Guardian rather euphemistically describes it as a “big stick approach,” which would be true if that ‘big stick’ were an electric cattle prod the size of the One World Trade Center building in New York.

The government had to withdraw a similar law back in December following numerous riots, but merely re-introduced the same legislation with even tougher punishments for dissenters.

As we previously highlighted, police in Paris used tear gas to disperse demonstrators protesting against the measures in scenes that unfolded in several other major cities throughout the country.

We are now entering the phase of the pandemic where it’s becoming clear that those who refuse to take the vaccine will remain under the most onerous lockdown measures yet in perpetuity.

*

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.

***

Kicking life-saving solutions endlessly down the road is the mark of the brutish power of the corporations over the innocents.

Fifty years ago, medical research warned about the overuse of antibiotics creating mutations of resistant bacterium, making these drugs less effective. Dr. Sidney Wolfe warned about this criminal negligence again and again, along with other colleagues. But the drug companies kept over-promoting to get physicians to over-prescribe. Today, antibiotic resistance takes over 100,000 lives a year just in the U.S. Some bacterium are mutating beyond the ability of medical science to catch up with new more powerful antibiotics to curb new antibiotic resistance bacterium.

Deadly Lag Time.

For decades, starting in the 1970s, at the very least, both the big oil companies and knowledgeable government officials warned about global warming. Exxon’s own scientists sounded the alarm internally as well. Now with little preparedness to move fast from fossil fuels to renewables and conserve energy, the climate crisis is upon the world. Mega storms, floods, wildfires, and rising sea levels threaten everything and everybody. As James Gustave Speth’s forthcoming book, They Knew: The U.S. Federal Government’s Fifty-Year Role in Causing the Climate Crisis, people knew, including the graphic, forecast report in 1993, now forgotten, authored by Bill Clinton and Al Gore who promptly gave the auto industry an eight-year holiday from the regulatory push on fuel efficiency.

Deadly Lag Time.

Great physicians such as Quentin Young, Arnold Relman, Steffie Woolhandler, and David Himmelstein warned of the avoidable casualties and price gouging if we did not enact single-payer universal health insurance. They were ignored. The delay is costing trillions of dollars and about 100,000 lives a year with many more injuries and illnesses for those unable to afford health insurance to get a timely diagnosis and treatment.

Dr. Philip Lee supported a study by Harvard Medical School physicians back in the early 1990s, estimating the huge fatality toll annually from medical malpractice just in hospitals. In 2015, Johns Hopkins medical researchers reported a minimum of 250,000 deaths a year from preventable problems in hospitals excluding clinics and doctors’ offices. The prophets warned, but the power structure, including the media, turned a largely deaf ear.

Deadly Lag Time.

Walter Hang, an environmental scientist, has warned for years about the toxic nature of fluids used in fracking of gas and oil. He and others mobilized people in New York state to persuade Gov. Andrew Cuomo to ban the practice, unlike the increasingly poisoned fracking sites in Pennsylvania and other fracking states. Now we have been told by scientists that a chemical used in the mining breaks down into a toxic giant called PFAS, which they call a “forever” pollutant endangering underground drinking water sources.

Deadly Lag Time.

Over twenty-five years ago, scientists spoke out against the rising epidemic now known as the opioid disaster, promoted by drug companies and their owners like the Sackler family. The government and medical professions dillydallied. Last year, a record 90,000 people died in America from drug overdoses, mostly from opioids.

Deadly Lag Time.

In the 1950s, government scientists reported the connection between cigarette smoking and cancer. In 1964, the annual report by the Surgeon General (launched by Dr. Luther Terry) kept adding to the evidence of diseases from this highly promoted tobacco industry killer. Philip Morris Co., R.J. Reynolds and others kept promoting, denying, deceiving and regularly luring youngsters with free samples near schools. Over 400,000 annual deaths in the U.S. are attributed to smoking-related diseases.

When Congress, the media, and the public health groups started banging the drums in the 1980s, Big Tobacco was put on the defensive year after year. The number of daily smokers declined to under 15% from a high of 42% in 1964. Non-smokers more aggressively demanded smoke-free places and helped mightily to turn the tide. Who remembers the handful of tobacco-use fighters for their courageous and prescient advocacy?

Deadly Lag Time.

Lag time is another phrase for the “democracy gap.” It is the space between what most of the people want and need, and what those same passive people suffer and tolerate.

The same “lag time” bleeds people economically. The federal minimum wage is still frozen by Congress at $7.25 per hour. Many millions of workers are between that number and $15 per hour.

Prof. Malcolm Sparrow of Harvard has led the way in highlighting the many billing frauds in the health care industry that totals $350 billion or more this year alone. His detailed warnings and his classic book, License to Steal: Why Fraud Plagues America’s Health Care System, came out years ago in 1996. Still, a corporate Congress does nothing. The Biden Administration does not ask for necessary money for this area of enforcement, even though $1billion would save over $15 billion from fraudulent billing.

Jake Lewis and Jonathan Brown wrote and spoke about the damaging influence of the Federal Reserve and its Big Bank patrons back in the 60s and 70s. The lag time became worse, especially under Fed Chairman Jerome Powell who studies show has made the super-rich and corporate giants soaked in unearned wealth more rich while expanding the impact of gross inequality against the masses. (See the op-ed by Karen Petrou in the New York Times, July 12, 2021).

New Time Lags are underway. We have been forewarned about Medicare [Dis]Advantage, yet its corporate deceivers continue to devour traditional Medicare (controlling over 40% of Medicare beneficiaries).

Technology seers are warning against the terrible effects on younger people, including children, who will become addicted to Facebook’s rollout of the Oculus or augmented reality goggles. Avaricious Zuckerberg continues to expand his dangerous monopolistic empire.

All those who told us so are largely forgotten, uncelebrated and, if they are still active, hardly getting their calls returned. Is there a more abject sign of a decaying 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.

***

Cuba was rocked by a series of anti-government street protests earlier this week. The U.S. establishment immediately hailed the events, putting its full weight behind the protestors. Yet documents suggest that Washington might be more involved in the events than it cares to publicly divulge.

As many have reported, the protests, which started on Sunday in the town of San Antonio de los Baños in the west of the island, were led and vocally supported by artists and musicians, particularly from its vibrant hip-hop scene.

“For those new to the issue of Cuba, the protests we are witnessing were started by artists, not politicians. This song ‘Patria y Vida’ powerfully explains how young Cubans feel. And its release was so impactful, you will go to jail if caught playing it in Cuba,” said Florida Senator Marco Rubio, referencing a track by rapper Yotuel.

Both NPR and The New York Times published in-depth features about the song and how it was galvanizing the movement. “The Hip-Hop Song That’s Driving Cuba’s Unprecedented Protests,” ran NPR’s headline. Yotuel himself led a sympathy demonstration in Miami.

But what these accounts did not mention was the remarkable extent to which Cuban rappers like Yotuel have been recruited by the American government in order to sow discontent in the Caribbean nation. The latest grant publications of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) — an organization established by the Reagan administration as a front group for the CIA — show that Washington is trying to infiltrate the Cuban arts scene in order to bring about regime change. “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA,” NED co-founder Allen Weinstein once told The Washington Post.

For instance, one project, entitled “Empowering Cuban Hip-Hop Artists as Leaders in Society,” states that its goal is to “promote citizen participation and social change,” and to “raise awareness about the role hip-hop artists have in strengthening democracy in the region.” Another, called “Promoting Freedom of Expression in Cuba through the Arts,” claims it is helping local artists on projects related to “democracy, human rights, and historical memory,” and to help “increase awareness about the Cuban reality.” This “reality,” as President Joe Biden himself stated this week, is that the Cuban government is an “authoritarian regime” that has meted out “decades of repression” while leaders only “enrich themselves.”

Other operations the NED is currently funding include enhancing Cuban civil society’s ability to “propose political alternatives” and to “transition to democracy.” The agency never divulges with whom it works inside Cuba, nor any more information beyond a couple of anodyne blurbs, leaving Cubans to wonder whether any group even vaguely challenging political or societal norms is secretly bankrolled by Washington.

“The State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development, and the U.S. Agency for Global Media have all financed programs to support Cuban artists, journalists, bloggers and musicians,” Tracey Eaton, a journalist who runs The Cuba Money Project, told MintPress. “It’s impossible to say how many U.S. tax dollars have gone toward these programs over the years because details of many projects are kept secret,” he added.

A currently active grant offer from the NED’s sister organization, USAID, is offering $2 million worth of funding to groups that use culture to bring about social change in Cuba. Applicants have until July 30 to ask for up to $1 million each. The announcement itself references Yotuel’s song, noting, “Artists and musicians have taken to the streets to protest government repression, producing anthems such as ‘Patria y Vida,’ which has not only brought greater global awareness to the plight of the Cuban people but also served as a rallying cry for change on the island.”

The hip-hop scene in particular has long been a target for American agencies like the NED and USAID. Gaining popularity in the late 1990s, local rappers had a considerable impact on society, helping bring to the fore many previously under-discussed topics. The U.S. saw their biting critiques of racism as a wedge they could exploit, and attempted to recruit them into their ranks, although it is far from clear how far they got in this endeavor, as few in the rap community wanted to be part of such an operation.

The graphic below shows how much money various artists have received from the US government. Credit | Cuba Money Project

Click here for the full list.

MintPress also spoke with Professor Sujatha Fernandes, a sociologist at the University of Sydney and an expert in Cuban music culture. Fernandes stated:

For many years, under the banner of regime change, organizations like USAID have tried to infiltrate Cuban rap groups and fund covert operations to provoke youth protests. These programs have involved a frightening level of manipulation of Cuban artists, have put Cubans at risk, and threatened a closure of the critical spaces of artistic dialogue many worked hard to build.”

Other areas in which U.S. organizations are focussing resources include sports journalism — which the NED hopes to use as a “vehicle to narrate the political, social, and cultural realities of Cuban society” — and gender and LGBTQ+ groups, the intersectional empire apparently seeing an opportunity to also use these issues to increase fissures in Cuban society.

The House Appropriations Budget, published earlier this month, also sets aside up to $20 million for “democracy programs” in Cuba, including those that support “free enterprise and private business organizations.” What is meant by “democracy” is made clear in the document, which states in no uncertain terms that “none of the funds made available under such paragraph may be used for assistance for the government of Cuba.” Thus, any mention of “democracy” in Cuba is all but synonymous with regime change.

Capitalizing on a battered economy

The protests began on Sunday after a power outage left residents in San Antonio de los Baños without electricity during the summer heat. That appeared to be the spark that led to hundreds of people marching in the street. However, Cuba’s economy has also taken a nosedive of late. As Professor Aviva Chomsky of Salem State University, author of “A History of the Cuban Revolution,” told MintPress:

Cuba’s current economic situation is pretty dire (as is, I should point out, almost all of the Third World’s). The U.S. embargo (or, as Cubans call it, blockade) has been yet another obstacle (on top of the obstacles faced by all poor countries) in Cuba’s fight against COVID-19. The collapse of tourism has been devastating to Cuba’s economy — again, as it has been in pretty much all tourism-heavy places.”

However, Chomsky also noted that it could be a mistake to label all the protestors as yearning for free-market shock therapy. “It’s interesting to note that many of the protesters are actually protesting Cuba’s capitalist reforms, rather than socialism. ‘They have money to build hotels but we have no money for food, we are starving,’ said one protester. That’s capitalism in a nutshell!” Chomsky said.

Eaton was skeptical of the idea that all those marching were in the pay of the U.S. “Certainly, much of the uprising was organic, driven by Cubans who are desperate, poor, hungry and fed up with their government’s inability to meet their basic needs,” he said. Yet there were signs that at least some were not simply making a point about the lack of food in stores or medicines in pharmacies. A number of demonstrators marched underneath the American flag and the events were immediately endorsed by the U.S. government.

“We stand with the Cuban people and their clarion call for freedom,” read an official statement from the White House. Julie Chung, Biden’s Acting Assistant Secretary for U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, added:

Cuba’s people continue to bravely express yearning for freedom in the face of repression. We call on Cuba’s government to: refrain from violence, listen to their citizens’ demands, respect protestor and journalist rights. The Cuban people have waited long enough for ¡Libertad!”

Republicans went much further. Mayor of Miami Francis Suarez demanded that the United States intervene militarily, telling Fox News that the U.S. should put together a “coalition of potential military action in Cuba.” Meanwhile, Florida Congressman Anthony Sabbatini called for regime change on the island, tweeting:

High-ranking communist officials in Cuba should be given an ultimatum now:

Either immediately assist in the transition of government away from communism or be prosecuted and executed thereafter #SOSCuba

— Rep. Anthony Sabatini (@AnthonySabatini) July 12, 2021

The corporate media cheering section

Corporate media were also extremely interested in the protests, devoting a great deal of column inches and air time to the demonstrations. This is extremely unusual for such actions in Latin America. Colombia has been living through months of general strikes against a repressive government, while there have been three years of near-daily protests in Haiti that were almost completely ignored until earlier this month, when U.S.-backed President Jovenel Moïse was assassinated.

The effect of U.S. sanctions was constantly downplayed or not even mentioned in reporting. For example, The Washington Post’s editorial board came out in favor of the protestors, claiming Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel was reacting “with predictable thuggishness…blaming everything on the United States and the U.S. trade embargo.” Other outlets did not even mention the embargo, leaving readers with the impression that the events could only be understood as a democratic uprising against a decaying dictatorship.

This is particularly pernicious because government documents explicitly state that the goal of the U.S. sanctions is to “decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and [the] overthrow of [the] government” — exactly the conditions brewing in Cuba right now. Professor Chomsky noted:

The U.S. embargo/blockade is one (not the only) cause of Cuba’s economic crisis. The U.S. has overtly and continuously said that the goal of the embargo is to destroy Cuba’s economy so that the government will collapse. So it’s not just reasonable, it’s obvious that the U.S. has some kind of hand in this.”

Chomsky also took issue with the media’s explanation of events, stating:

Look at coverage of Black Lives Matter or Occupy Wall Street protests in this country. One thing that we see consistently is that when people protest in capitalist countries, the media never explains the problems they are protesting as caused by capitalism. When people protest in communist or socialist countries, the media attributes the problems to communism or socialism.”

Media were at pains to emphasize how large and widespread the anti-government demonstrations were, insisting that the pro-government counter-demonstrations were smaller in number, despite images from the protests suggesting that the opposite might be true. As Reuters reported, “Thousands took to the streets in various parts of Havana on Sunday including the historic centre, drowning out groups of government supporters waving the Cuban flag and chanting Fidel.”

If this were the case, it is odd indeed that so many outlets used images of pro-government movements to illustrate the supposed size and scope of the anti-government action. The Guardian, Fox News, The Financial Times, NBC and Yahoo! News all falsely claimed a picture of a large socialist gathering was, in fact, an anti-government demo. The large red and black banners emblazoned with the words “26 Julio” (the name of Fidel Castro’s political party) should have been a dead giveaway to any editors or fact checkers. Meanwhile, CNN and National Geographic illustrated articles on the protests in Cuba with images of gatherings in Miami — gatherings that looked far better attended than any similar ones 90 miles to the south.

A ton of corporate media, including the Financial Times, Fox News, The New York Times and The Guardian have used a pic of a PRO-govt rally in Cuba 🇨🇺 to illustrate their articles on anti-government protests, falsely claiming the huge crowds to be on the side of the US. pic.twitter.com/eKo9QJzzeP

— Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) July 13, 2021

Social media meltdown

Social media also played a pivotal role in turning what was a localized protest into a nationwide event. NBC’s Director of Latin America, Mary Murray, noted that it was only when live streams of the events were picked up and signal-boosted by the expat community in Miami that it “started to catch fire,” something that suggests the growth of the movement was partially artificial. After the government blocked the internet, the protests died down.

The hashtag #SOSCuba trended for over a day. There are currently over 120,000 photos on Instagram using the hashtag. But as Arnold August, the writer of a host of books on Cuba and Cuban-American relations, told MintPress, much of the attention the protests was getting was the result of inauthentic activity:

The latest attempt of regime change also has its roots in Spain. Historically, the former colonizer of Cuba plays its role in all major attempts of regime change, not only for Cuba, but also, for example, in Venezuela. The July operation made intensive use of robots, algorithms and accounts recently created for the occasion.”

Within days the #SOSCUBA hashtag generated over 120,000 images on Instagram

August noted that the first account using #SOSCuba on Twitter was actually located in Spain. This account posted nearly 1,300 tweets on July 11. The hashtag was also buoyed by hundreds of accounts tweeting the exact same phrases in Spanish, replete with the same small typos. One common message read (translated from Spanish), “Cuba is going through the greatest humanitarian crisis since the start of the pandemic. Anyone who posts the hashtag #SOSCuba would help us a lot. Everyone who sees this should help with the hashtag.” Another text, reading “We Cubans don’t want the end of the embargo if that means the regime and dictatorship stays, we want them gone, no more communism,” was so overused that it became a meme in itself, with social media users parodying it, posting the text alongside pictures of demonstrations beside the Eiffel Tower, crowds at Disneyland, or pictures of Trump’s inauguration. Spanish journalist Julian Macías Tovar also cataloged the suspicious number of brand new accounts using the hashtag.

Much of the operation was so crude that it could not have failed to be discovered, and many of the accounts, including the first user of the #SOSCuba hashtag, have now been suspended for inauthentic behavior. Yet Twitter itself still chose to put the protests at the top of its “What’s Happening” for over 24 hours, meaning that every user would be notified, a decision that further amplified the astroturfed movement.

Twitter leadership has long displayed open hostility towards the Cuban government. In 2019, it took coordinated action to suspend virtually every Cuban state media account, as well as those belonging to the Communist Party. This was part of a wider trend of deleting or banning accounts favorable to governments the U.S. State Department considers enemies, including Venezuela, China and Russia.

In case you're wondering why Cuba is trending worldwide…pic.twitter.com/pzYae6DNS1

— Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) July 12, 2021

In 2010, USAID secretly created a Cuban social media app called Zunzuneo, often described as Cuba’s Twitter. At its peak, it had 40,000 Cuban users — a very large number for that time on the famously Internet-sparse island. None of these users were aware that the app had been secretly designed and marketed to them by the U.S. government. The point was to create a great service that would slowly start to feed Cubans regime-change propaganda and direct them to protests and “smart mobs” aimed at triggering a color-style revolution.

In an effort to hide its ownership of the project, the U.S. government held a secret meeting with Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, aimed at getting him to invest in the project. It is unclear to what extent, if any, Dorsey helped, as he has declined to speak on the matter. This is not the only anti-government app the U.S. has funded in Cuba. Yet, considering both what happened this week and the increasingly close ties between Silicon Valley and the National Security State, it is possible the U.S. government considers further cloak-and-dagger apps unnecessary: Twitter already acts as an instrument for regime change.

Cuba in perennial crosshairs

By the end of the nineteenth century, the United States had effectively conquered its entire contiguous landmass; the frontier was declared closed in 1890. Almost immediately, it began to look for opportunities to expand westwards into the Pacific — to Hawaii, the Philippines and Guam. It also began looking southwards. In 1898, the U.S. intervened in the Cuban Independence War against Spain, using the mysterious sinking of the U.S.S. Maine as a pretext to invade and occupy Cuba. The U.S. operated Cuba as a client state for decades, until the Batista regime was overthrown in the 1959 revolution that brought Fidel Castro to power.

The U.S. launched a botched invasion of the island in 1961, the Bay of Pigs event driving Castro closer to the Soviet Union, laying the groundwork for the Cuban Missile Crisis the following year. The U.S. reportedly attempted to kill Castro hundreds of times, all without any luck. It did, however, carry out a bitter and protracted terroristic war against Cuba and its infrastructure, including using biological weapons against the island. Along with this came a long-standing economic war, the 60-year U.S. blockade of the island that throttled its development. In addition to this, it has attempted to bombard the Caribbean nation with anti-communist propaganda. TV Martí, a Florida-based media network, has cost the U.S. taxpayer well over half a billion dollars since its creation in 1990, despite the fact that the Cuban government successfully jams the signal, meaning virtually nobody watches its content.

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Cuba was left without its main trading partner, to which it had geared its economy. Without a guaranteed buyer for its sugar, and without subsidized Russian oil imports, the economy crashed. Sensing blood, the U.S. intensified the sanctions. Yet Cuba pulled through the grim time collectively known as the “Special Period.”

After a wave of left-wing, anti-imperialist governments came to power across Latin America in the 2000s, the Obama administration was forced to move towards normalizing diplomatic relations with the island. However, once in office, President Donald Trump reversed these actions, intensifying the blockade and halting vital remittances from Cuban-Americans to the island. Trump advisor John Bolton labeled Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua a “troika of tyranny” — a clear reference to George Bush’s “Axis of Evil” speech, implying that these three nations could expect military action against them soon. In its last days, the Trump administration also declared Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism.

While Biden had intimated that he might turn the U.S. Cuba policy back to the Obama days, he has, so far, done little to move away from the Trump line, his unequivocal endorsement of this week’s actions the latest example of this.

Despite monumental worldwide media coverage, encouragement and legitimation from world leaders, including the president of the United States himself, the recent action petered out after barely 24 hours. In most cases, counter-protests effectively diluted the protests, without the need for repressive forces to be deployed.

The U.S. government can cause economic misery for the Cuban people, but it cannot, it appears, convince them to overthrow their government. “The current events in Cuba constitute in reality the U.S.S. Maine of 2021,” August said. If this really was an attempted color revolution, as August is implying, it was not a very successful one, amounting to little more than a Bay of Tweets.

*

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.

Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.org, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.

Featured image is from OneWorld

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

As protests erupted in Cuba over shortages of basic necessities, the decades-long illegal U.S. blockade on Cuba was no longer a part of mainstream media narratives. In 2020, media focus was on the Cuban contribution to the fight against Covid19 and how, despite the blockade, Cuba had still managed its internationalist approach, while manufacturing its own vaccines. For a brief period, talk about lifting the illegal blockade on Cuba was also part of the international narrative, even as the medical brigades were nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Meanwhile, due to the blockade and Covid19, Cuba’s economy contracted further. Unwaveringly, the U.S. government also continued with its funding of anti-governments groups. Only the U.S. intentions are not democratic, despite what mainstream propaganda disseminates.

In April 1960, a memorandum under the heading “The Decline and Fall of Castro” partly stated, “The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.” Calling for economic deprivation, the memorandum further advocated for action which, “while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”

Given that the U.S. has never relented in its aggressive policy against Cuba, why is the imperialist narrative suddenly excluded from the greater picture of Cubans protesting against the existing shortages on the island. The U.S.’s economic sabotage of Cuba is well documented and for 60 years, the Cuban people have suffered the effects of U.S. foreign policy against the island, particularly when it comes to restrictions on trade. Repeated non-binding UN resolutions to lift the illegal blockade have not wrought any change in this regard. The near unanimous agreement at an international level that the U.S. blockade is harming Cuba is up against imperialist foreign policy, which the mainstream media takes and leaves, depending on which narrative best suits its interests.

U.S. President Joe Biden has not been particularly forthcoming about Cuba until now, biding his time, it seems, until an opportune moment to build upon the Trump administration’s foundations. With Cuba still on the U.S. terror sponsor list, and no effort to rescind any of former U.S. President Donald Trump’s policies on Cuba, Biden is now playing the humanitarian card to foment political unrest.

The White House statement describes Cubans “bravely asserting their fundamental and universal rights.” Undoubtedly so, but not in line with the imperialist designations for the island. If the U.S. has not relented in its repressive tactics against Cuba, there is nothing to suggest that the people would trade one rule of law for another that has sought their downfall, to reconstruct Cuba as the U.S.’s playground reminiscent of the days before the Cuban revolution.

So after upholding Trump’s policies, not to mention the illegal blockade, Biden stated he would be prepared to offer humanitarian aid for Cuba and “to give significant amounts of vaccine” if an international organization would step in. This after Cuban has successfully manufactured its own vaccines which rival both Pfizer and Moderna in terms of efficacy.

Calls for foreign intervention from Cuban dissidents in Miami are adding to the hostility against the island. Would the media think back to the CIA-sponsored assassination attempts on Fidel Castro, and the terror attacks against Cubans, and consider the calls for military intervention in light of decades of failure to bring Cuba under imperialist designs? “We hope that in 2021, President Biden can fix what Kennedy broke in 1961,” Cuban exile Orlando Gutierrez-Boronat stated.

The Miami assumption that military intervention would fix Cuba holds no ground, besides illustrating how, decades after the Bay of Pigs invasion, the interests of the anti-revolution dissidents in Miami are aligned with those of the U.S. The logical step would be for the U.S. to end the blockade and let the Cuban people who have not betrayed the island for the U.S. chart their course.

*

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

Ramona Wadi is an independent researcher, freelance journalist, book reviewer and blogger. Her writing covers a range of themes in relation to Palestine, Chile and Latin America.

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.

***

Exits of Netanyahu & Trump: chance to dial down Mideast tensions?

The Iraqi geopolitical analyst, Ali Fahim, recently said in an interview with The Tehran Times:

“The arrival of [newly elected Iranian President] Ebrahim Raisi at the helm of power gives a great moral impetus to the resistance axis.”

Further, with new administrations in the United States, Israel, and Iran, another opportunity presents itself to reinstate fully the 2015 multilateral nuclear agreement, as well as completely lift the US economic sanctions from Iran.

Let us wait and see after Raisi is in power in August 2021. It is a fact that, since the Trump administration pulled out of the 2015 multilateral nuclear deal, tensions have been on the rise. One can legitimately suspect that the Trump pull out had as its real intentions: first, to provoke Tehran; second to undo one of the only foreign policy achievements of the Obama administration, which was negotiated by John Kerry for the US. The Trump administration also used unfair economic sanctions on Iran as a squeeze for regime-change purposes. This was a complete fiasco: the Islamic Republic of Iran suffered but held together.

As far as military tensions in the region, there are many countries besides Syria where conflicts between Iran-supported groups and US-supported proxies are simmering, or full blown. The US does its work, not only via Israel in the entire region, but also Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in Yemen, and presently Turkey in Syria. Right now conflicts are active in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine, but something could ignite in Lebanon at any time.

Iran views itself as the lead supporter of the resistance movement, not only through its support for regional allies like Hezbollah and Bashar al-Assad, but also beyond the Middle-East, for Maduro in Venezuela. The upcoming Iranian administration does not hide its international ambition. For better or worse, Iran sees itself as a global leader of smaller nonaligned countries that are resisting US imperialism, be it Syria, Yemen, Palestine, Lebanon, or Venezuela. Even though Iran is completely different ideologically, it has replaced the leadership of Yugoslavia’s Tito or Cuba’s Castro. Both were not only Marxists but also leaders of the nonaligned movement during the Cold War, when the US and the USSR were competing to split the world in two. Now the dynamics have shifted because of China’s rising global influence, and the Iran Islamic Republic thinks it has a card to play in this complex geopolitical imbroglio.

In the US, Europe and Gulf States, Raisi has been categorized as a hardliner cleric and judge, but this gives Raisi more power than he will have as president. In Iran, major foreign policy issues are not merely up to the president to decide but a consensus process involving many. In the end such critical decisions are always signed off by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Khamenei has already indicated that he supports going back to the 2015 nuclear deal. During his electoral campaign, Raisi, who is close to Khamenei despite previous opposition, said that if elected he would uphold the 2015 landmark nuclear agreement.

Ottoman empire revival under Erdogan

Turkey’s President, Recep Erdogan, often behaves as a modern day Sultan. He is shrewd and extremely ambitious. He fancies himself to be the global leader, politically and militarily, of Sunny Islam. Under Erdogan, Turkey has flexed its military muscles, either directly or through Syrian proxies, not only in Syria, but also in Libya, as well as in Turkey’s support for Qatar in the small Gulf State’s recent skirmish with Saudi Arabia. Erdogan thinks he now has a card to play in Afghanistan. More immediately and strategically, the serious issue on Erdogan’s plate is called Idlib.

The problem of the pocket of Idlib has to be resolved, and unfortunately, for all the civilian population that has been and will be in the crossfire, it can only be solved by a full-on military operation, with troops from Bashar al-Assad and Russia. Turkey is, of course, adamant about keeping a military presence and influence within Syria to prevent a complete Assad victory. Time will tell, but the war of attrition has to end. For this to happen, Russia has to commit to face Turkey from a military standpoint. If Russia is ready for a direct confrontation with Turkey, then Bashar al-Assad’s troops, and Russian forces bringing mainly logistic and air support, should prevail.

What should make this easier is the fact Erdogan has overplayed his hand for quite some time. This includes his tense relationships with his supposed NATO allies, many of whom, including France, Greece and even Germany, would not mind having him out of NATO altogether.

There are important factors that explain, not only why Erdogan is quite popular with Turks, but also why his position could become precarious. Erdogan is playing on the Turkish nostalgia for the Ottoman Empire.

From one Empire to two others: the Sykes-Picot agreement

To understand better this imperial dynamic, we must go back to the middle of World War I, when the Ottoman Empire was allied with Germany. In 1916, the Sykes-Picot secret agreement effectively sealed the fate of post World War I Middle-East. This British-French agreement, in expectation of a final victory, was a de-facto split of the Ottoman Empire. In the resulting colonial or imperial zones of influence, a euphemism for an Anglo-French control of the region, the British would get Palestine, Jordan, Iraq and the Gulf area, while France would take control of Syria and Lebanon. More than 100 years later, the misery created by this imperialist deal lingers in the entire region, from Palestine, with the 1948 English-blessed creation of the Zionist state of Israel, to Iraq. France put in place two protectorates in Syria and Lebanon, in which the respective populations did not fare much better. Even today, French governments still act as if they have a say in Lebanese affairs.

The weight of history and the nostalgia of 600 years of rule in the Middle-East are why some Turks — especially Erdogan — feel entitled to an intrusive role in the region. The unfortunate story of the Middle-East has been to go from one imperialism to another. With the American empire taking over in the mid-1950s, the only competition during the Cold War became the USSR. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US had carte blanche. It became more blunt about the exploitation of resources, regime-change policies and its role as the eternal champion of the sacred state of Israel. Quickly, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar became the US’ best friends in the Arab world. I have called this alliance between the West, Israel and the oil-rich Gulf states an unholy alliance. It is still at play, mainly against Iran.

Since the collapse of the USSR, the US empire has tried to assert a worldwide hegemony by mainly two different approaches: support of autocratic regimes like those in the Gulf States, or pursuit of regime change policies to get rid of sovereign nations. This is what I have identified as engineering failed states: a doctrine at play in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen. Often, Islam soldiers of fortune — called at first freedom fighters as in Afghanistan, or the so-called Free Syrian Army — have mutated down the line into ISIS terrorists. Once the mercenaries developed independent ambitions, they served a dual purpose: firstly, as tools of proxy wars; secondly as a justification for direct military interventions by the empire and its vassals. Since the US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq the bottom line results have been the same: death and destruction. Tabula rasa of Iraq, Libya and Syria, with countries left in ruins, millions killed, and millions of others turned into refugees and scattered to the winds. The numbers are mind boggling in the sheer horrors they reflect. According to the remarkable non-partisan Brown University Costs of War project, since the start of the US-led so-called war on terror, post September 11, 2001, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere the direct cost in people killed has been over 801,000. So far, the financial burden for US taxpayers has been $6.4 trillion.

Does Erdogan think he can do better than Alexander the Great with Afghans?

Apparently Erdogan’s imperial ambitions reach as far as the land of the Pashtuns. The Taliban already control about 85 percent of Afghanistan. While most NATO troops have either left or are in the process of doing so, Erdogan has volunteered Turkish troops to secure Kabul’s airport. Some in the Middle-East speculate, rightly or wrongly, that Erdogan plans to send to Afghanistan some of his available Syrian mercenaries, like those he has used in Libya. Even if this is rubber stamped by regional powers like Pakistan or Iran, which it won’t be, such a direct or proxy occupation will fail. If Turkish or Syrian mercenaries, or any other foreign proxies for that matter, try to get in the way of the Taliban, they will be shredded to bits.

Does Erdogan think he is a modern day version of Alexander the Great? This is plainly laughable! The Taliban are resuming control of Afghanistan, and that is the reality. Something Afghans agree upon is that they want all occupying foreigners out. This will include Turkish and Syrian mercenaries.

Post Netanyahu Israel: more of the same for Palestinians?

For the Palestinians living either in Gaza or in the occupied territories, one element that has changed in Israel is that Netanyahu is no longer in power. It would be naive to think that the new Israeli administration will be less Zionist in its support for Jewish settlers expanding their occupation of Palestinian land, but we might see a small shift, more like a pause in Israel’s bellicose behavior.

Lebanon on the brink: opportunity for Israel to attack Hezbollah?

Despite Lebanon’s dreadful political and economic situation, Israel would be ill advised to consider any military action. Hezbollah is a formidable fighting force of 70,000 men, who have been battle hardened for almost a decade in Syria. Vis a vis Iran, a direct aggression of Israel is even less likely. With Trump gone, it seems that Israel’s hawks have missed out on that opportunity. Furthermore, it would be borderline suicidal for the Jewish state to open up many potential fronts at once against Hezbollah, Hamas, and Bashar al-Assad’s army. All of them would have the backing and logistic support of Iran.

Once the 2015 nuclear agreement is in force again, with the Biden administration, the tensions in the region should significantly decrease. It is probable that in the new negotiations, Iran will request that all the US economic sanctions, which were put in place by the Trump administration, be lifted.

Neocolonial imperialism: a scourge that can be defeated

One thing about US administrations that has remained constant pretty much since the end of World War II is an almost absolute continuity in foreign policy. From Bush to Obama, Obama to Trump, and now Trump to Biden, it hardly matters if the US president is a Democrat or Republican. The cornerstone of foreign policy is to maintain, and preferably increase, US hegemony by any means necessary. This assertion of US imperial domination, with help from its NATO vassals, can be blunt like it was with Trump, or more hypocritical with a pseudo humanitarian narrative as during the Obama era.

The imperatives of military and economic dominance have been at the core of US policies, and it is doubtful that this could easily change. Mohammed bin-Salman‘s war in Yemen is part of this scenario. Some naively thought MBS would be pushed aside by the Biden administration. The clout of the Saudis remained intact, however, despite the CIA report on the gruesome assassination of a Washington Post journalist in Turkey. All evidence pointed to bin-Salman, but he was not pushed aside by his father. Under Biden, MBS is still Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, and de-facto autocratic ruler. The Saudis’ oil and money still have considerable influence in Washington.

The Saudis understand very well that, since the 1970s, their real geopolitical power has resided in the way they can impact global oil prices. They can still make the barrel price go up or down to serve specific geopolitical interests. For example, recently the Saudis tried to help the US regime change policy in Venezuela by flooding the global market to make oil prices crash. Saudi Arabia and its United Arab Emirates ally have used the black gold as an economic weapon countless times, and very effectively.

The great appetite of the Saudis for expensive weapons systems is another reason why they have a lot of weight in Washington and elsewhere. How can one oppose the will of a major client of the corporate merchants of death of the military-industrial complex?

History will eventually record the 20-year Afghanistan war as a defeat and perhaps the beginning of the end for the US empire that established its global dominance aspiration in 1945. People from countries like Yemen, Palestine, as well as Mali, Kashmir, and even Haiti, who are fighting against an occupation of their lands, respectively, by the imperial little helpers Saudi Arabia, Israel, France, India and the United Nations, should find hope in what is going on in Afghanistan. My News Junkie Post partner Dady Chery has explained the mechanics of it brilliantly in her book, We Have Dared to Be Free. Yes, occupiers of all stripes can be defeated! No, small sovereign nations or tribes should not despair! The 20-year US-NATO folly in Afghanistan is about to end. The real outcome is a victory of the Pashtuns-Taliban that is entirely against all odds. It is a victory against the most powerful military alliance ever assembled in history. Yemenites, Palestinians, Tuaregs, Kashmiris, Haitians and other proud people, fighting from different form of neocolonial occupations, should find inspiration from it. It can be done!

*

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

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, News Junkie Post.

Gilbert Mercier is the author of The Orwellian Empire.

Featured image is from Newsonline