All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

In the aftermath of the special military operation (SMO), the mainstream propaganda machine and the Kiev regime fought bitterly to ensure that the image of “united Ukraine standing in the face of Russian aggression” is spread across the world. The illusion held initially, but it was only a matter of time before this false unity faded away. And that’s precisely what’s happening as the Neo-Nazi junta frontman Volodymyr Zelensky is trying his best to retain power. Namely, Zelensky is trying to seize his “Churchill moment” by using the ongoing conflict as a way to legally stay in power and continue exploiting whatever’s left of Western funding, slated to soon dry out.

His supporters often quote the poll conducted back in February 2023, the results of which can be considered highly questionable, as it showed that “over 90% of Ukrainians were satisfied with his performance”, while 65% allegedly “wanted him to serve another term”. Even in the case these numbers were true at the time (once again, an extremely debatable claim), they certainly wouldn’t have stayed the same (or even close). Since February, the Kiev regime suffered a crushing defeat of its much-touted counteroffensive, losing nearly all of its initiative and resulting in Russia moving from active defense and defense-in-depth to incremental offensive operations.

As a result, factionalism and fault lines within the Neo-Nazi junta were exacerbated exponentially, amplifying its troubles both at home and abroad. The confidence in “victory over Moscow” plummeted, despite Zelensky’s declared “optimism”. His propagandists have tried to push the narrative that criticizing him is supposedly “unpatriotic”, stifling any chance to get accurate information about the situation on the frontlines and in the country itself. Alternative sources are the only way to get bits and pieces of the truth, but using them can be deadly nowadays, as the Kiev regime henchmen are ready to imprison (or worse) anyone they deem “disloyal” or “not loyal enough”.

However, despite all this, Zelensky is still afraid to allow elections even in such a climate. As he became accustomed to having no competitors or critics, Zelensky took his grip on power to the extreme and is actively using the state apparatus against his potential opponents. “Conspiracy theorists” would probably say he’s taking a lesson directly from Joe Biden’s playbook, to paraphrase the favorite propaganda trope used by American and other Western outlets when talking about Vladimir Putin. What’s more, Zelensky is turning on his own backers, as evidenced by Igor Kolomoisky’s arrest back in early September when he was accused of corruption and embezzlement.

When the pompously announced counteroffensive started, Zelensky pledged to “liberate the whole country (including Crimea) from the evil Russians”. Giving such grossly unrealistic promises might have secured short-term political points, but it also drew a wider wedge with the military, because top generals such as Zaluzhny certainly knew that such claims were nothing more than silly fantasies. Thus, Zelensky managed not only to antagonize the military, but also got another strong political opponent, as Zaluzhny’s presidential ambitions might be publicly revealed sooner than expected. In addition, Zelensky’s old rivals are still alive and kicking, ready to reactivate soon.

This includes former president Petro Poroshenko and former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko, both of whom are just waiting for the perfect opportunity to regain power. In addition, the mayor of Kiev, Vitaliy Klitschko, Zelensky’s former adviser, the notorious Oleksiy Arestovych, as well as the GUR chief Kyrylo Budanov all might join the political arena. Arestovych and Budanov can be considered very serious contenders, as both have been (or are still) close to the top echelons of power in Kiev and know all of Zelensky’s weaknesses. They’ll certainly use them against him when the time comes, as the political arena in the country has always been merciless.

Oligarchs, such as the aforementioned Kolomoisky and Rinat Akhmetov are also very likely to try and seize power, if not directly, then through intermediaries. Akhmetov was particularly affected by the SMO, losing much of his wealth that was largely based in the southeast, precisely where the heaviest fighting has been ongoing. However, despite this wealth and power, military leaders are emerging as the richest and most influential figures. Showered with tens (if not hundreds) of billions in Western funding, top generals have accumulated enormous resources that could easily be translated into political power. Many have also built up their reputation as supposed “war heroes”.

This is particularly true for General Zaluzhny, who has been extremely critical of Zelensky and his closest associates. The “unexplained” death of Zaluzhny’s aide might be a message from the presidential cabinet, one that he certainly won’t ignore and that could very well serve as the driving force behind his potential power grab. Zelensky won’t be able to use the conflict to stay in power indefinitely, particularly if recent battlefield defeats are followed by even greater failures and Russian advances, either incremental or massive. The blame game between the politicians and the military might backfire on Zelensky, as Zaluzhny could easily argue that he was denied proper funding.

Given the staggering level of corruption of the Kiev regime, this could be embraced by the people who want someone to be held accountable for hundreds of thousands of casualties. Even before the SMO, Zelensky’s presidency was marred by corruption scandals, which only worsened in the last nearly two years. Either way, the political struggle in Kiev is bound to look more like a hyena fight, particularly when Western funding starts running dry. The situation on the frontlines will further exacerbate this, a fact that Zelensky’s opponents will (ab)use to the maximum. The military might even try to grab power directly, which Zaluzhny might use as a shortcut to take the presidency.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Credit Image: © Ukraine Presidency/Ukraine Presi/Planet Pix via ZUMA Press Wire

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The first week in December of this year was all about America’s apparent inextinguishable love for the state of Israel. After a short pause to exchange hostages for prisoners, the Israelis re-launched their drive to exterminate the Gazans and steal what remains of their land and property. President Joe Biden, ably assisted by his ever-present sidekick State Department honcho Antony Blinken, welcomed the Jewish state’s onslaught by pushing the pedal to the metal on aiding the loveable Bibi Netanyahu while at the same time suggesting that the twenty thousand dead Palestinians and counting just might be a tad too much.

Of course, the suggestion was limited to demonstrating what a great humanitarian, who is up for reelection, now sits in the Oval Office and was not supported by any real consequences for Israel should it ignore the advice, which it did.

Biden then demonstrated where his heart truly was by expediting through the State Department a new shipment of munitions, an apparent gesture that keeps on giving to help the war effort, with some reports suggesting that upwards of two hundred US military aircraft have already made deliveries of more than 15,000 bombs to help Bibi kill more Pals.

The decision to provide more weapons to Israel coincides with a recommendation from Jerusalem’s right wing deputy mayor that captured Palestinians, whom he described as subhuman, should be buried alive, which elicited no comment from the White House. The Administration explained the rush delivery of the tank cannon munitions circumventing established congressional review procedures by saying that Israel urgently required the materiel to defend itself and that complying with Israeli demands is “vital to US national interests.”

A State Department press release described the unusual procedure as having been “determined and provided [with] detailed justification to Congress that an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale to the Government of Israel of the above defense articles and services in the national security interests of the United States, thereby waiving the Congressional review requirements under Section 36(b) of the Arms Export Control Act, as amended. The United States is committed to the security of Israel, and it is vital to US national interests to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives. Israel will use the enhanced capability as a deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defense.”

As Hamas has no heavy weapons and it is not occupying or penetrating into Israeli territory, the explanation would appear to be more in the nature of another government “big” lie, somewhat similar to Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech before the UN in 2003 affirming that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was preparing to use them. And it also challenges those who believe the United States is making an honest effort to reduce casualties among civilians.

Josh Paul, the former State Department official who resigned to protest the provision of American weapons for use against the people of Gaza, reacted to the news with “…this expedited provision of lethal arms to Israel should cause some serious consideration of whether the secretary’s repeated assertions that the US seeks to minimize civilian casualties in Israel’s operation in Gaza are sincere.”

So, what made the first week in December different than any other in which the White House looks the other way and gives Netanyahu whatever he wants while Israel kills and kills and kills? Well, there was also more going on than just the provision of thirteen thousand nine hundred eighty-one (13,981) 120mm M830A1 High Explosive Anti-Tank Multi-Purpose with Tracer (MPAT) tank cartridges, worth a paltry $106.5 million.

There was also a bit of bother at the United Nations, where a motion came to a vote that would have demanded an immediate ceasefire in Gaza to permit negotiations to end the genocide that Israel is pursuing to end the Palestinian problem forever.

The motion had been endorsed earlier in the week, by UN Secretary-General António Guterres, who invoked a rarely used article of the UN Charter to urge the Security Council to “press to avert a humanitarian catastrophe” and pass a resolution for a “humanitarian cease-fire between Israel and Palestinian militants.” Guterres warned that the civilian death toll was approaching what he described as an “apocalyptic” level due to the bombing of infrastructure, starvation and disease. He called for the UN Security Council to stop the killing in Gaza as a basic responsibility under the UN Charter. Each day, UN officials on the ground in Gaza heroically struggled to feed, shelter, and protect the population from Israeli bombs and more than 100 UN staff have been killed, a higher death toll than for any other operation ever.

The motion would have passed unanimously but for one little problem: the United States vetoed it, clearly acting under orders from Netanyahu, who later thanked Biden. The final vote was 13 to 1 with Britain abstaining and not voting. Blinken defended the move on the Sunday talk shows, saying that Israel’s effort to eliminate Hamas was a “legitimate goal.” He added that “When it comes to a cease-fire in this moment, with Hamas still alive, still intact, and again, with the stated intent of repeating October 7th again and again and again, that would simply perpetuate the problem.”

The US deputy representative to the UN Robert Wood, clearly acting under orders from the White House and State Department, explained his veto vote, saying that “…the resolution’s authors declined to condemn Hamas’ October 7th attack that killed 1,200 people, including women, children and elderly.” Wood added that the draft also “failed to acknowledge that Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorism.” Israeli Ambassador to the US Gilad Erdan thanked the White House “for standing firmly by our side.”

Frustrated by the US veto in the Security Council, on December 12th the UN General Assembly voted on the same resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Israel/Gaza conflict. The result was an overwhelming Yes: 153; No: 10; Abstain: 23. The US was again a “no” vote, together with Israel and the usual “associated” south Pacific island territories and Austria, Papua New Guinea, the Czech Republic, Guatemala, Liberia and Paraguay . The vote took place at an “emergency special session” under a “Uniting for Peace” resolution introduced when the Security Council fails to act due to the veto of a permanent member, and there have been legal arguments made that such votes, like Security Council votes, can be construed as legally binding. Of course, that may be viewed as irrelevant, since Israel has rarely if ever complied with any UN resolution that it opposed, whether of the “binding” variety or not, and also since Israel’s effective control of the US government has guaranteed that its defiance will not produce any adverse consequences.

It was, reportedly, the forty-fifth time that Washington has used its veto to protect the state of Israel in the UN, which is why the Jewish state has never been held accountable for anything. Nor has the United States, which has started more wars against countries that did not actually threaten it than anyone else since the founding of the UN and, presumably, it could always use its veto to block such a motion against itself. The result is that the United Nations Security Council only exists to take action against countries that are not one of the permanent members of the Council or against Israel, which is protected by Washington.

One would think that all of the above would constitute a far above average week from hell, but there’s more, including yet another sustained attack on freedom of speech being mounted by politicians, the media and Jewish billionaires to block all and any criticism of Israel. The attacks started several months ago when students at a number of public and private universities began protesting over Israel’s deliberate targeting of civilians, leading to a death toll that is almost certainly currently approaching or exceeding 20,000 when all the corpses are dug up from the rubble of bombed buildings. Some politically ambitious scumbags like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis immediately declared that pro-Palestinian student groups were “antisemites” and banned them from Florida state universities while also declaring that no Palestinian refugees should be admitted to the US because they too were “Jew haters.”

As the anti-Palestinian narrative took shape in political, media and Zionist circles, it adopted a familiar line, which goes something like this: Israel is the Jewish state. If you criticize the Jewish state and/or Zionism you are therefore by definition an antisemite. Antisemitism is a “hate crime.” If you advocate or argue for any Palestinian group like Hamas, which the US government has labeled “terrorist,” you are providing “material assistance to terrorism” which is a crime for which you can be fined or imprisoned. Even if you merely criticize Jewish groups supporting Israel you are likewise an antisemite and have committed a “hate crime.” Neat, isn’t it? and the end result is that Israel, which is immune from the consequences of its actions internationally, also increasingly cannot be criticized at all without serious consequences for the critic. In other words, freedom of speech in the United States only exists, insofar as it does, if you are not disparaging Israel or even its friends due to their demonstrable behavior.

Some of those consequences were experienced recently by three presidents of prominent American universities, responding to a congressional grilling that was set up by allegations that colleges are hotbeds of antisemitism and are responsible for major increases in incidents targeting Jews. There is a certain irony in the allegations since Jews in America are the wealthiest, best educated, most politically powerful, most prestigiously employed and most protected by Homeland Security of all ethno-religious groups. And there is not much real evidence that Jews are in any way increasingly “victims” in the United States or in Europe. The antisemitic incidents that are “surging” are frequently based on criticisms of what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians and often consist of a Jewish college student being offended or annoyed by a poster or a speaker criticizing Israeli behavior. Instances of actual physical confrontation are few and far between and are immediately reported in the accommodating mainstream media to heighten the sense that Jews in America and even worldwide are threatened. Certain groups like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) are heavily into the promotion of the narrative of Jew hatred as it is in their bottom line to do so given their donor base which likes to hear exactly that. In other words, it is all largely a contrivance to obtain political and economic benefits as well as a free pass on bad behavior that might not otherwise be forthcoming.

The three university presidents, all of whom were women, represented Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania and MIT and all three were highly respected in their respective professions prior to their presidencies. They did not anticipate New York Republican Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, a Jewish Harvard product, who was out to nail them and make the case that academia hates Jews and is encouraging antisemitism. Stefanik was backed up by Jewish oligarchs who have threatened to sharply cut donations to the respective universities that do not toe the line, doing what Jews are often accused of doing, i.e. using their money and the power that it buys to stop all discussion on subjects that they find troubling.

Stefanik and company were particularly incensed by student pro-Palestinian demonstrators chanting “Intifada” and “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” She interpreted both expressions being calls for the destruction of Israel, which they are not. Intifada is “shaking off” in Arabic and is a call for liberating the Palestinian people and their land from the Israeli tyranny. The “river to sea” is somewhat similar, a call for a Palestinian state with actual sovereignty and neither is an explicit call for killing Israelis or Jews. They are generic cries for freedom. Stefanik curiously, though not surprisingly, did not mention the concurrent actual demands by senior Israeli government officials to displace or kill all Palestinians, something that they actually have the power to do and which might be regarded as a threat.

The university presidents were pilloried by congress, the White House, the Israel Lobby and the media by refusing to label all criticisms of the Zionist project and Israeli behavior as unacceptable “free speech” and through their assertion that the meaning of political slogans often depends on the context. For something or someone to qualify as a source of harassment, which is forbidden at the colleges in question, there has to be a direct threat made to another person. When that is present, it is harassment. When it is not, it is protected speech on a university campus, even if it is critical of group behavior or even racist. That is as it should be.

And if you thought that the week’s nastiness ended there, you would be wrong. There was also some disgraceful action during the week from Congress which rejected a Senator Rand Paul motion to withdraw US troops from Syria by a vote of 13 votes in favor and 84 votes against. Ironically, on the same day December 7th, Pearl Harbor Day, US bombers committed a war crime in killing 36 Syrian villagers in retaliation for a series of attacks on US bases. American soldiers are in Syria illegally basically to bring down the legitimate government of Bashar al-Assad, though they claim it is to confront ISIS terrorists. They are also sitting on Syria’s oil producing region and stealing the oil. Both Syria and neighboring Iraq would like to see the “Yankees go home” but the Pentagon alleges that the attacks on the bases have been carried out by groups affiliated with Iran, Washington and Israel’s prime enemy in the region, so the White House has decided that killing Syrian farmers is justifiable reciprocity. Meanwhile, Israel is bombing Syrian airports in Damascus and Aleppo on a regular basis, arguing that they are being used by the Iranian military and Revolutionary Guards.

During the week the Congress also passed a motion which partly explains why US foreign policy in the Middle East region is so incoherent. Congress declared by way of a GOP drafted and backed resolution that antizionism is to be considered antisemitism by a vote of 311 to 14, drawing the support of all but one Republican. Ninety-two Democrats voted “present” — not taking a position for or against the measure — while 95 supported it, paving the way for more hate crime persecutions and increasing legal liabilities for critics of Israel. Antizionism is, of course, not antisemitism as Zionism is a political movement and Judaism is a religion. In fact, many religious Jews reject the idea of a Jewish state and many secular Jews are currently active and even prominent in the humanitarian protests against Israel’s massacre of the Gazans.

Finally, the week also saw presentations by Biden and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, both of whom explained their view of why Congress must pony up multiple billions of dollars for Ukraine. Biden warned explicitly and almost certainly incorrectly that “If Putin takes Ukraine, he won’t stop there. We’ll have something that we don’t seek and that we don’t have today: American troops fighting Russian troops.” Austin doubled down on the warning, telling members of Congress that he will send “your uncles, cousins, and sons to fight Russia if aid to Ukraine is not approved.” Biden and Austin’s delusion centers on a presumption that Russia’s Vladimir Putin will move to reconstruct the Soviet Union by taking the Baltic states, which are NATO allies, after he gobbles up Ukraine. It is a scare tactic based on no evidence whatsoever and Russia does not even have the desire or ability to take all of Ukraine, let alone recreate the USSR, which its leadership clearly recognizes. Fortunately, few in Washington and Europe have been buying the bullshit and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, who made a surprise visit to Biden a few days later to plead for money, went home basically empty handed.

There probably is still more from that action packed week if I dig a bit deeper, but I am sure that readers get the point. It was a disastrous week for genuine United States’ interests and I don’t see anything that benefits the average American, quite the contrary. But this has been the pattern for a whole series of US administrations that have unfortunately done their best to destroy the United States as it once was along the lines of George W. Bush’s pledge to be the new sheriff in town ready and willing to engage in warfare against the whole world. Who will rid us of these monsters or are they too deeply entrenched in the system to be removed? That is the real question.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch

***

Bisan Owda, a 25-year-old journalist from Gaza, recently expressed a bleak outlook: ‘I no longer have any hope of survival…I am certain that I will die in the next few weeks or maybe days.’ Bisan’s harrowing sentiment reflects the dangerous reality journalists face, risking their lives to expose the brutal truths obscured by the fog of war.

Bisan and other Palestinian reporters, such as Motaz, another courageous photojournalist from the Deir al-Balah refugee camp, stand as unsung heroes amid a devastating genocide. Bisan, tearfully acknowledging the imminent danger she faces, and Motaz transitioning from documenting to surviving underscore the extraordinary courage of Palestinian journalists determined to unveil the truth.

In contrast, mainstream Western media, epitomized by The New York Times, presents a stark disparity. Instead of amplifying the voices of individuals like Bisan and Motaz, major publications propagate a narrative that perpetuates misinformation and greenlights the ongoing tragedy.

The toll in Gaza is staggering—over 20,000 lives lost, including nearly 10,000 innocent children. Amidst the ruins of homes and the echoes of airstrikes, it becomes clear that the valiant efforts of these journalists serve as our only window into the extent of this horror.

Regrettably, The New York Times is failing to report the situation accurately. Its persistence in publishing misleading information not only aids in spreading propaganda but also follows a historical pattern. The current reporting echoes the publication’s prior engagement in a misinformation campaign preceding the U.S. invasion of Iraq, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. The New York Times is failing an open-notes test it has taken many times.

Notably, instead of reporting on the confirmed cases of genocide, the New York Times seems fixated on fake controversies sparked by controversial lawmakers such as Rep. Elise Stefanik (R–N.Y.) that feed into the false idea that supporting Palestinians and demanding an end to the genocide is antisemitic. This type of reporting creates a false sense of danger and weaponizes people into rejecting the Palestinian struggle as the human rights issue it is.

As the Israeli military intensifies its attack on Gaza, the urgency for accurate reporting becomes paramount. Netanyahu’s unwavering pursuit of genocidal goals, evidenced by the bombing of schools, hospitals, and UN buildings, demands unfiltered attention. Strikingly, Israeli leaders have laid bare their intentions for ethnic cleansing through genocide, yet U.S. media remains conspicuously silent.

The betrayal of journalists like Bisan, Motaz, and countless others who put their lives on the line becomes even more egregious when juxtaposed with The New York Times’ failure to uphold journalistic standards. It is no longer a matter of misguided reporting; it is the perpetuation of a historical pattern that prioritizes profit and imperialism over truth and justice.

Western media has the potential to be a catalyst for change. We have seen the impact of unfiltered reporting during the Vietnam War when journalists chose to reveal the truth, irrespective of government constraints. There are the equivalents of the Tet Offensive and the My Lai Massacre currently being in Gaza by Israel. Any reporting by Western media that doesn’t center its context around that is a disservice to humanity.

News reporting, at its core, should be about saving lives. Instead, influential publications opt to provide manufactured consent for violence and oppression, holding the line for war criminals while the atrocities unfold in real-time. In doing so, this makes publications like the New York Times complicit in the ongoing genocide in Palestine, mixing the blood of innocent Palestinians with that of those murdered in Iraq twenty years ago—shame on the New York Times and 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.

Nour Jaghama is CODEPINK’s Palestine and Iran Campaigner. 

Melissa Garriga is the communications and media analysis manager for CODEPINK. She writes about the intersection of militarism and the human cost of war. She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The problem isn’t ‘global inaction’ to prevent mass atrocities, as the Guardian claims. It’s intense US and UK support for atrocities so long as they bolster their global power

Declassified UK – 11 December 2023

How do politicians, diplomats, the media and even the human rights community keep us politically ignorant, docile and passive – a collective mindset that prevents us from challenging their power as well as the status quo they benefit from?

The answer: By constantly misrepresenting reality to us and their own role in shaping it. And they do it so successfully because, at the same time, they gaslight us by flaunting the pretence that they crave to make the world a better place – a better place where, in truth, the unspoken danger is that, were those advances to be realised, their own power would be severely diminished.

A perfect illustration of how this grand deception works was provided in a report at the weekend in the supposedly progressive Guardian newspaper, headlined “World faces ‘heightened risk’ of mass atrocities due to global inaction”.

The opening paragraph reports that human rights activists fear the “international community has given up on intervention efforts to stop mass atrocities, leading to fears that such occurrences may become the norm around the world”.

In practice, this “failure”, according to the report, has manifested in an abandonment by western states of the principle of R2P – or “responsibility to protect”. This principle and related “humanitarian” pretexts were used to justify the US and its allies meddling since the 1990s variously in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, with disastrous consequences.

Millions were killed as a result of R2P-type interventions and tens of millions displaced, leading to mass movements of people that are seen today by western states in terms of an “illegal immigration threat”.

Sustained massacre

The context for the human rights community’s concerns, we are told, are growing abuses of the Genocide Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Both were adopted in the immediate wake of the second world war to prevent a repeat of the Nazi holocaust and widespread atrocities committed against civilians on both sides of the fighting.

One might have assumed, at this point, that such fears have been heightened – resulting in their being raised at the United Nations – by the most egregious genocide of modern times: the sustained massacre over two months of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and the wanton destruction of the vast majority of their homes to drive the survivors out of Gaza and into Egypt.

More than 18,000 Palestinians are known to have been killed by Israel so far, most of them women and children. More than 100,000 homes have been made uninhabitable. Some 2.3m Palestinians have been herded into a tiny, ever shrinking space, close to the border with Egypt, denied water, food, and fuel.

This combined act of genocide and ethnic cleansing is the most intense, visible and industrial – using the very latest and most powerful weaponry available – in living memory.

But extraordinarily, that does not appear to be the central concern of the “international community”. According to the Guardian, the following are the global crises primarily driving a steep rise in atrocities:

“The mass killing of civilians in Syria and Ukraine, and the internment of over a million Uyghurs and other Muslims in China, have been followed by war crimes in Ethiopia, and a resumption of ethnic cleansing in Sudan’s Darfur province, 20 years after the start of the genocide there.”

Notice anything significant about this list? It comprises only mass atrocities being committed by those not firmly within the US imperial sphere of subservience.

The mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza, which has been in the headlines for many weeks, cannot be credibly overlooked. So it is mentioned – but notice how the spotlight is sharply directed away from the present, highly pertinent events in Israel and Palestine. The genocide in Gaza, which has driven many millions of protesters on to the streets across Europe and North America, becomes an afterthought:

“The 7 October Hamas killing of 1,200 Israelis, mostly civilians, and the consequent Israeli invasion of Gaza, in which women and children have accounted for most of the estimated 16,000 dead, have added to the bloody chaos.”

Manifold deceptions

The deceptions here are manifold, and not just because Gaza ought to be top of the list of concerns, not at the bottom.

The formulaic framing in this paragraph is designed – as ever in western reporting – to create a false equivalence between Hamas’ actions and Israel’s, and engender a sense that Israel’s mass slaughter of Palestinians is caused, and excused, by Hamas’ preceding mass slaughter of Israelis.

It should hardly need restating that Hamas’ breakout of the prison that is Gaza – and its predictably dire consequences – was preceded by decades of Israeli military abuses of Palestinians under military occupation and an illegal 16-year siege of their territory depriving more than 2 million people of their freedom, basic rights and dignity.

There has been a constant, slow-motion atrocity in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem for decades – long before the human rights community, the UN and the Guardian raised their new concerns about “a heightened risk of atrocity crimes”.

There is, too, a clear difference between the exceptional, one-off violence Hamas was able to wreak on October 7 because of dramatic and unexpected failures in Israel’s surveillance and control of the Palestinian population in Gaza and Israel’s intensification of the structural violence of a decades-long occupation and siege.

These, all too obviously, are not the same things – and they do not pose even vaguely comparable threats to the status of the Genocide Convention and Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

To suggest otherwise – as all western reporting does constantly – is to exaggerate the threat posed to international law by the atrocities committed by Hamas and dramatically underplay the significance of Israel’s genocide and ethnic cleansing.

Weapons testing lab

But there is a far deeper problem with the framing of these concerns. The critical problem is not “global inaction” over mass atrocities. It is the opposite: intense western – chiefly US – support for, and complicity in, such atrocities.

This problem is highlighted only too clearly by events in Gaza. Which is precisely why it is included reluctantly, and only as an afterthought, in the list of threats to international humanitarian law. The US is not helpless in the unfolding genocide. It is actively facilitating it. In fact, Israel’s genocide and ethnic cleansing would be impossible without not just US collusion but active participation.

The mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza is occurring because the US has supplied many of the heavy-duty bombs razing Gaza’s high-rises and killing its children.

The slaughter is occurring because the US has sent warships to the region to intimidate neighbouring Arab states and militant groups into remaining quiet as Gaza’s civilians are murdered.

Lebanon’s Hezbollah, for example, is quite capable of ending “global inaction”, by engaging Israel militarily and drawing Israeli firepower away from Gaza. But no one in the “international community” presumably wants that kind of “action”.

The mass slaughter in Gaza is occurring because the US used its veto at the UN Security Council last Friday to block a ceasefire.

It is occurring because the US has funded the Iron Dome missile interception system that stops Hamas being able to fire rockets on Israeli communities – mirroring on a tiny scale Israel’s destruction in Gaza – to raise the political pressure in Israel for a ceasefire.

The slaughter is occurring because Washington has for decades propped up Israel’s military with the bulk of the US overseas aid budget, and let Israel use the Palestinian territories as a profitable laboratory for testing new weapons systems, surveillance techniques and cyber technology.

Peace talks blocked

The problem here is most definitely not “inaction”. It is that the US picks and chooses when and how it wants to be active in creating, sustaining and ending conflicts around the globe.

Noticeably absent from the list of concerns about the spread of atrocities is the suffering of Yemen, where Saudi Arabia has been waging a genocidal war for years. On average, four Yemeni children have been killed or maimed each day over the past eight years by Saudi atrocities.

Why is Yemen overlooked? Because factions there are seen as allies of Iran and therefore enemies of the West whose lives count for nothing. Because Riyadh is a critically important US ally and supplier of oil. And because the US and Britain have been arming the Saudis to the hilt to commit the genocide there.

Similarly, in Ukraine. The vast majority of the casualties on both sides of the fighting might have been avoided if peace talks had not been blocked by the US and Britain in the first weeks after Russia’s invasion.

It was that “action” and others – such as the threatening expansion of Nato to Russia’s borders and the West’s flooding of Ukraine with weapons on the false promise that Nato would have Kyiv’s back – that ensured nearly two years of war and its tragic death toll.

As with Gaza, the problem has not been inaction, it’s been far too much action from the US and its lapdogs in Europe of the very kind designed to assist in slaughter and genocides.

‘You must obey’

There is, however, a reason why the “international community” is raising concerns about “atrocity crimes” now, while downplaying or denying the worst possible atrocity crime – genocide – in Gaza.

And that is because Hamas’ attack on Israel on October 7 signifies a dangerous moment for western domination of the so-called “global, rules-based order”. The concern is not really about a rise in mass atrocities. The West is just fine with atrocities when it commits them or it helps others carry them out.

It is about the West’s increasing difficulty of keeping the rest of the world weak, intimidated and subdued through the use of its own atrocities. US military failures in Afghanistan, Syria and Ukraine – and the growing self-assurance of Russia and China – are marking out new limits to Washington’s supremacy.

The truth is that Hamas’ attack on Israel – horrific as its consequences were – served as a signpost to a different future for many of those who have lived for decades under the thumb, or more often the boot, of the US and its allies. They see that it is possible, even as an oppressed, weak, abused party, to give the bullying global hegemon and its sidekicks a bloody nose.

What is seen by privileged, complacent westerners purely in terms of senseless, barbaric violence is understood by others as a slave revolt – as an “I am Spartacus” moment.

Which is why, just as happened after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, so much of the rest of the world is failing to join the West in its self-righteous chorus of outrage and condemnation. They view these professions of indignation as pure hypocrisy.

It is the reason, too, why the US is being so indulgent as Israel goes about its genocidal rampage in Gaza. The importance for Washington is not stopping Israel’s atrocities but making sure Israel reasserts its famed “deterrence” to provide a lesson to those who might be inspired to wage their own slave revolt.

In front of the cameras, the Biden administration is calling for restraint and urging Israel to minimise civilian casualties. But behind the scenes, it is carefully calibrating just how much savagery Israel needs to unleash to send the right message to the non-Western world: You cannot win. You must obey.

*

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 button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

World Economic Forum recently announced the theme for their annual meeting in Davos in January 2024.[1] This time it is about “rebuilding trust”. This also happens to be the theme of the United Nations 78th General Assembly that opened September 5 2023.[2]

I say good luck with those ambitions! Klaus Schwab and his army of “change agents” have never scored high on the popularity charts, and his achievements of the recent years haven’t exactly improved that.

This is a project that will likely have about the same chances of success as Jack Skellingtons hijacking of Christmas in Tim Burton’s classic movie Nightmare Before Christmas.

The aim is to “restore collective agency, and reinforce the fundamental principles of transparency, consistency and accountability among leaders”.

This is the old worn out mantra of working together as a unit to solve the many crises that sweeps the world. A more fitting description would be:

Unite the psychopaths of the world to solve problems of their own making with the help of more centralised power and control.

The goal is “to help connect the dots in an increasingly complex environment and provide foresight by introducing the latest advances in science, industry and society”.

Foresight is the latest catch word among the world leaders. A futuristic concept about gaining knowledge about, and controlling the times ahead with an “Earth Macroscope”.

Earth Macroscope, Digital Citizenship, World Government Summit

That means no more hiding (or breathing)! Very much like Stings lyrics to the song “Every breath you take” by The Police:

Every breath you take and every move you make, Every bond you break, every step you take, I’ll be watching you – Every single day, every word you say, Every game you play, every night you stay, I’ll be watching you

The meeting in Davos with “over 100 governments, all major international organizations and the Forum’s 1000 partner companies as well as civil society leaders, foremost experts, young changemakers, social entrepreneurs and the media” will serve as an arena to further these megalomaniacal goals.

All is a part of the ongoing agenda to restructure the global governance system that started with The Great Reset in 2020, and is connected to simultaneous processes in the United Nations and the Group of Twenty (G20) that lead up to next years Summit of the Future and the signing of the “Pact for the Future”.

A pact with who?

I can hear the characteristic voice of Dan McCafferty in Nazareths “Sold my Soul”:

I prayed to God and Jesus but I guess they didn’t hear. My sacrifice was useless, my pleas fell on deaf ears. So I cried in desperation, bowed to evil sorcery…I sold my soul, sold my soul – I sold my soul to the Devil…

This will further the rolling out of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and its futuristic management techniques.

The meeting in Davos will be organised around four subjects:

  1. Achieving Security and Cooperation in a Fractured World.
    How to effectively deal with security crises, such as in the Middle East.
  2. Creating Growth and Jobs for a New Era
    How government, business and civil society can come together around a new economic framework.
  3. Artificial Intelligence as a Driving Force for the Economy and Society
    How AI can be used for the benefit all.
  4. A Long-Term Strategy for Climate, Nature and Energy
    How to develop a long-term systemic approach to achieve a carbon-neutral world by 2050.

Psychopaths of the World United!

The last point on the WEF-agenda is a red hot topic as a new climate deal was signed at the Climate Summit (COP28) in Dubai, December 13. The negotiating parties have now “recognized” the need for:

Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, so as to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science.

A major topic will be how Artificial Intelligence can help to achieve this goal.

World Economic Forum recently started the AI Governance Alliance, including Microsoft, Google, IBM, Meta and the United Nations Envoy on Technology, with the mission to design global “responsible, transparent and inclusive” AI that is “harnessed for the betterment of society while upholding ethical considerations and inclusivity at every step”.

AI as a solution to climate related challenges was also recently discussed at COP28 as well as at the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting of the Global Future Councils in October.

Both these meetings were held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The global elites’ futuristic world capital in the Middle East, which serves as a playground for the transhumanist alchemists that summons their desired sci-fi future at the annual World Governments Summit every February.

The irony is that the fossil free future was discussed in a country built with revenues from oil and gas. It is like letting the pyromaniacs take charge of the fire brigade. It is safe to say that few of the 70 000 COP28 attendees arrived to the Persian Gulf with sailing ships.

As shown in my book Rockefeller – Controlling the Game, the climate agenda is largely constructed with the willing assistance of Big Oil “environmentalists” like The Rockefellers (Standard Oil), Robert O. Anderson (ARCO) and Maurice Strong (Petro Canada).

These culprits and their contemporary heirs know that this world would collapse without oil and gas and have other aims with the climate agenda and their “sustainable transformation”. They want an inventory of all the worlds carbon emissions (global stocktake) in order to efficiently manage them with the Earth Macroscope. All with a little help from their All-seeing Eye (AI).[3]

Global Energy Trends: Insights From The 2023 Statistical Review Of World Energy

At WEFs October-meeting the AI-expert Azeem Azhar (Chief Executive Officer of Exponential View), said that AI can be a force for good in the world but added that the outcome depends on who’s the controller.

If control of infrastructure is power and control of the interface is power. Those who control AI will be powerful.[4]

This closely resembles Klaus Schwab’s State of the World Adress from this year’s World Government Summit where he proclaimed: “who masters those technologies will in some way, be the masters of the world.”

Has the time come to externalize the trustees of the “material universe for future generations”? The Master(s) of Puppets:

Master of puppets, I’m pulling your strings
Twisting your mind and smashing your dreams
Blinded by me, you can’t see a thing
Just call my name, ’cause I’ll hear you scream
Master, master…

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Notes

[1] www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/12/davos-2024-what-to-expect-and-whos-coming/

[2] www.un.org/pga/77/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2023/07/Letter-from-President-elect-of-the-78th-session-of-the-United-Nations-General-Assembly-Theme-for-the-78th-session-of-the-United-Nations-General-Assembly.pdf

[3] unfccc.int/topics/global-stocktake/information-portal

 

[4] www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/10/ai-force-for-good-amgfc-dubai-uae-gfc23/

 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

I have covered previously the well-documented strategy of the Israeli Netanyahu regime to provide material and political support for Hamas in the Gaza Strip going back many years.

The utility for the Israeli government, obviously, of propping up Hamas is that, by virtue of maintaining a designated terrorist organization as the de facto governing body of the Strip and creating political separation between the Strip and the West Bank, which is governed nominally by the Palestinian Authority (a puppet regime of the Israeli state), handing off political autonomy to a unified Palestinian state (the so-called “Two State Solution”) becomes a much harder sell.

What kind of a monster, after all, could advocate legitimizing a terrorist organization as a bona fide government of a sovereign state?

And, if Bibi could scare up an atrocity or two in the process, and thereby create a further pretext for endless war and negate any possibility of a long-term peace, all the better for a creature such as he whose entire political career has revolved around instigating war.

This is how the real world works. It’s ugly, Machiavellian, honorless stuff.

But why should anyone expect anything different from the regime that achieved the proud distinction of being “the first country on Earth to fully vaccinate a majority of its citizens against COVID-19,” — having administered 18,199,232 “vaccine” doses to a country of 9.3 million — in the service of its multinational corporate state masters?

At any rate, a journalist at one of the recent State Department propaganda sessions pressed the U.S. government’s spokescreature on Bibi’s complicity in “bolstering” a terrorist organization’s and the government’s plans to sanction him for it.

(relevant exchange starts at 23:12)

As an aside, glimpse the shark-like psychopathy fully evident in the State Department propagandist’s eyes. There is something not fully human there.

It’s worth recalling that Jen Psaki, who has the same dead eyes, came up through the State Department ranks. They appear to be a job requirement — perhaps not least of which for the sake of coping with the death and destruction worldwide they enable through their lies. No human of conscience could get up on that horse every day and go to work lying on behalf of a murderous government for a measly paycheck and a 401(k). 

Returning to the matter at hand, 18 U.S.C. 2339B states unequivocally that “providing material support” (i.e., cash money) to designated terrorist organization is a violation of federal law.

Via Department of Justice:

“The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 gave the Secretary of State authority to designate foreign terrorist organizations whose terrorist activity threatens the security of United States nationals or the national defense, foreign relations or economic interests of the United States. See Pub. L. 104-132, § 302, 110 Stat. 1214, 1248. See also section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. §  1189). The Antiterrorism Act also created 18 U.S.C. § 2339B, which makes it unlawful, within the United States, or for any person who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States anywhere, to knowingly provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization that has been designated by the Secretary of State.” 

The U.S. government designates Hamas a terrorist organization.

  • The logic is clear and, actually, impeccable:
  • Hamas has been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. government
  • Providing material support to designated terrorist organizations is illegal under U.S. law 18 U.S.C. 2339B
  • Bibi Netanyahu is on record bragging about funneling cash to Hamas
  • Bibi Netanyahu broke U.S. law 18 U.S.C. 2339B
  • Bibi Netanyahu is a criminal enabler of terrorism and ought to be brought up on charges just as soon as he steps foot next on American soil to cajole the American taxpayer into sending him more money and weapons

Israeli propagandists salivate at the prospect of sanctioning the speech of individual college students — who have far less influence over the material conditions on the ground in Gaza than Netanyahu — opposed to Israel’s activities in Gaza under the pretext that they are providing “support for terrorists.”

How about starting with Bibi, the world’s biggest booster of Hamas?

“What’s good for the goose is good for the gander!” my Irish-Catholic grandmammy was wont to admonish me as she crocheted next to the fireplace on chilly wintry eves.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on the author’s Substack, Armageddon Prose.

Ben Bartee is an author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The events of the past week should obliterate any doubt that the war against the Palestinians of Gaza is a joint U.S.–Israeli operation.

On Friday, as the Biden administration stood alone among the nations of the world in vetoing a United Nations Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire, Secretary of State Antony Blinken was busy circumventing congressional review to ram through approval of an “emergency” sale of 13,000 tank rounds to Israel. For weeks, Blinken has been zipping across the Middle East and appearing on scores of television networks in a PR tour aimed at selling the world the notion that the White House is deeply concerned about the fate of Gaza’s 2.2 million residents.

“Far too many Palestinians have been killed; far too many have suffered these past weeks, and we want to do everything possible to prevent harm to them,” Blinken declared on November 10.

A month later, with the death toll skyrocketing and calls for a ceasefire mounting, Blinken assured the world Israel was implementing new measures to protect civilians and that the U.S. was doing everything it could to encourage Israel to employ a tiny bit more moderation in its widespread killing campaign. Friday’s events decisively flushed those platitudes into a swirling pool of blood. 

Over the past two months, Benjamin Netanyahu has argued, including on U.S. news channels, “Our war is your war.” In retrospect, this wasn’t a plea to the White House. Netanyahu was stating a fact. From the moment President Joe Biden spoke to his “great, great friend” Netanyahu on October 7, in the immediate aftermath of the deadly Hamas-led raids into Israel, the U.S. has not just supplied Israel with additional weapons and intelligence support, it has also offered crucial political cover for the scorched-earth campaign to annihilate Gaza as a Palestinian territory. It is irrelevant what words of concern and caution have flowed from the mouths of administration officials when all of their actions have been aimed at increasing the death and destruction.

The propaganda from the Biden administration has been so extreme at times that even the Israeli military has suggested they tone it down a notch or two. Biden falsely claimed to see images of “terrorists beheading children” and then knowingly relayed that unverified allegation as fact — including over the objections of his advisers — and publicly questioned the death toll of Palestinian civilians. None of this is by accident, nor can it be attributed to the president’s propensity to exaggerate or stumble into gaffes. 

Everything we know about Biden’s 50-year history of supporting and facilitating Israel’s worst crimes and abuses leads to one conclusion: Biden wants Israel’s destruction of Gaza — with more than 7,000 children dead — to unfold as it has. 

Israel’s Dystopian Game Show

The horrifying nature of the October 7 attacks led by Hamas do not in any way — morally or legally — justify what Israel has done to the civilian population of Gaza, more than 18,000 of whom have died in a 60-day period. Nothing justifies the killing of children on an industrial scale. What the Israeli state is engaged in has far surpassed any basic principles of proportionality or legality. Israel’s own crimes dwarf those of Hamas and the other groups that participated in the October 7 operations. Yet Biden and other U.S. officials continue to defend the indefensible by rolling out their well-worn and twisted notion of Israel’s right to “self-defense.”

If we apply that rationale — promoted by both the U.S. and Israel — to the 75 years of history before October 7, how many times throughout that period would the Palestinians have been “justified” in massacring thousands of Israeli children, systematically attacking its hospitals and schools? How many times would they have been acting in “self-defense” as they razed whole neighborhoods to rubble, transforming the apartment buildings Israeli civilians once called home into concrete tombs? This justification only works for Israel because the Palestinians can enact no such destruction upon Israel and its people. It has no army, no navy, no air force, no powerful nation states to provide it with the most modern and lethal military hardware. It does not have hundreds of nuclear weapons. Israel can burn Gaza and its people to the ground because the U.S. facilitates it, politically and militarily. 

Despite all the airtime consumed by Blinken and other U.S. officials playing make-believe on the issue of protecting Palestinian civilians, what has unfolded on the ground is nothing less than a corralling of the population of Gaza into an ever-shrinking killing cage. On December 1, Israel released an interactive map of Gaza dividing it into hundreds of numbered zones. On the Israel Defense Forces’ Arabic language website, it encouraged Gaza’s residents to scan a QR code to download the map and to monitor IDF channels to know when they need to evacuate to a different zone to avoid being murdered by Israeli bombs or ground operations. This is nothing short of a dystopian Netflix show produced by Israel in which its participants have no choice to opt out and a wrong guess will get you and your children maimed or killed. On a basic level, it is grotesque to tell an entrapped population that has limited access to food, water, health care, or housing — and whose internet connections have repeatedly been shut down — to go online to download a survival map from a military force that is terrorizing them.

Throughout Blinken’s one-man parade proclaiming that the U.S. had made clear to Israel that it needs to protect civilians, Israel has repeatedly struck areas of Gaza to which it had told residents to flee. In some cases, the IDF sent SMS messages to people just 10 minutes before attacking. One such message read: “The IDF will begin a crushing military attack on your area of residence with the aim of eliminating the terrorist organization Hamas.” U.N. Secretary General António Guterres said Palestinians were being treated “like human pinballs – ricocheting between ever-smaller slivers of the south, without any of the basics for survival.” Blinken attributed the continuously mounting pile of Palestinian corpses to “a gap” between Israel’s stated intent to lessen civilian deaths and its operations. “I think the intent is there,” he said. “But the results are not always manifesting themselves.”

National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby got visibly irritated when asked on December 6 about Israel’s widespread killing of civilians.

“It is not the Israeli Defense Forces strategy to kill innocent people. It’s happening. I admit that. Each one is a tragedy,” he said. “But it’s not like the Israelis are sitting around every morning and saying ‘Hey, how many more civilians can we kill today?’ ‘Let’s go bomb a school or a hospital or a residential building and just—and cause civilian casualties.’ They’re not doing that.”

One problem with Kirby’s rant is that attacks against civilians, schools, and hospitals are exactly what Israel is doing—repeatedly. It is irrelevant what Kirby believes the IDF’s intent to be. For two months, numerous Israeli officials and lawmakers have said that their intent is to collectively strangle the Palestinians of Gaza into submission, death, or flight. 

Dr Suleiman Qaoud surveys the damage at the Rantisi Specialist Hospital, part of the Nasser Medical Complex in Gaza City, following Israeli missile attacks on November 6, 2023 [Abdelhakim Abu Riash/Al Jazeera]

Kirby’s claims are also decimated by the revelations in a recent investigative report by the Israeli media outlets 972 and Local Call. The story, based on interviews with seven Israeli military and intelligence sources, described in detail how Israel knows precisely the number of civilians present in buildings it strikes and at times has knowingly killed hundreds of Palestinian civilians in order to kill a single top Hamas commander.

“Nothing happens by accident,” one Israeli source said. “When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target. We are not Hamas. These are not random rockets. Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.”

As Israel ratchets up its killing machine, giving lie to all of Blinken’s pronouncements, it continues to wage a propaganda war that is consistent with its overarching campaign of mass killing. No lie is too obscene to justify the wholesale slaughter of people that Israel’s defense minister has called “human animals.” According to this campaign, there are no Palestinian children, no Palestinian hospitals, no Palestinian schools. The U.N. is Hamas. Journalists are Hamas. The prime ministers of Belgium, Spain, and Ireland are Hamas. Everything and everyone who dissents in the slightest from the genocidal narrative is Hamas.

Israel has quite understandably grown accustomed to many Western media outlets accepting its lies — no matter how outrageous or vile — when they are told about Palestinians. But even news outlets with a long track record of promoting Israel’s narrative unchecked have inched toward incredulity. Not because they have had a change of conscience, but because the Israeli propaganda is so farcical that it would be embarrassing to pretend it is otherwise.

Israeli forces have distributed multiple images and videos in recent days of Palestinian men stripped to their underwear — sometimes wearing blindfolds — and claimed they are all Hamas terrorists surrendering. These claims, too, fell apart under the most minimal scrutiny: Some of the men have been identified as journalists, shop owners, U.N. employees. In one particularly ridiculous piece of propaganda, a video filmed by IDF soldiers and distributed online depicted naked Palestinian captives laying down their alleged rifles.

Government spokesperson Mark Regev defended the practice of stripping detainees.

“Remember, it’s the Middle East and it’s warmer here. Especially during the day when it’s sunny, to be asked to take off your shirt might not be pleasant, but it’s not the end of the world,” Regev told Sky News. “We are looking for people who would have concealed weapons, especially suicide bombers with explosive vests.”

Regev was asked about this clear violation of the Geneva Conventions’s prohibition against publishing videos of prisoners of war.

“I’m not familiar with that level of international law,” he said, adding (as though it matters) that he did not believe the videos were distributed by official Israeli government channels. “These are military aged men who were arrested in a combat zone,” he said. 

Despite Israeli claims of mass surrenders by Hamas fighters, Haaretz reported that “of the hundreds of Palestinian detainees photographed handcuffed in the Gaza Strip in recent days, about 10 to 15 percent are Hamas operatives or are identified with the organization,” according to Israeli security sources. Israel has produced no evidence to support its claim that even this alleged small pool of the stripped prisoners were Hamas guerrillas.

So what we have here is both a violation of the Geneva Conventions and an immoral production in which Palestinian civilians are forced at gunpoint to play Hamas fighters in an Israeli propaganda movie.

No Path of Resistance

It has become indisputably clear over these past two months that there are not actually two sides to this horror show. Without question, the perpetrators who meted out the horrors against Israeli civilians on October 7 should be held accountable. But that is not what this collective killing operation is about. And journalists should stop pretending it is.

Any analysis of the Israeli state’s terror campaign against the people of Gaza cannot begin with the events of October 7. An honest examination of the current situation must view October 7 in the context of Israel’s 75-year war against the Palestinians and the past two decades of transforming Gaza first into an open-air prison and now into a killing cage. Under threat of being labeled antisemitic, Israel and its defenders demand acceptance of Israel’s official rationale for its irrational actions as legitimate, even if they are demonstrably false or they seek to justify war crimes.

“You look at Israel today. It’s a state that has reached such a degree of irrational, rabid lunacy that its government routinely accuses its closest allies of supporting terrorism,” the Palestinian analyst Mouin Rabbani recently told Intercepted. “It is a state that has become thoroughly incapable of any form of inhibition.”

Israel has imposed, by lethal force, a rule that Palestinians have no legitimate rights of any form of resistance. When they have organized nonviolent demonstrations, they have been attacked and killed. That was the case in 2018-2019 when Israeli forces opened fire on unarmed protesters during the Great March of Return, killing 223 and wounding more than 8,000 others. Israeli snipers later boasted about shooting dozens of protesters in the knee during the weekly Friday demonstrations. When Palestinians fight back against apartheid soldiers, they are killed or sent into military tribunals. Children who throw rocks at tanks or soldiers are labeled terrorists and subjected to abuse and violations of basic rights — that is, if they are not summarily shot dead. Palestinians live their lives stripped of any context or any recourse to address the grave injustices imposed on them.

Image: Members of the Hamas al-Qassam Brigade (EPA-EFE/Mohammed Saber via Euractiv)

You cannot discuss the crimes of Hamas or Islamic jihad or any other armed resistance factions without first addressing the question of why these groups exist and have support. One aspect of this should certainly probe Netanyahu’s own role — extending back to at least 2012 — in propping up Hamas and facilitating the flow of money to the group.

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” Netanyahu told his Likud comrades in 2019. 

But in the broader sense, a sincere examination of why a group such as Hamas gained popularity among Palestinians or why people in Gaza turn to armed struggle must focus on how the oppressed, when stripped of all forms of legitimate resistance, respond to the oppressor. It should be focused on the rights of people living under occupation to assert and defend their self-determination. It should allow Palestinians to have their struggle placed in the context of other historical battles for liberation and independence and not relegated to racist polemics about how all Palestinian acts of resistance constitute terrorism and there are not really any innocents in Gaza. Israel’s president said as much on October 13.

“It is an entire nation out there that is responsible,” Isaac Herzog declared. “It is not true this rhetoric about civilians not being aware, not involved. It’s absolutely not true. They could have risen up. They could have fought against that evil regime which took over Gaza in a coup d’etat.” 

The notion that the Palestinians of Gaza could end all of their suffering by overthrowing Hamas is just as ahistorical and false as the oft-repeated claims that the war against Gaza would end if Hamas surrendered and released all Israeli hostages.

“Look, this could be over tomorrow,” Blinken said December 10. “If Hamas got out of the way of civilians instead of hiding behind them, if it put down its weapons, if it surrendered.”

That, of course, is a crass lie. With or without Hamas, Israel’s war against the Palestinians would endure precisely because of Blinken and his ilk in elite bipartisan U.S. foreign policy circles. 

Throughout the years of U.S. support for Israel’s apartheid regime, it has consistently facilitated Israel’s “mowing the grass” in Gaza. This is not a series of periodic assaults on Hamas — it is a cyclical campaign of terror bombings largely aimed at civilians and civilian infrastructure. The Biden administration is not — and Biden personally has never been — an outside observer or a friend encouraging moderation during an otherwise righteous crusade. None of this slaughter would be occurring if Biden valued Palestinian lives over Israel’s false narratives and its bloody ethnonationalist wars of annihilation repackaged as self-defense. We should end the charade that this is an Israeli war against Hamas. We should call it what it is: a joint U.S.–Israeli war against the people of Gaza.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image source

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

After failing to obtain more funding from the United States for additional military assistance in the conflict with Russia, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky admitted to Congressmen that he would have to cede territories to Russia without financial and military assistance. His comments come as Elon Musk contributed his opinion to the great risk Ukraine faces if it continues its futile war against Russia.

A Washington Post report published on December 13 states that Ukraine’s leader declared that without more help, the conflict will become even more brutal, and the Ukrainian military will “inevitably” cede “ground to its determined and well-armed adversary.”

Zelensky’s visit to the US Congress occurred during an impasse in the legislative house when Republicans demanded comprehensive changes to US immigration legislation in exchange for approval of the request for more than $60 billion from US President Joe Biden to keep Kiev supplied.

At a White House press conference, Zelensky characterised the meetings as “more than positive” but acknowledged that Ukrainians would have to “separate words from results.”

Biden and Zelensky did not detail Ukraine’s plans for next year, a major concern for Republicans. Biden also discussed when the US would urge Ukraine to negotiate with Russia to end the fighting.

This was the second time in three months that the Ukrainian leader visited the Capitol, and it is hugely contrasted with the visit in December 2022 when he was given a standing ovation at the legislative house and received an American flag that flew over the State Capitol during his visit.

To date, Congress has allocated more than $111 billion to support Ukraine and Biden’s call for more funds is part of a larger emergency spending package that would also provide security assistance to Israel and Taiwan and on the US-Mexico border. Ultimately, the bill failed to pass the vote in the US Senate as it needed support from 60 lawmakers. Only 49 voted in favour, with 51 voting against.

Due to this financing issue, policymakers in Kiev are trying to figure out how to fund their war against Russia if its allies fail to deliver on promised aid, and the options are fraught with risk. According to Bloomberg, the Ukrainian financial toolkit could include increasing tax revenues — an obvious challenge in a battered economy — or cutting expenses to an already beleaguered public and service sector.

“The support from the EU and US is crucial,” said Ukrainian Finance Minister Serhiy Marchenko to the agency, adding that Kiev maintains active communication with EU and US representatives to inform them about their needs for the next budget year.

Ukraine’s financial salvation is at stake, especially after Kiev’s counteroffensive failed to make gains, and the arrival of winter brought new difficulties. If the shortage of foreign aid flows exceeds several billion US dollars, Ukrainian authorities will be left with very few choices, and all eventually result in the cessation of more territories to Russia.

Newly committed aid to Kiev fell to the lowest level since the start of the conflict in February 2022, down almost 90% between August and October compared to the same period the previous year, according to data monitored by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel) and released on December 7.

“Our figures confirm the impression of a more hesitant donor attitude in recent months,” said Christoph Trebesch, head of the team responsible for the Ukraine Support Tracker and director of a research centre at the Kiel Institute.

In fact, Elon Musk even chipped in with his own opinion on December 12, concurring with the conclusions of David Sacks, a South African entrepreneur, that

“Ukraine has lost Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, most of Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia forever. If it doesn’t negotiate a peace deal now, it will also lose Kharkiv, Odesa, the rest of Kherson, and more. The flag wavers who think they’re helping Ukraine are just dismembering it.”

Musk responded on X (formerly Twitter),

“Your assessment is accurate [in my opinion].”

The endgame is nearing, and although no one will know exactly when this will be, Ukraine has reached a point where there is nothing they can do once Russia decides to go on the offensive, something the Eurasian Giant has not done in a serious manner for the entirety of 2023 as it instead secured its defensive lines and easily absorbed Ukraine’s attacks to devastating effect. No amount of finance and material support to Ukraine can help the country now, especially as it contends with a huge manpower shortage, and this is extremely evident to any observers of the war who do not see the Ukrainians as nothing more than an expendable force to pursue their Russophobic policies.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Al Mayadeen English

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

Bisan Owda, a 25-year-old journalist from Gaza, recently expressed a bleak outlook: ‘I no longer have any hope of survival…I am certain that I will die in the next few weeks or maybe days.’ Bisan’s harrowing sentiment reflects the dangerous reality journalists face, risking their lives to expose the brutal truths obscured by the fog of war.

Bisan and other Palestinian reporters, such as Motaz, another courageous photojournalist from the Deir al-Balah refugee camp, stand as unsung heroes amid a devastating genocide. Bisan, tearfully acknowledging the imminent danger she faces, and Motaz transitioning from documenting to surviving underscore the extraordinary courage of Palestinian journalists determined to unveil the truth.

In contrast, mainstream Western media, epitomized by The New York Times, presents a stark disparity. Instead of amplifying the voices of individuals like Bisan and Motaz, major publications propagate a narrative that perpetuates misinformation and greenlights the ongoing tragedy. 

The toll in Gaza is staggering—over 20,000 lives lost, including nearly 10,000 innocent children. Amidst the ruins of homes and the echoes of airstrikes, it becomes clear that the valiant efforts of these journalists serve as our only window into the extent of this horror.

Regrettably, The New York Times is failing to report the situation accurately. Its persistence in publishing misleading information not only aids in spreading propaganda but also follows a historical pattern. The current reporting echoes the publication’s prior engagement in a misinformation campaign preceding the U.S. invasion of Iraq, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis. The New York Times is failing an open-notes test it has taken many times.

Notably, instead of reporting on the confirmed cases of genocide, the New York Times seems fixated on fake controversies sparked by controversial lawmakers such as Rep. Elise Stefanik (R–N.Y.) that feed into the false idea that supporting Palestinians and demanding an end to the genocide is antisemitic. This type of reporting creates a false sense of danger and weaponizes people into rejecting the Palestinian struggle as the human rights issue it is. 

As the Israeli military intensifies its attack on Gaza, the urgency for accurate reporting becomes paramount. Netanyahu’s unwavering pursuit of genocidal goals, evidenced by the bombing of schools, hospitals, and UN buildings, demands unfiltered attention. Strikingly, Israeli leaders have laid bare their intentions for ethnic cleansing through genocide, yet U.S. media remains conspicuously silent.

The betrayal of journalists like Bisan, Motaz, and countless others who put their lives on the line becomes even more egregious when juxtaposed with The New York Times’ failure to uphold journalistic standards. It is no longer a matter of misguided reporting; it is the perpetuation of a historical pattern that prioritizes profit and imperialism over truth and justice.

Western media has the potential to be a catalyst for change. We have seen the impact of unfiltered reporting during the Vietnam War when journalists chose to reveal the truth, irrespective of government constraints. There are the equivalents of the Tet Offensive and the My Lai Massacre currently being in Gaza by Israel. Any reporting by Western media that doesn’t center its context around that is a disservice to humanity. 

News reporting, at its core, should be about saving lives. Instead, influential publications opt to provide manufactured consent for violence and oppression, holding the line for war criminals while the atrocities unfold in real-time. In doing so, this makes publications like the New York Times complicit in the ongoing genocide in Palestine, mixing the blood of innocent Palestinians with that of those murdered in Iraq twenty years ago—shame on the New York Times and all. 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Nour Jaghama is CODEPINK’s Palestine and Iran Campaigner. 

Melissa Garriga is the communications and media analysis manager for CODEPINK. She writes about the intersection of militarism and the human cost of war.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

It was a policy that was bound to send a shiver through the policymaking community. The issue of nuclear energy in Australia has always been a contentious one. Currently, the country hosts a modest nuclear industry, centred on the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), nuclear medicine and laboratory products. But even this has created headaches in terms of long-term storage of waste, plagued by successful legal challenges from communities and First Nation groups. The advent of AUKUS, with its inane yet provocative promise of nuclear-powered submarines for the Royal Australian Navy, adds yet another, complicating dimension to this fact. Without a clear idea of a site, a vital part of the nuclear dilemma remains unresolved.

Broadly speaking, the nuclear issue, in manifold manifestations, has never entirely disappeared from the periphery of Australian policy. The fact that Australia became a primary testing ground for Britain’s nuclear weapons program was hardly something that would have left Canberra uninterested in acquiring some nuclear option. Options were considered, be they in the realm of a future weapons capability, or energy generation.

In a June 29, 1961 letter from Australian Prime Minister Robert Menzies to his counterpart in the UK, Harold Macmillan, concerns over the impediments imposed by a potential treaty that would impose limitations on countries the subject of nuclear testing were candidly expressed.  Were that treaty to go ahead, it “could prove a serious limitation on the range of decisions open to a future Australian Government in that it could effectively preclude or at least impose a very substantial handicap on Australia’s acquisition of nuclear weapons.”

Menzies put forth a suggestion that was ultimately never pursued – at least officially. An arrangement deemed “more practical,” suggested the Australian PM, might involve “the supply of ready-made weapons” at the conclusion of such a treaty.

A sore point here were efforts by the Soviets to insist that countries such as Australia be banned from pursuing their own nuclear program. Menzies therefore wished Macmillan “to accord full recognition of the potentially serious security situation in which Australia could find herself placed as a result of having accommodated United Kingdom testing.”

Australia eventually abandoned its nuclear weapons ambitions with the ratification of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in February 1970, preferring, instead, the nuclear umbrella of extended deterrence offered by the United States. (The nature of that deterrence has always seemed spectacularly hollow.) Domestically, nuclear technology would be sparingly embraced. Nuclear power stations, however, were banned in every state and territory, a policy left unchallenged by a number of parliamentary inquiries.

The quest of meeting emissions reduction targets during the transition to the goal of net zero was bound to refocus interest on the nuclear power issue. The Liberal-National opposition is keen to put the issue of nuclear power back on the books. It is a dream that may never see the light of day, given, according to the chief government scientific body, the CSIRO, its uncompetitive nature and the absence of “the relevant frameworks in place for its consideration and operation within the timeframe required.”

Australian politicians have often faced, even when flirting with the proposition of adopting nuclear power, firm rebuke. South Australian Premier Malinauskas gave us one example in initially expressing the view late last year that “the ideological opposition that exists in some quarters to nuclear power is ill-founded.”  It did not take him long to tell the ABC’s 7.30 program that he did not wish “to suggest that nuclear should be part of the mix in our nation.” Australia had to “acknowledge that nuclear power would make energy more expensive in our nation & [we should] put it to one side, rather than having a culture war about nuclear power.”

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has been by far the boldest, pitching for a gentler exit from the fossil-fuel powered nirvana Australia has occupied for decades. Australia, he is adamant, should join “the international nuclear energy renaissance”. Of particular interest to him is the use of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), which might be purposefully built on coal generator cites as part of the general energy package alongside renewables. SMRs, as Joanne Liou of the International Atomic Energy Agency explains, “are advanced nuclear reactors that have a power capacity of up to 300 Mw(e) per unit, which is about one-third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear power reactors.”

The heralded advantages of such devices, at least as advertised by its misguided proponents, lie in their size – being small and modular, ease of manufacture, shipping and installation. They also offer, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, “savings in cost and construction time, and they can be deployed incrementally to match increasing energy demand.”

For all these benefits, the cold reality of SMR designs is how far they have yet to go before becoming viable. Four SMRs are currently in operation, though these, according to Friends of the Earth Australia’s lead national nuclear campaigner, Jim Green, hardly meet the “modular definition” in terms of serial factory production of components relevant to such devices.

Russia and China, despite hosting such microreactors, have faced considerable problems with cost blowouts and delays, the very things that SMRs are meant to avoid. Oregon-based NuScale has tried to convince and gull potential patrons that its small reactor projects will take off, though the audience for its chief executive John Hopkins is primarily limited to the Coalition and NewsCorp stable. The company’s own cost estimates for energy generation, despite heavy government subsidies, have not made SMR adoption in the United States, let alone Australia, viable.

In his second budget reply speech in May, Dutton showed little sign of being briefed on these problems, stating that “any sensible government [in the 21st century] must consider small modular nuclear as part of the energy mix.” Labor’s policies on climate change had resulted in placing Australia “on the wrong energy path.”

Such views have not impressed the Albanese Government. Energy Minister Chris Bowen insists that counterfeit claims are being peddled on the issue of the role played by nuclear energy in Canada along with false distinctions between the costs of nuclear power and renewable energy.

“If they are serious about proposing a nuclear solution for Australia, the simplistic bumper stickers and populist echo chamber has to come to an end. Show the Australian people your verified nuclear costings and your detailed plans about where the nuclear power plants will go.”

Such verification will be a tall order indeed. As the CSIRO concedes,

“Without more real-world data for SMRs demonstrating that nuclear can be economically viable, the debate will likely continue to be dominated by opinion and conflicting social values rather than a discussion on the underlying assumptions.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). Email: [email protected]

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

Dec. 4, 2023 – 36 year old adult film star Sophie Anderson died suddenly on Dec. 4, 2023. Two weeks earlier, her husband Premier League professional soccer player Oliver Spedding died suddenly on Nov. 17, 2023.

Nov. 26, 2023 – CANADA, Montreal, QC – Two sisters diagnosed with same cancer – osteosarcoma. They have a genetic mutation of p53 – but does that place both of them at higher risk of developing COVID-19 Vaccine Induced Turbo cancer? Should people with these genetic susceptibilities have avoided mRNA Vaccines?

Nov. 18, 2023 – FIVE SIBLINGS DEAD – 48 year old Christine Chrissy Brandt died suddenly on Nov. 18, 2023. All 5 siblings are dead (sisters Pam, Yvonne, step-sister Renee, brother Teddy). Her sister Pam (Pamela Zieler) died Dec. 1, 2022.

Image

Oct. 18, 2023 – Paula Denton, Albert Johnson and Letha Knox are three family members all of whom died suddenly within the past few months.

Oct. 1, 2023 – 57 year old Red Sox baseball pitcher Tim Wakefield died this morning on Oct. 1, 2023. I reported he had aggressive brain cancer and his wife has aggressive pancreatic cancer!

Image

Image

Sep. 15, 2023 – YOUNG COUPLE WITH TURBO CANCER – In Feb. 2023, Shane Gray developed testicular cancer that spread to lymph nodes. In June 2023, his wife Morgan was diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer.

Sep. 5, 2023 – Los Angeles, CA – Teacher Karyn Newbill Helmig was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in the form of 5 malignant tumors in her abdomen. Her husband 53 year old Shawn Helmig died unexpectedly of a pulmonary embolism in Nov. 9, 2022.

Aug. 29, 2023 – Temple Hill, KY – Nurse Velvet Scott died suddenly on Aug. 29, 2023. She rushed to get her 1st COVID-19 Vaccine on Dec. 23, 2020. Her brother died a few moths prior and her other brother just had surgery for prostate cancer. Three siblings, two dead, one with cancer within a few months.

Aug. 19, 2023 – Halifax, MA – William Roche and his wife Tracy Roche have both come down with cancer. Tracy was diagnosed with breast cancer last year and this spring William was diagnosed with tonsil/neck/throat cancer.

Aug. 14, 2023 – Melbourne, Australia – Danny Norman and Stacey Singles lost their baby boy Cooper at 2 weeks old on May 23, 2023. Just 2 months later, on August 13, 2023, while on vacation in Bali, Stacey Singles collapsed and died suddenly. “My beautiful wife Stacey passed away and is now with our beautiful boy Cooper in heaven”

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.

Featured image is from COVID Intel


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

December 15th, 2023 by Global Research News

The WHO Confirms that the COVID-19 PCR Test Is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” Are Meaningless. Both the Lockdown and the “Vaccine” Have No Scientific Basis

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 12, 2023

“Is the Virus Fictitious”? Laboratories in US Can’t Find COVID-19 in One of 1,500 Positive Tests

Xander Nieuws, December 10, 2023

The Climate Scam Revealed by COP28

Peter Koenig, December 12, 2023

There Never Was a “New Corona Virus”, There Never Was a Pandemic

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 14, 2023

Video: “The design of the so called COVID-19 vaccines was intentionally to harm people.” Dr. Mike Yeadon

Patricia Harrity, December 11, 2023

The Gaza War, “Big Money” and the Insidious Role of the World Economic Forum

Ernst Wolff, December 8, 2023

Are National Governments All Following a Genocide Agenda?

Julian Rose, December 11, 2023

Israel and US Plan Complete Deportation from Gaza. Famine Is Looming. “A Child Is Killed Every Ten Minutes”

Marc Vandepitte, December 11, 2023

Yuval Noah Harari Discusses the Creation of a Massive Class of “Useless People” and What Should be Done with Them

Rhoda Wilson, December 11, 2023

The Criminalization of U.S. Foreign Policy: The Life and Legacy of Henry Kissinger

Michael Welch, December 10, 2023

Turbo Cancer: Leukemia Diagnosis to Death in Hours, Days or Weeks

Dr. William Makis, December 11, 2023

The War on Gaza: Debunking the Pro-Zionist Propaganda Machine

Amir Nour, December 11, 2023

Israel-Palestine War: The Big Picture. Peter Koenig

Peter Koenig, December 9, 2023

A Fateful Nobel Prize in Medicine to Convince “Reluctant People” to Get Vaccinated. For Making Possible the “Genetic Lobotomy” of a Large Part of the World’s Population

Dr. Michael Nehls, December 9, 2023

The ‘Greater Israel’ Scheme and Its Global Power Play: A Delusional Recipe for Armageddon

Matthew Ehret-Kump, December 7, 2023

Israel’s “Final Solution” for the Palestinians Did Not Start in 2023. “The Terror to Eliminate Palestinians from their Homeland” Started in the 1930s

Peter Koenig, December 11, 2023

Who is Volodymyr Zelensky?

Nauman Sadiq, December 9, 2023

The ‘Blue Shirts’ of October 7. The Wall of Jericho, “The Mysterious Case of the Men with the Light Blue Shirts”

Michael Ginsburg, December 11, 2023

Sabotage of the Kiev-Moscow March 2022 Peace Agreement in Istanbul. The End Game is the Destruction and Privatization of Ukraine

Nauman Sadiq, December 8, 2023

Seventeen Covid Pandemic Lies We’ve Been Told

Richard Gale, December 10, 2023

“Digital Euro Is Now in Preparation Phase”. Can We Trust the Head of the ECB Christine Lagarde?

By Global Research News, December 14, 2023

The Head of the European Central Bank Christine Lagarde, has announced the implementation of the digital Euro, which will have devastating economic and social consequences.

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC): The Weaponization of Money? WHO’s Health Tyranny: Towards a Totalitarian World Government? No Way!

By Peter Koenig, December 14, 2023

Two kinds of absolute controls are being prepared to implement The Great Reset, alias UN Agenda 2030. A potentially straitjacket and total control by programmable Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), and an all-oppressive health tyranny by WHO, overriding national Constitutional rights and national sovereignty as far as health measures are concerned.

WHO Pandemic Treaty’s Global Power Grab in May 2024

By Global Health Project, December 14, 2023

W.H.O. Pandemic Treaty “Judgment Day” is May 24, 2024. Everything is on the line in this historic, unprecedented, global power grab. This 4 part video series is probably one of the most important things you will ever watch.

“Pogrom”: From Kishinev in Tsarist Russia (1903) to Gaza, Palestine (2023)

By Prof. Yakov M. Rabkin, December 14, 2023

Pogrom. This Russian term denotes a violent riot incited with the aim of massacring Jews and destroying their property. One of the deadliest pogroms (50 Jews were killed and nearly 600 wounded) took place in Kishinev [Chișinău, Moldava] a hundred and twenty years ago, in April 1903. But the trauma of Russian Zionists facing the oppression in Tsarist Russia over a century ago continues to inform Israel’s political culture. 

Ukraine War: Mainstream Media Narrative Doubles Down on “Russia Losing” Fantasies

By Drago Bosnic, December 14, 2023

Even before the start of the special military operation (SMO), the mainstream media had been running several propaganda narratives, almost simultaneously. Shortly before the SMO and in the first few days, there was the claim that Russia would take Kiev in three days and most of Ukraine in a week.

A Stunning Rebuke: U.N. Cease-fire Vote Humiliates U.S. Imperialism

By Sara Flounders, December 14, 2023

The United Nations Security Council vote on December 8, calling for an immediate cease-fire in Palestine, was a public humiliation of the United States. When explaining their vote, numerous countries denounced the U.S. — Israel’s number one supporter — as the accomplice, the enabler and the real force behind the Zionist destruction in Gaza.

“Four Died Trying”: John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Robert F. Kennedy: A Powerful, Riveting, and Masterful Documentary Series Begins

By Edward Curtin, December 14, 2023

It is hard for those who have not lived through the shattering political assassinations of the 1960s to grasp their significance for today. Many might assume that that was then and long before their time, so let’s move on to what we must deal with today. 

The Horrifying Secret Agenda of the UN and WHO: Total Enslavement of Humanity Through a “Global Health Dictatorship”

By Peter Koenig, Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger, and Mike Adams, December 14, 2023

Imagine where the world has gone? And where the full UN Agenda 2030 is planning to take us? With a corrupted UN system, with a World Health Organization that is no longer looking after the population’s health and disease, but is promoting death.

Video: The Pfizer “Killer Vaccine”: “Money vs. Mortality”. Michel Chossudovsky

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 14, 2023

“Killing is Good for Business”. What we are witnessing is a crime against humanity on an unprecedented scale, affecting the lives of the entire population of our  planet. The upward trend in excess mortality related to the Covid-19-19 Vaccine is amply documented. 

Death and Destruction in Gaza: “Have You No Decency?” Prof. John J. Mearsheimer

By John J. Mearsheimer, December 13, 2023

I do not believe that anything I say about what is happening in Gaza will affect Israeli or American policy in that conflict. But I want to be on record so that when historians look back on this moral calamity, they will see that some Americans were on the right side of history.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

The Head of the European Central Bank Christine Lagarde, has announced the implementation of the digital Euro, which will have devastating economic and social consequences.

According to Peter Koenig:

“The universal drive towards central bank digital currencies, emanates most likely from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the Central Bank of all central banks, controlling at least 90% of central banks around the globe, and the BIS, itself, being controlled by the Rothschild family.

As we see, all is in best-intended private hands, perfectly aligned with the fraudulently established 1913 Federal Reserve Act – that has allowed the US Federal Reserve –which is controlled by a handful of Wall Street Banks– to create a US dollar hegemony around the world”.

***

 
 

 
  
 

Can We Trust Christine Lagarde? 

The Head of the European Central Bank Christine Lagarde has a criminal record in France.

“International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde has been convicted [December 2016] over her role in a controversial €400m (£355m) payment to a businessman.

French judges found Ms Lagarde guilty of negligence for failing to challenge the state arbitration payout to the friend of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy [Bernard Tapie].

The 60-year-old, following a week-long trial in Paris, was not given any sentence and will not be punished.
 .
 The Court of Justice of the Republic, a special tribunal for ministers, could have given Ms Lagarde up to one-year in prison and a €13,000 fine. (The Independent, December 19, 2016, emphasis added)
.

Screenshot: The Independent, December  2016 

Unusual in France? Lagarde was found “guilty” without the enforcement of a one year jail term ordered by the Court:  She was accused of “negligence” rather than “complicity”  in a multimillion euro fraud.

The French judges took the decision to withhold a one year prison sentence pertaining to the accused pursuant to a decision of the IMF Executive Board which is routinely chaired by the accused. 

 

Can We Trust Pfizer Which Also Has A Criminal Record?

Did the Media or Your Government Inform You? Had You Known Would You Have Accepted to Receive the Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine?

“The federal government announced the largest medical fraud settlement in U.S. history” directed against Pfizer: $2.3 Billion (2009)

See details below

Pfizer Has a Criminal Record

By US Department of Justice and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 13, 2023

Pfizer’s CEOs Were not Arrested.  They were Put on “Probation” by the U.S. DOJ  

Is there a relationship between the Covid “Vaccine” and the “Digital Euro”?

They are both “Big Money” operations controlled by the Financial Elites. The Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) project is to be implemented in coordination with the International ID system under the so-called WHO Pandemic Treaty, as well as the vaccine programs. 

“Two kinds of absolute controls are being prepared to implement The Great Reset, alias UN Agenda 2030. A potentially straitjacket and total control by programmable Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), and an all-oppressive health tyranny by WHO, overriding national Constitutional rights and national sovereignty as far as health measures are concerned.” (Peter Koenig)

See:

Video: The Pfizer “Killer Vaccine”: “Money vs. Mortality”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 14, 2023

Video. US Department of Justice. 2.3 Billion Medical Fraud Settlement

 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from the European Commission

Cada vez mais, os líderes ocidentais começam a adotar uma postura mais realista em relação à Ucrânia. Confrontados com a impossibilidade de manter o fornecimento irrestrito de armas a longo prazo, algumas autoridades ​​europeias expressam uma visão crítica do papel da UE no conflito, admitindo que o bloco não será capaz de manter a sua política atual.

É provável que a UE fique em breve sem fundos para ajudar Kiev. O alerta foi feito pelo ministro das eelações exteriores da Espanha, José Manuel Albares, durante entrevista ao jornal El Pais, no dia 10 de dezembro. Segundo o responsável, o bloco europeu terá que rever as suas prioridades estratégicas para fazer investimentos de forma adequada e racional, sem prejudicar as suas próprias reservas financeiras.

“Estamos na fase inicial da discussão deste quadro financeiro plurianual. A Ucrânia tem necessidades muito importantes que temos vindo a cobrir até agora. No entanto, os fundos são limitados e as prioridades devem ser analisadas (…) Mas não podemos permitir que princípios básicos como a soberania ou a integridade territorial sejam violados na Europa. Seria um retrocesso. Não vamos desistir”, diz o comunicado.

Ele enfatizou, no entanto, a “necessidade” de continuar a apoiar o regime de Kiev, apesar de todas as dificuldades. Segundo ele, se a Europa suspendesse a ajuda à Ucrânia, permitiria à Rússia violar importantes princípios internacionais, como a soberania e a integridade territorial – que considera inaceitáveis. No entanto, ele acredita que só é possível reduzir a ajuda financeira e continuar a apoiar Kiev impondo sanções contra Moscou.

Um tema interessante que ele comentou foi o conflito na Palestina. O ministro admite que o Ocidente está atualmente a ter a sua atenção desviada da Ucrânia para a Palestina devido aos últimos acontecimentos. Ele acredita que as hostilidades entre Israel e o Hamas “mudaram o foco” da OTAN, mas enfatiza a “importância” de apoiar a Ucrânia de todas as formas possíveis, desde que seja “necessário”.

Albares acrescentou ainda que a “solução” para o conflito depende da Rússia e da sua vontade de pôr fim às hostilidades, ignorando todas as circunstâncias paralelas graves, como o expansionismo ilimitado da OTAN. Repetindo as narrativas convencionais, afirmou que Moscou poderia simplesmente parar as suas actividades militares, “acabando” com a “guerra” e pacificando a região – o que mostra que, apesar do realismo relativamente ao apoio da UE a Kiev, o ministro espanhol continua a ser ingênuo quando se trata de para analisar o futuro do conflito.

Na verdade, o crescimento de uma opinião crítica relativamente ao apoio da UE à Ucrânia já parece ser um fenómeno inevitável. Os políticos do bloco estão a ser forçados a adotar este pensamento estratégico porque se nada for feito para mudar a política atual, a UE entrará certamente numa grave crise interna. Sem dinheiro e armas para continuar a apoiar o regime neonazista de forma ilimitada, a UE precisa urgentemente de rever as suas orientações relativas ao conflito, caso contrário as consequências poderão ser catastróficas.

Neste sentido, acabar com a prestação de ajuda militar e financeira e restringir o apoio à implementação de sanções anti-russas parece uma forma disfarçada de simplesmente deixar de ajudar Kiev. As sanções contra a Rússia já se revelam ineficientes, à medida que a economia de Moscou cresce cada vez mais e parece longe do isolamento e do colapso que os estrategistas ocidentais planejaram. Além disso, mesmo que as sanções prejudicassem de alguma forma a Rússia, não seriam suficientes para gerar qualquer efeito no campo de batalha, razão pela qual as medidas são essencialmente inúteis.

Além disso, mesmo que o apoio militar continue, o resultado final das hostilidades não mudará nada. Com um exército devastado pelos efeitos da “contra-ofensiva” falhada e dependente de recursos estrangeiros para continuar a lutar, a Ucrânia não parece ter quaisquer esperanças no conflito atual. Assim, para a UE, os argumentos para manter o apoio são ainda mais reduzidos, uma vez que, não vendo possibilidade de vitória, não há realmente razão para investir tanto dinheiro no exército ucraniano.

Na verdade, o que a UE deveria fazer é simplesmente admitir que foi errado começar a apoiar o regime e pôr termo à sua política anti-Rússia. Além de não ser eficiente, a onda anti-Rússia revelou-se verdadeiramente suicida para os europeus, sendo extremamente prejudicial aos interesses estratégicos da UE.

O bloco europeu deveria romper com os EUA e a OTAN e adotar uma política externa centrada no pragmatismo e no multilateralismo. Esta é a única forma de reverter os danos causados ​​por quase dois anos de sanções suicidas e de uma política militar irresponsável.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

 

Artigo em inglês :

https://infobrics.org/post/40060/

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, jornalista, pesquisador do Center for Geostrategic Studies, consultor geopolítico.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://twitter.com/leiroz_lucas

O fracasso das sanções contra a Federação Russa parece cada vez mais claro. Agora, os dados mostram que os Países Baixos continuam a importar gás russo, apesar de o país ter aderido publicamente às sanções lançadas pela UE. O caso é mais uma prova de que a política coercitiva anti-Rússia falhou e só é mantida devido à hipocrisia dos seus apoiantes.

Os dados foram revelados por um importante meio de comunicação russo. Segundo fontes, a Holanda não parou de comprar a commodity, tendo importado cerca de 211,5 milhões de metros cúbicos de gás natural liquefeito só em setembro de 2023. As transações atingiram valores de centenas de milhões de euros, tendo sido um negócio obviamente lucrativo para ambas as partes.

A informação indica que os Países Baixos apenas deixaram de importar gás russo por um curto período de três meses, tendo rapidamente retomado as negociações bilaterais. Dados sobre o assunto são impedidos de chegar à opinião pública para não gerar escândalo, já que o país está comprometido com as medidas que o bloco europeu impôs contra Moscou. Em vez de pôr fim às sanções e agir abertamente com o seu povo, o governo holandês optou pela hipocrisia e por acordos secretos, escondendo dos seus próprios cidadãos a realidade das relações com a Rússia.

Na verdade, não existe apenas o fator geopolítico, mas também as contradições do país relativamente à sua paranóia “ambiental”. Além de usarem a desculpa ucraniana, os políticos holandeses pressionam pelo fim das relações com a Rússia, dizendo que é necessário substituir completamente o uso de gás natural por fontes de “energia limpa”. Esta narrativa “verde” fortaleceu enormemente o crescimento da popularidade da mentalidade anti-russa. Mas, aparentemente, tais preocupações com a Ucrânia e o ambiente eram igualmente apenas hipocrisia.

Na prática, os estados continuam reféns das suas próprias necessidades e interesses. Mesmo que exista algum desejo genuíno de romper laços com a Rússia, os países europeus simplesmente não podem fazê-lo – pelo menos não de uma forma radical e absoluta. As condições geográficas forçam a Europa a cooperar, em certa medida, com a Rússia, para que as suas necessidades de segurança e de recursos sejam satisfeitas. Assim, por mais pró-Kiev que seja o discurso público, é muito improvável que a ruptura seja realmente implementada de forma integral.

Vale lembrar também que em abril o ministro holandês do clima e da energia, Rob Jetten, fez uma declaração enfatizando que a Holanda encerraria todos os acordos de fornecimento de gás com a Rússia – mas, aparentemente, isso não aconteceu. Acredita-se que Jetten tenha feito tais promessas motivado apenas pelo fato de a Europa atravessar então a época primavera-verão, quando a dependência do gás diminui, “encorajando” discursos radicais contra esta importante commodity. No entanto, com a chegada do inverno, o governo mudou rapidamente a sua estratégia, ignorou as promessas pró-ucranianas e começou a preparar-se através da compra de gás russo.

Com esta informação a chegar à opinião pública, é muito provável que haja uma crise de legitimidade nos Países Baixos – se não em toda a UE. A dada altura, os cidadãos comuns compreenderão que estão a ser enganados com tais narrativas sobre sanções e “defesa da Ucrânia” – o que conduzirá inevitavelmente a uma crescente impopularidade destas medidas e à pressão para o seu fim. Os protestos em massa e a diminuição da confiança das pessoas no governo são algumas coisas previsíveis para o futuro próximo na Europa.

Além disso, é necessário lembrar que a transparência na política estatal é um dos principais princípios democráticos. Ao afirmar-se como defensora da democracia e dos valores ocidentais, a Europa precisa de agir de acordo com estas orientações, caso contrário estará em contradição com a sua própria ideologia política. A UE critica frequentemente a Rússia e outros países rivais, acusando-os de não serem “democráticos” e de terem pouca “transparência política”, mas aparentemente é a própria Europa que depende de mentiras e hipocrisias na sua administração.

Na verdade, confrontados com a impossibilidade de implementar sanções de forma “satisfatória”, os países ocidentais deveriam simplesmente deixar de ser hipócritas e admitir que precisam da ajuda russa, procurando termos bilaterais mutuamente interessantes e negociando acordos estratégicos em conjunto. É necessário ignorar questões ideológicas e políticas ao negociar o fornecimento de produtos vitais como gás e alimentos, razão pela qual não há necessidade de continuar a “sancionar” Moscou – mesmo que ideologicamente a UE continue a apoiar a Ucrânia. Resta saber quando é que os tomadores de decisões europeus o admitirão.

Luca Leiroz de Almeida

Artigo em inglês :

https://infobrics.org/post/40049

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, jornalista, pesquisador do Center for Geostrategic Studies, consultor geopolítico.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://twitter.com/leiroz_lucas

Por que Israel não pode derrotar o Hamas

December 14th, 2023 by Eduardo Vasco

Benjamin Netanyahu, o Hitler judeu, declarou inúmeras vezes que o principal objetivo de Israel nestes últimos dois meses é erradicar a Faixa de Gaza do Hamas. O genocídio promovido por seu exército, que já deixou mais de 18.000 palestinos mortos, resultante de bombardeios e ataques quase ininterruptos contra qualquer coisa que se mova em Gaza, indica que o primeiro-ministro israelense está disposto a fazer qualquer coisa para destruir o movimento da resistência islâmica.
Contudo, a história e a realidade atual da Palestina mostram que o Hamas não será erradicado. E Israel e seus comparsas sabem disso. Emmanuel Macron teve um raro momento de razão ao declarar: “eu acho que nós chegamos a um momento no qual as autoridades israelenses terão de definir mais claramente qual é o seu objetivo final. A destruição total do Hamas

Alguém acha que isso é possível? Se for assim, a guerra vai durar dez anos.”

A jornalista Loveday Morris publicou no Washington Post de 5 de dezembro que as forças sionistas estimam em 5.000 o número de militantes do Hamas mortos por Israel em Gaza – uma cifra considerada incerta e mesmo duvidosa, pois a Israel (como sempre acontece nas guerras) interessa inflar o número de baixas do inimigo para justificar a carnificina de civis. Se esse índice estiver próximo à realidade, isso significa que, até aquela data, Israel teria assassinado uma criança e um civil adulto para cada militante do Hamas morto.

Segundo o Centro Nacional de Contraterrorismo do Diretório de Inteligência Nacional do Governo dos EUA, até setembro de 2022 o Hamas tinha entre 20.000 e 25.000 membros. Analistas consultados pela BBC acreditam que atualmente o número de combatentes seja de 30.000, enquanto que a mesma reportagem do Post o estima em até 40.000 e com recrutamento recorrente. Se tanto os dados do governo americano como os desses veículos de imprensa estiverem mais ou menos corretos, pode-se considerar que o número de militantes do Hamas aumentou consideravelmente no período de um ano.
Isso seria um fato essencial para a análise da correlação de forças na atual fase do conflito na Palestina. E vai ao encontro das revelações expostas por pesquisas de opinião realizadas recentemente. Reportagem de Dahlia Scheindlin publicada em 22 de novembro no Haaretz noticia que um estudo do grupo de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento do Mundo Árabe apontou que: 1) quase 60% dos palestinos de Gaza e da Cisjordânia apoiam totalmente e 16% apoiam moderadamente a operação liderada pelo Hamas em 7 de outubro; 2) somente 13% (21% em Gaza) se opõem àquela operação militar; 3) para 76%, o Hamas desempenha um papel positivo; 4) ao menos metade dos consultados acredita que o Hamas luta pela liberdade dos palestinos.

A mesma reportagem cita outra pesquisa de opinião, conduzida pelo Barômetro Árabe, que revela que antes de 7 de outubro a maioria dos palestinos criticava o Hamas por não fazer o suficiente contra a ocupação. Essa pesquisa teve o apoio do Fundo Nacional para a Democracia (NED, na sigla em inglês) dos EUA – logo, provavelmente é enviesada para diminuir o apoio real ao Hamas. O Washington Institute, insuspeito de apoiar os palestinos, também conduziu uma pesquisa em julho deste ano, que concluiu que 57% dos habitantes de Gaza expressam um sentimento positivo pelo Hamas, sendo um pouco menor na Cisjordânia (52%) e maior em Jerusalém Oriental (64%) – e três quartos do povo de Gaza apoiam a Jihad Islâmica Palestina e a Cova dos Leões, outra organização militante.

A maioria das análises dos números apresentados pelas pesquisas de opinião não interpreta corretamente o sentimento dos palestinos, incluindo a análise publicada em 25 de outubro na Foreign Affairs por Amaney A. Jamal e Michael Robbins, os dois principais investigadores do Barômetro Árabe. O que essas pesquisas comprovam é: 1) o Hamas tem um grande apoio popular e 2) o movimento foi compelido a realizar a operação de 7 de outubro pela pressão popular para que alguma medida fosse tomada em reação à opressão imposta pelos ocupantes sionistas. A operação do Hamas foi o resultado lógico do sentimento de indignação dos palestinos com a sua condição de oprimidos, sendo que uma parte significativa dos palestinos revoltados se incorporou às fileiras do Hamas no último ano para lutar de forma efetiva contra essa opressão.

No dia 13 de dezembro veio à luz uma nova pesquisa de opinião, do Centro Palestino de Política e Pesquisas de Opinião, publicada no site da Press TV. Ela é enfática: 57% dos habitantes de Gaza apoia a operação Tempestade de al-Aqsa. É fundamental destacar que o levantamento foi feito durante o cessar-fogo, quando Gaza já estava destruída e milhares de pessoas já estavam mortas (481 pessoas responderam o questionário em Gaza). Ou seja, mesmo sofrendo a retaliação criminosa de Israel, a maioria dos entrevistados defende a ação do Hamas. Não se arrependem da operação conduzida pela Resistência.

Os nazistas de Tel Aviv têm tratado os civis palestinos como membros ou cúmplices do Hamas. Ao assassiná-los, cometem crimes de guerra – ignorados pelas “sagradas” organizações internacionais, todas corrompidas pelos patrocinadores de Israel. Contudo, a concepção israelense não é de todo incorreta: o povo palestino como um todo está em guerra contra os ocupantes e, ao invés de ser uma guerra entre Israel e Hamas meramente, é uma guerra de todo o povo palestino conduzida pelo Hamas contra os agressores israelenses. Uma grande parte dos cidadãos comuns constitui uma rede de apoio logístico e material à Resistência Palestina. De fato, muitos dos atuais membros do Hamas eram crianças inocentes quando Israel devastou Gaza no início da década anterior e muitas crianças que sobreviverem ao atual genocídio seguirão o mesmo caminho, porque a tendência natural de um povo que vive esmagado e massacrado é a revolta radical e armada.
A Resistência Palestina é somente mais um dos inúmeros movimentos de libertação nacional que necessariamente brotam nos países oprimidos, tal como os vietcongues, os talibãs ou a resistência xiita no Iraque pós-2003. E, assim como aqueles, o Hamas tem grande apoio popular – em seu caso, um apoio urbano, dadas as características da Faixa de Gaza, que também fazem com que a tática da resistência seja de guerrilha urbana diante da atual invasão. O Centro Nacional de Contraterrorismo dos EUA admite o caráter popular do movimento ao informar que o Hamas utiliza “dispositivos explosivos improvisados”, “armas pequenas” e “sistemas de defesa aérea portáteis”, reconhecendo assim que a guerra de Israel é absolutamente assimétrica.

Tal como os seus antecessores vietnamitas, afegãos e iraquianos, o Hamas utiliza redes de milhares de túneis subterrâneos para transportar armas e combatentes e surpreender os ocupantes com emboscadas mortais. Mesmo que seja verdade que guerrilheiros se escondam sob instalações civis (o ex-primeiro-ministro Ehud Barak admitiu à CNN que foi Israel quem construiu bunkers sob o Hospital al-Shifa), isso não constituiu uma conduta indevida levando-se em conta que os esconderijos servem também aos civis, que são o grande sustentáculo do Hamas na guerra de todo o povo. Deste modo, é de total responsabilidade e culpa de Israel as mortes civis causadas por bombardeios a hospitais, escolas, prédios residenciais e campos de refugiados, mesmo que eles abriguem “terroristas”.

As características da militância de organizações como o Hamas e a Jihad Islâmica, assim como do Vietcongue e do Talibã, que significam o abandono desinteressado de todo o tipo de comodidade e a entrega ao martírio, são prova de que o movimento só será derrotado se todos os seus membros e apoiadores (atuais e futuros) forem mortos. Isto é, se toda a população palestina for exterminada. Caso contrário, os palestinos forçosamente continuarão a luta, até a vitória. O grupo de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento do Mundo Árabe revelou em seu levantamento que três quartos dos palestinos acreditam na vitória e, mesmo na Cisjordânia, onde o Hamas não governa, apenas 10% acham que o Movimento da Resistência Islâmica será derrotado. Isso significa que o moral dos palestinos está muito elevado e essa é uma condição essencial para a vitória em qualquer guerra, principalmente em uma guerra de libertação nacional de todo o povo contra um ocupante.
Essa disposição de luta também se comprova pelo fato de que, mesmo após dois meses de martírio em massa, os tradicionalmente inferiores armamentos do Hamas (em relação aos de um exército regular como o de Israel), muitos de produção doméstica, têm vencido o tão propagandeado Domo de Ferro e os israelenses reconhecem que seria muito difícil destruir completamente esses foguetes. O Haaretz revelou que não foram feridos somente 1.593 soldados israelenses (como divulgou Israel), mas sim 4.591. Até o dia 13 de dezembro também haviam morrido 115 militares de Israel em meio aos combates em Gaza. A Resistência Palestina continua revidando, e continuará revidando, mesmo que seja com paus e pedras (como fez tantas vezes), a agressão das forças de ocupação. Até a vitória.

O Hamas é fruto direto da opressão sionista e da natural insurgência contra os ocupantes. É fruto também dos erros, capitulações e traições da OLP. Assim como no Vietnã, no Afeganistão e no Iraque, a única maneira de os palestinos conseguirem sua independência é a rebelião armada. O abandono da luta radical contra os opressores foi a sentença de morte da OLP, assim como o é da esmagadora maioria dos regimes da Ásia Ocidental e do Norte da África. A pesquisa divulgada pela Press TV é prova da impopularidade da Autoridade Palestina: 92% dos moradores da Cisjordânia querem a renúncia de Mahmoud Abbas e 60% querem a dissolução da Autoridade Palestina – por outro lado, 82% apoiam a operação Tempestade de al-Aqsa, liderada pelo Hamas.

Os povos da região não suportam mais a opressão que sofrem de Israel e dos EUA e, enquanto essa opressão existir (ou seja, enquanto existir o Estado de Israel e a presença militar e econômica do imperialismo americano), eles nunca desistirão de lutar.

Eduardo Vasco

 

 

Eduardo Vasco é jornalista especializado em política internacional, correspondente de guerra e autor dos livros O povo esquecido: genocídio e resistência no Donbass e Bloqueio: a guerra silenciosa contra Cuba.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

[This article was first published on April 10, 2023.]

***

Two kinds of absolute controls are being prepared to implement The Great Reset, alias UN Agenda 2030. A potentially straitjacket and total control by programmable Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), and an all-oppressive health tyranny by WHO, overriding national Constitutional rights and national sovereignty as far as health measures are concerned.

The former will be “managed”, coordinated and supervised for faultless implementation, by the so-called Central Bank of Central Banks, the Bank for International Settlement (BIS); the latter by the 1948 Rockefeller-created, falsely called UN-agency WHO. The emerging tyrant’s budget is to 80% pharma, Gates and otherwise privately funded. Both are criminal organizations.

These are plans, not yet implemented. But the world better be aware, so We, the People, may stop this terrifying assault on humanity in its tracks.

CBDC may be upon us, humanity, rather sooner than later. Programmable CBDC is a weapon of mass destruction. The weapon has been in the planning for decades – and it fits right into the Bigger Picture of the Great Reset / Agenda 2030.

Programmable – means the money can be programmed on how it is to be spent by an individual, or blocked, or made to expire, or made to be used for certain goods or services – or it can be totally withheld, wiped out, depending on how well you behave, according to the standards of the all-commandeering death cult elite.

CBDC is a master control element, a stranglehold on the population.

Simultaneously, an all controlling health tyranny is being prepared by WHO. The plan is that the new totalitarian rules – Biden Administration initiated revised International Health Regulations (IHR), including a new Pandemic Treaty – are to be ratified by the World Health Assembly, presumably by the end of May 2023. If approved, by a two-thirds majority, the new rules will become effective in 2024.

Health Tyranny and Control by WHO

The elite who pretends to rule over humanity acts most silently from the shadows. It includes the financial giants, the largest funders of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the Davos Boys. The financial elite calls the shots on integrated and willing Klaus Schwab, WEF’s CEO.

In turn, Mr. Schwab passes on instructions to the World Health Organization (WHO), for example, to redesign and implement the revision of the IHR which now also includes a Pandemic Treaty.

First, Bill Gates, also one of the key sponsors of WHO, puts a shady Ethiopian politician, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, at the helm of WHO. Tedros, a buddy of Bill Gates, is former DG of the GAVI Vaxx-Alliance, also created and funded by the Gates Foundation. – So much for WHO being a UN Agency.

If these new IHR / Pandemic Treaty are approved by the World Health Assembly at the end of May 2023, the world (currently 194 WHO members) will be living under a “health tyranny”.

WHO would have overreaching powers over otherwise autonomous countries, being able to overrule national Constitutions and decide whether a disease must be treated as a pandemic, i.e., with massive vaccination.

For example, WHO could decide that henceforth the common flue must be treated as a pandemic. Since “covid”, any “vaccination” will be the gene-modifying mRNA type. The same viral-technology that has, with covid inoculations, caused already tens of millions of deaths around the world. Of course, not openly recognized, but over-mortality statistics, especially in the western world, alias, Global North, speak for themselves. They are congruent with the countries’ vaxx-injection rates.

People have no clue that when they next take their kid for a polio, or measles vaccination, their child will be injected with a potentially deadly mRNA-type toxic solution, producing immune-averse spike proteins. See this by Dr. Mike Yeadon, former VP and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer.

Total Obedience

To assure utmost obedience of countries, Klaus Schwab has on several occasions boasted that the, the WEF was able infiltrating scholars of the WEF “Academy” for Young Global Leaders (YGL) into governments around the world. They often are placed in Prime Minister’s or President’s positions. To name just a few of the more prominent ones – Justin Trudeau, Canada; Emmanuel Macron, France; Mark Rutte, Netherlands; former German Chancellor Angela Merkel; as well as Olaf Scholz, current Chancellor of Germany.

Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) – Welcome to the New Money Prison

The decision to introduce CBDC so-to-speak at warp speed was made at a Jackson Hole, WY, meeting in August 2019 by the Central Bankers of the G7 nations. They voted on a financial coup which was “Going Direct Reset”.

This was planned way ahead for at least the last 20 years, and now needed to be consolidated for the final stage of total and absolute financial control – the end game of the coming world tyranny. First applied by the Global North, where the impact will be greatest. 

It is weaponizing money into programmable and controllable CBDC – a Weapon of Mass Destruction.

The rest of the world will follow suit. That’s what they think. Destruction of the industrialized world is first. Germany is supposed to lead deindustrialization of Europe, prompted by artificially caused energy shortages. Then comes the absolute control of the world’s natural resources – so that reconstruction of the system, with a drastically reduced world population, may progress rather fast.

The US / NATO Ukraine proxy-war against Russia is a forerunner aiming at dominating Russia and her wealth of natural resources.

Governments and banksters are the people’s biggest, most nefarious, but least recognized enemies. How much longer does it take until a majority of people will wake up and stop this crime on humanity?

According to Katherine Austin Fitts, the introduction of CBDC, may put half a billion people out of work. That is just one part of the warfare. It is intimately connected to the plandemic. People did not die of covid, most perished from toxic vaxxes and from “covid” caused misery.

Dr. Michael Yeadon, former VP and Chief Scientist of Pfizer repeatedly said in his interviews and special addresses, the real, potentially massive dying, of the coerced vaxx-campaign – will take place after three and up to about ten years from the beginning of the vaxx-drive. Injections of mRNA material into people’s bodies began in December 2020. We are now entering year three. And hundreds of thousands, if not millions, around the world have already died due to the “vaxxes”, NOT covid.

Today, truth-seeking scientists and medical doctors warn – “don’t get vaxxed, it is dangerous for your health, the jabs may kill you.” If not, they may maim you for life, or reduce massively women’s and men’s fertility. The latter shows already up in statistics – in Europe from 20% to 40% reduced fertility in 2022. Yet, worldwide vaxx-drives go on – a bulldozer stopping from nothing.

How to weaponize money?

A threesome tyranny – a “trinity”, is at it.  The WEF and it’s behind the scene giant financiers; the Governments, and the banksters, through a network of national central banks, all controlled by the Bank for International Settlement (BIS), in Basel, Switzerland. The “health industry” – Big Pharma, health- and hospital facilities and insurances are following the line with digitized health records and digitized health services.

The 2019 G7 Jackson Hole decision on massive bank failures to bring about CBDC, started in early March 2023 on a relatively light note in the United States. The opening was the apparent collapse of California’s Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), California’s Silvergate Capital and NYC’s Signature Bank. None of them really needed to go into bankruptcy. They were “bailed out” by the Biden Administration, put in control of the “Regulator”, before rumors of failure could trigger a run on the bank.

We know how “rumors” can be fabricated or enhanced and how they may mobilize people.

On the other side of the Atlantic, Credit Suisse, second largest Swiss bank, had been plagued for the last two decades by scandals and “financial irregularities” one after the other, including drug money laundering, and helping Russian oligarch escape western sanctions by “disappearing “ documents linking them to their luxury yachts which were supposed to be confiscated.

Since earlier this year, the bank’s share value plummeted, first by the week, then by the day. For a complete list of financial scandals and more, see this.

Much of the loss of confidence was, again, based on rumors – and rumors can be spread – true or false.

There was never a need to put CS into receivership. The bank, according to many analysts, also FINMA (the Swiss banking “regulator”) was solvent, especially after CS supposedly received on Friday, 17 March, a 50 billion franc “bail-out” loan from the Swiss Central Bank.

According to insiders (CS analysts)- and outsiders, this amount of cash would have been enough to restructure the bank, including quietly getting rid of undesirable skeletons – regaining trust of people and shareholders – and be functional again within less than a year.

However, there may be another agenda for the sudden change in direction, during the weekend, 18/19 March. Janet Yellen, US Secretary of Treasury, UK and German senior Ministry of Finance officials were in “consultation” with the Swiss Minister of Finance.

Outside pressure again cut into Swiss sovereignty politically and in terms of Swiss reputed private banking services.

What happened then, is the complete opposite to what the 50 billion “bail-out” should have achieved. One may ask, was the CHF 50 billion government “bail-out” just a disguise?

In an apparent sudden change of direction, the Swiss Government, without any consultation of shareholders and holders of some CHF 16 billion worth of bonds, forced UBS, the largest Swiss bank, to take over its slightly smaller sister, CS. Even stranger, this happened by applying a shady emergency decree. CS was never in an emergency of insolvency.

CS shareholders had to accept a take-over price of CHF 3 billion, about CHF 0.76 / share, less than half its last quoted share value. The bank’s infrastructure alone is worth a multiple of the take-over price.

On Sunday, March 19, the Swiss regulator FINMA announced that the so-called additional tier-one bonds (AT1) of about CHF 16 billion will be written to zero as part of the deal. Neither the shareholders or the bondholders were warned.

This precipitous coerced deal has not gone down well in Europe. A famous law Professor at the Swiss Fribourg law-specialized university, called Switzerland a “Banana Republic”.

The conservative Swiss newspaper NZZ reported on 19 March 2023 that a few months ago nobody would have believed the downfall of CS was possible. In 2007, CS had a stock value of over CHF 100 billion. It was gradually reduced to CHF 7 billion, less than a week before the decreed take-over. The paper concludes that Switzerland got rid of a Zombie-bank, but acquired instead a Monster-bank. After the merger, UBS will have about 5 trillion worth of managed assets. Compare this with about 10 trillion of BlackRock.

Instead of a 50 billion bailout credit – which would have been paid back, the new deal costs Switzerland about 230 billion – a 200 billion Central Bank line of credit, of which hundred billion are fully guaranteed by the Swiss Government (taxpayers), plus a 9 billion guarantee (taxpayer) for UBS losses, plus other guarantees in case of defaults.

As a sideline, the Swiss Central Bank, on 5 March declared one of the biggest losses in its recent history, of CHF132.5 billion. You add to this a potential loss position of another some CHF 100 to 200 billion – that makes you think – what else is planned to wipe out this debt?

The major CS shareholders may launch a massive law suit against the Swiss Government. Saudi National Bank (10%), Saudi Olayan Group (5%), plus Qatar Holding (5%), hold together about 20%. For these oil-producing countries legal fees may not be an issue, but creating a precedent will be important. BlackRock with about 4.1% CS shares stays for now on the sidelines.

Looks and smells like all of this has been planned by a long hand. Remember the G7 Central Bankers meeting at Jackson Hole, Wy in 2019?

Financial Times and Forbes report that there are about 200 small-to medium size US banks “at the brink” of collapse. The Credit Suisse collapse, one of the world’s 30 systemically most important banks, also one of the “Too Big to Fail” banks, rescued by the Swiss Government, may just set the beginning of a massive domino of bank failures in the US and Europe. See this.

BlackRock’s Vice Chairman, responsible for Investments, Philipp Hildebrand, is the former President of the Swiss National Bank (forced out in 2016, because of a personal scandal), then joined BlackRock. He knows how the wheels turn in Switzerland.

The Biden Administration’s rule of order, ignores the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act that eliminates government bail-outs and opened the door for bail-ins, allowing banks to confiscating creditors’ money and converting it into equity. If this government bail-out policy continues, a never-seen before government debt will accrue. The same may apply in Europe, amassing potentially hundreds of trillions of national debts, on both sides of the Atlantic.

This would be the ideal moment to introduce at once in the western world – US, UK, Canada, Europe, but also Japan and Australia – programmable Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC).

These countries’ combined 2022 GDP amounts to about US$ 50 trillion equivalent, almost half of the 2022 world GDP (US$ 103.86 trillion). See this (World Bank data).

*

Within the shortest period of time, the western US-dollar-based economy’s debt could be wiped out with one stroke – with a new kind of money, the CBDC. With another stroke, the entire ignorant western population could be doubly straitjacketed – by WHO’s Health Tyranny, as well as by programmable CBDC.

It is high time that We, the People, around the world gain consciousness and become aware of the dictatorial measures waiting just a short stretch down road to be implemented. Then, the bulk of The Great Reset / Agenda 2030 would have been achieved. Once that happens, it will be difficult to escape.

It is time that We the People, request our governments to exit WHO – in Switzerland a referendum to this effect has already been initiated – and that we are prepared for setting up parallel governments with local money, totally delinked from existing banking and central banks.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years 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).

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing. 

Featured image is from International Man

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC): The Weaponization of Money? WHO’s Health Tyranny: Towards a Totalitarian World Government? No Way!
  • Tags: , , ,

WHO Pandemic Treaty’s Global Power Grab in May 2024

December 14th, 2023 by Global Health Project

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Pogrom. This Russian term denotes a violent riot incited with the aim of massacring Jews and destroying their property. One of the deadliest pogroms (50 Jews were killed and nearly 600 wounded) took place in Kishinev [Chișinău, Moldava] a hundred and twenty years ago, in April 1903. But the trauma of Russian Zionists facing the oppression in Tsarist Russia over a century ago continues to inform Israel’s political culture. 

The Russian word has been widely used by Israelis to characterise the Hamas attack on Southern Israel in October 2023. It had also been used before. For example, an Israeli general employed it a few weeks earlier when armed Zionist settlers attacked the Palestinian village of Huwara on the occupied West Bank.

These attacks have intensified since. The term appears appropriate since gun-toting Israeli vigilantes were attacking unarmed civilians.

Kieff (Rusia).—La expulsión de los judíos eslavos: familias israelitas abandonando sus hogares. Public Domain, Link

However, the use of this term for the Hamas attack has provoked debate. Some argue that Hamas conducted the operation as an act of resistance against one of the best armed states in the world. They would not call the attack a pogrom because it was ultimately directed at a powerful state enforcing a system deemed oppressive and illegitimate by its victims.

Others put emphasis on the purely civilian targets of the attack such as the music festival which may justify the use of the Russian word. They attribute the Hamas attack to antisemitism, i.e., unmotivated hatred, rather than see in it a reaction to decades of suffering and misery inflicted by the Zionist state.

However, within the state of Israel, despite its formidable military might, including nuclear weapons, the term has caught on. It was claimed that the number of Jews killed on one day in the Hamas attack was the highest since the Nazi genocide. This drew a direct line with the Nazi genocide and created the impression that Jews were once again powerless in the face of “pure unadulterated evil”, as the U.S. President put it. 

When, two weeks into Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, the U.N. Secretary General reminded the world that the Hamas attack had not happened in a vacuum, Tel Aviv indignantly called for his resignation.

There is little tolerance for any mention of the Israeli blockade of Gaza since 2007, and, more generally, of Israeli responsibility for the dispossession, deportation, and murder of Palestinians since 1947.

These look like the manifest cause of the Palestinian resistance.

Most Israelis also prefer to ignore the fact that the millions of Palestinians trapped in Gaza are largely descendants of those that the Zionist militias and the Israeli military expelled from their homes in what is now the state of Israel. Israeli officials and its fans elsewhere usually deploy arrogance and self-righteousness to reject rational debate about the Hamas attack.

Besides the obvious political purposes of this PR strategy, one can notice a genuine embrace of the term “pogrom” in Israeli society at large.

Ideologically committed Zionists used to treat pogrom victims of over a century ago and survivors of the Nazi genocide with shame and disdain. They were blamed for lacking the courage to fight, for “going as sheep to the slaughter”.

Haim Nahman Bialik, who later became a cultural icon in Israel, in a poem written following the Kishinev pogrom, castigated the survivors, heaping shame upon their heads. Bialik lashed out at the men who hid in stinking holes, “crouched husbands, bridegrooms, brothers, peering from the cracks, “while their non-Jewish neighbors raped their wives and daughters. This poem, in the Russian translation by Vladimir Jabotinsky, remains one of the strongest literary depictions of the pogrom.

Brenner, another poet and like Bialik the son of a pious Russian Jewish family, radically transformed the best-known verse of the Jewish prayer book “Hear, O Israel, God is your Lord, God is one!” one of the first verses taught to children and the last to be spoken by a Jew before his death. Brenner’s revised verse proclaimed: “Hear, O Israel! Not an eye for an eye. Two eyes for one eye, all their teeth for every humiliation!”

This is how these and many other Zionist writers stoked the fires of revenge and violence. As the Diaspora Jew was a coward, so the Zionist Jew — the New Hebrew, the Israeli Jew — must be a warrior.

Later, recognized as the collective legatee of the victims of the Nazis, the state of Israel was awarded crucial financial resources from West Germany and other countries. At the same time, a transformation was taking place: while it was becoming militarily stronger, the state of Israel was claiming to be recognized not only as a legatee of past victims but as an actual collective and righteous victim in its own right.

The Eichmann trial in 1961 marked a watershed in this respect. From then on, the state of Israel has emphasised its continuity with the victims and introduced Holocaust studies into public education. Israeli officials argue that their country is unfairly treated as a harmless collective Jew. In the face of opprobrium for the mass bombing of Gaza in 2023 the Israeli delegates at the United Nations started wearing yellow six-pointed stars, like those imposed on the Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe.

The pretense of being a blameless victim justifies Israeli reliance on military force. “Ein brera!”, “we have no choice” is a common Israeli explanation of violence. Jabotinsky formulated the Zionist concept of the Iron Wall, of terrorising the Arabs into submission, and published it in Russian in 1923. His concept is being reconfirmed a century later. Moreover, political compromises with the Palestinians appear suspect and dangerous. Israeli Prime Minister Itzhak Rabin who tried to reach such a compromise was assassinated, effectively putting an end to the idea of a Palestinian state next to Israel.

The European Jewish memory of victimhood has been maintained, cultivated, and transmitted to future generations of Israelis.

The collective memory of the pogroms in the Pale of Settlement and the death camps in Poland has been inculcated in Israeli schools. All the students, whether or not their ancestors suffered at the hand of the Nazis, are led to make the same conclusion: Arabs attack us just because we are Jews. No wonder this is the way many Israelis view the Hamas attack, which enables them to support the massive violence being inflicted on the Palestinians.

Since October 2023, comparisons of Palestinian resistance with the Nazis have acquired a new life. One of the best-known precedents belongs to Menachem Begin who, during Israel’s first invasion of Lebanon, compared Arafat to Hitler.

This was meant to make the massive bombardment of Beirut in 1982 appear morally sound. Such comparisons are now used to justify a much deadlier bombardment of Gaza. The proportion of civilian casualties in these bombardments surpassed that of all the cases of warfare in the 20th century.

The state of Israel tends also to dehumanize the Palestinians to vindicate what many experts qualify as genocide. An Israeli high school history teacher was put in solitary confinement  for making Facebook posts showing the names and faces of a few of the 18,000 Palestinians killed during Israel’s assault on Gaza. The Zionist state apparently considers humanizing the Palestinians an existential threat.

The paradigm of the Kishinev pogrom is rallied to provide a moral carte blanche for the Israeli destruction of Gaza.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Yakov M. Rabkin is Professor Emeritus of History at the Université of Montréal. His publications include over 300 articles and a few books: Science between Superpowers, A Threat from Within: a Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism, What is Modern Israel?, Demodernization: A Future in the Past and Judaïsme, islam et modernité. He did consulting work for, inter alia, OECD, NATO, UNESCO and the World Bank. E-mail: [email protected]. Website: www.yakovrabkin.ca 

Featured image is from Informed Comment

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Even before the start of the special military operation (SMO), the mainstream media had been running several propaganda narratives, almost simultaneously. Shortly before the SMO and in the first few days, there was the claim that Russia would take Kiev in three days and most of Ukraine in a week. However, as this didn’t happen (nor was it ever planned to unfold this way in the Kremlin), the mainstream propaganda machine went full afterburner in the opposite direction. Now, Moscow was suddenly losing, the Kiev regime forces are unbeatable, the Russians are suffering from extremely low morale due to massive losses, they’re running out of missiles, shells, fuel and so on, and so forth.

These ludicrous myths never stopped and continued until the failure of the much-touted counteroffensive. That was when many in the political West adopted a somewhat less propagandistic tone and tried mixing in some “realism”. However, this didn’t have the desired effect on the populace in Western Europe and North America. Thus, there’s a slow return to the most ridiculous propaganda one could possibly imagine. For instance, the Wall Street Journal claims that the Neo-Nazi junta will be “able to seize the initiative on the battlefield in 2025 if it can hold out against Russia until the end of next year”. This narrative is being pushed despite the fact that the United States, its primary backer, is about to stop the money flow.

The report initially doesn’t come off as propagandistic as one would expect, but towards the end, the authors still tried pushing debunked propaganda narratives. There are several instances of somewhat unexpected admissions, such as the obvious failure of the Kiev regime’s counteroffensive, as well as the dwindling financial support from the political West. The report also touched upon the growing divisions within the Neo-Nazi junta and the fact that its battered military will need time to recover. However, in a response to the WSJ, its Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba challenged this with a claim that “any pause in the fighting now would allow Russia to regroup and prepare for large-scale offensive operations”.

Kuleba even stated that the Kiev regime forces are preparing fresh brigades for “new counteroffensive and defensive operations”. The WSJ supported the idea and even went as far as to claim that “2024 will be the year of the recovery [for the Neo-Nazi junta troops]”. However, the authors admit that this comes with an important caveat, as the Kiev regime and its NATO overlords will need to “work through their current adversities and continue delivering supplies to troops, an emerging best-case scenario among Western strategists is that next year becomes a year of rebuilding for Kiev’s military“, adding that “the hope would be that a limited number of Ukrainian soldiers can hold Russian forces at bay”.

This would supposedly “allow NATO countries time to train fresh Ukrainian troops, expand armament production and restock Ukraine’s arsenals”. As indicated during a recent NATO meeting, the political West hopes that Russia’s incremental offensive operations will fail, “resulting in a depletion of its manpower and munitions, potentially offering Ukraine better prospects to retake the battlefield initiative in the spring of 2025, if it gets through next year”. However, the WSJ concluded the report with a not-so-optimistic remark of a Ukrainian infantry sergeant who said that when he talks to people at home he tells them that “everything is going well” and doesn’t describe what he sees or feels, which isn’t so upbeat.

“What is the point?”, the WSJ quoted the Ukrainian sergeant.

While the WSJ certainly is part of the mainstream, it’s still a bit more reputable than many other outlets of America’s massive propaganda machine. For instance, the infamous CNN is beating its own records in laughable claims by publishing that “Russia has lost a staggering 87% of the total number of active-duty ground troops it had prior to launching its invasion of Ukraine and two-thirds of its pre-invasion tanks”. Of course, this information came from “a source familiar with a declassified US intelligence assessment provided to Congress”. The assessment was sent on December 11, as the Republican-dominated Congress was in the middle of effectively canceling the “Ukraine aid”.

The “intelligence” assessment supposedly found that “the war has sharply set back 15 years of Russian effort to modernize its ground force”. Then came the numbers game, where CNN claims that “of the 360,000 troops that entered Ukraine, including contract and conscript personnel, Russia has lost 315,000 on the battlefield, 2,200 of 3,500 tanks and 4,400 of 13,600 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers have also been destroyed, a 32% loss rate”. CNN says it reached out to the Russian Embassy for comment, which is yet to respond. The most likely scenario is that His Excellency Ambassador Anatoly Antonov is still laughing uncontrollably after reading all this. And he certainly isn’t the only one.

“The idea that Ukraine was going to throw Russia back to the 1991 borders was preposterous,” Sen. J.D. Vance, a Republican from Ohio, said on CNN’s State of the Union on December 10, adding: “So what we’re saying to the president and really to the entire world is, you need to articulate what the ambition is. What is $61 billion going to accomplish that $100 billion hasn’t?”

Even CNN had to admit that “Ukraine remains deeply vulnerable”, as its “highly anticipated counteroffensive stagnated through the fall”, and that “US officials believe that Kiev is unlikely to make any major gains over the coming months”. As for the alleged “staggering losses” of the Russian military, the truth is that Moscow hasn’t been this strong militarily since at least the 1980s. In addition, the Kremlin is effectively returning to a Soviet superpower level with its latest military strategy shift. The very idea that Russia lost well over 300,000 soldiers is beyond ludicrous, as the country would be littered with new military cemeteries in virtually every major settlement. On the contrary, it’s precisely Ukraine that looks like that thanks to the NATO-backed Neo-Nazi junta.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Russian T-80 Tank in Ukraine (Source: mil.ru)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The United Nations Security Council vote on December 8, calling for an immediate cease-fire in Palestine, was a public humiliation of the United States. When explaining their vote, numerous countries denounced the U.S. — Israel’s number one supporter — as the accomplice, the enabler and the real force behind the Zionist destruction in Gaza.

The U.S. vetoed the resolution, making the resounding vote by every other member of the current Security Council unenforceable. Britain, the only remaining U.S. ally, acted like a loyal lap dog and abstained. Yet the vote was unprecedented; 100 member countries of the U.N. signed on to the resolution with less than 24 hours’ notice.

It is politically significant that the U.S. effort to amend the resolution, by inserting a condemnation of the Oct. 7 actions by the united Palestinian resistance, was refused. The vote was an assertion of the Palestinian right to resist occupation — a right that has long been recognized in international law but is usually ignored.

U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield attempted to label Hamas as a terrorist force. This also went down in public defeat, which was a global victory for the Palestinian resistance.

Of course, the U.N. has been a mere talk shop for decades. Its Secretariat and even its “humanitarian organizations” have been largely controlled through heavy-handed U.S. dictates. But the fact that more than 100 U.N. personnel have been killed by Israeli bombs in Gaza is fueling enormous anger at the U.S. within the body. The deaths of its workers are challenging toothless and usually complicit U.N. agencies to publicly denounce the killing of over 17,000 Palestinians.

Pressure on Guterres Led to Vote Being Called

Pressure from within the United Nations is what led the usually compliant U.N. Secretary General António Guterres to convene the emergency meeting. For the first time in his tenure as Secretary-General, Guterres invoked Article 99 of the U.N. Charter, under which he “may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.”

On X, Guterres posted:

“Facing a severe risk of collapse of the humanitarian system in Gaza, I urge the Council to help avert a humanitarian catastrophe and appeal for a humanitarian cease-fire to be declared.”

Growing U.S. isolation and its waning ability to enforce its domination through any political forum was confirmed in a stark new way. Only its military firepower remains. This overwhelming firepower is being challenged by a small armed resistance in a totally occupied Gaza.

The resistance in the West Bank is defending Palestinians from armed settler lynch mobs who operate with the Israeli Occupation Forces. In the past, these enforcers of apartheid acted with impunity. In addition to the armed resistance, a call for a Global General Strike has resonated in the West Bank and the surrounding countries, bringing about a total shutdown on Dec. 11.

Israel is being challenged by revolutionary forces in Yemen, who through several drone and missile attacks and then by daringly boarding Israeli-owned freighters, have forced all other Israeli chartered ships to avoid the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. They must navigate around Africa and into the Mediterranean Sea, causing the cost of supplies to skyrocket.

The U.N. vote is mirrored in hundreds of votes by unions and student assemblies, city council resolutions and actions by grassroots organizations globally. This can’t be shut down by U.S. demands.

The vote in the U.N. Security Council has now moved to the United Nations General Assembly. This vote, scheduled for Dec. 12, will lead to a further U.S. humiliation and a resounding defense of Palestine’s right to resist occupation.

Map depicts isolation of U.S, Israel in U.N. General Assembly vote in October 2023. (Map: Geopolitical Economy Report)

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Sara Flounders is an American political writer active in progressive and anti-war organizing since the 1960s. She is a Contributing Editor of the Marxist Workers World newspaper as well as a principal leader of the International Action Center. Sara also works actively with the SanctionsKill Campaign and United National Antiwar CoalitionSara can be reached at [email protected].

She is a regular contributor to Global Research. 

Featured image: US Embassy in Jerusalem. Image: Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs/ Flickr

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

 

It is hard for those who have not lived through the shattering political assassinations of the 1960s to grasp their significance for today. Many might assume that that was then and long before their time, so let’s move on to what we must deal with today. 

Let some old folks, the obsessive ones, live in the past. It is an understandable but mistaken attitude that this documentary will quickly shatter, visually and audibly.

The echoes of those guns that killed President John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Senator Robert F. Kennedy in rapid succession repeat and repeat and repeat down through the years, and their echoes bang off the walls of all today’s news that springs from the cells of all the little digital dinguses that provide a constant stream of distractions and fear porn meant to titillate but not illuminate the connections between then and now, nor those between the four subjects of this illuminating film.

Today we are living the consequences of the CIA/national security state’s 1960s takeover of the country. Their message then and now: We, the national security state, rule, we have the guns, the media, and the power to dominate you. We control the stories you are meant to hear. If you get uppity, well-known, and dare challenge us, we will buy you off, denigrate you, or, if neither works, we will kill you. You are helpless, they reiterate endlessly. Bang. Bang. Bang.

But they lie, and this series, beginning with its first installment (see sneak peek here), will tell you why. It will show why understanding the past is essential for transforming the present. It will profoundly inspire you to see and hear these four bold and courageous men refuse to back down to the evil forces that shot them down. It will open your eyes to the parallel spiritual paths they walked and the similarity of the messages they talked about – peace, justice, racism, human rights, and the need for economic equality – not just in the U.S.A. but across the world, for the fate of all people was then, and is now, linked to the need to transform the U.S. warfare state into a country of peace and human reconciliation, just as these four men radically underwent deep transformations in the last year of their brief lives.

Click Here to Access Trailer with Sound 

Click Here to access Trailer 

Four Died Trying, directed by John Kirby, the wonderful filmmaker who made The American Ruling Class with and about Lewis Lapham, and produced by Libby Handros, his partner in exposing the criminals that run the country, has just begun streaming.

As I watched the first twenty minutes of this opening episode, I was inwardly screaming, feeling deep in my soul how powerfully the film was capturing the essence of the dynamic, prophetic, and charismatic voices of JFK, Malcolm X, MLK, Jr., and RFK. All shot down – we hear the gun shots – by deep state forces, even as the film artfully juxtaposes this brutality against video clips of new reports, images of advertisements for silly products, and television shows that kept most of the public entertained and distracted during the 1960s carnage. Doing the Hokey Pokey, as the soundtrack plays it, but not turning around in a profound sense, as did the four who died trying to radically change the country and the world for the better.  Simply as film art, this documentary is ingenious. And its use of music is great.

I was transported back to the time of my youth. I was startled again by the powerful courage, passion, and eloquent intelligence of those four compelling voices that once lifted my spirits to the heavens, and I felt the despair as well as each assassination followed the other and my spirits sank. It is not nostalgic, I am sure, to say that one is hard pressed to find those qualities in many leaders today.  Like others of my generation, I am still trying to grasp the depths of what their assassinations did to me. Bob Dylan, who came to prominence in the midst of it all, referring ironically to his own life and work, has said that his first girlfriend was named Echo. I think I know her, for she echoed down the canyons of my mind as I watched this prologue and continues as I now reflect upon it.

So it does get hard to be objective, if that is what you want. I don’t. This not-to-be-missed film is truthful, for it uses vintage footage of what these men said and what was said against them by a government/media intent of distorting their messages and their assassinations. Listen and then research if you have any doubts. See if the film is truthful or manipulative. As one who has deeply studied these matters, I can attest to the former.

And I can tell you that if you are young and never knew about these four guys and what men they were – not in any macho sense, but as true lovers of human beings, men with chests, as C.S. Lewis described those who were true and brave and undaunted by the then current vibes that sucked the soul out of you, not pseudo-men in the “pumping iron” sense, not men who tried to appeal to your grossest stereotypes – you are in for a great surprise. You will yearn to see them resurrected in others today. In yourselves.  As Malcolm X said hopefully, “The dead are arising.”

This 58 minute prologue touches on many of themes that will follow in the months ahead. Season One will be divided into chapters that cover the four assassinations together with background material covering “the world as it was” in the 1950s with its Cold War propaganda, McCarthyism, the rise of the military-industrial complex, the CIA, red-baiting, and the ever present fear of nuclear war.

Season Two will be devoted to the government and media coverups, citizen investigations, and the intelligence agencies’ and their media mouthpieces’ mind control operations aimed at the American people that continue today.

One important aspect of this documentary series – never before done in film – is the way it shows the linkages between these four great leaders. Beside their own words, we hear from their families and associates throughout. Based on over 120 interviews conducted over many years, we hear from the four men’s children, Vince Salandria, James W. Douglass, Mort Sahl, Harry Belafonte, Khaleed Sayyed, Earl Caldwell, Clarence Jones, James Galbraith, John Hunt, Stephen Schlesinger, Andrew Young, Oliver Stone, David Talbot, Adam Walinsky, et al. It is an amazing list of thoughtful commentators who tell the story for the dead men whose living tongues have been silenced, although we are privileged for their fatidic cinematic ghosts to speak to us through archival footage.

In this opening Prologue, I was especially impressed with the words of Vince Salandria, one of the earliest critics of the Warren Commission’s absurd claims, and Adam Walinsky, a former aide and speechwriter for RFK, who made it clear that we are free, no matter what the propagandists tell us. That freedom to think and act, to make connections between then and now, to see the linkages between the four men’s messages and today, is crucial to carry on their legacy. That message ends the Prologue. It is a message of hope in a dark time.

This opening prologue is divided into four parts, each devoted to what each man tried to accomplish.  That is followed by a section on how they died and the ways it was buried, ending with an Epilogue on why they died and why it matters today.

All four died fighting the international power structure, the CIA and FBI, the military-industrial complex, the racist ideology central to the capitalist elites’ economic injustice and warfare state – those deep structures of power that have come to be called the deep state.  They were brothers in arms, their only weapons being their linked arms in a spiritual war against evil forces.  They were men of compassionate conscience, warriors for peace and justice for all.  That is why they were killed.

Four Died Trying is a profound documentary. It is good that each episode will be a stand-alone short film – that gives the viewer time to absorb its lessons rather than binging on too much too soon.  Once you watch this prologue, with its overview of all to come, you will be hooked.  It is not just revelatory history, but is artistically made, and, dare I say, entertaining. Kirby and Handros are astute to realize that young people demand more than lectures, and it is to the next generations that these voices must be addressed.  For although the times have changed, in so many ways we are today faced with all the same problems. The deep wounds of the 1960s were never given careful treatment; they are now suppurating and the infection is spreading.

Then and now. There is a powerful clip in the film of Senator Robert Kennedy giving a speech in Chicago when he has decided to enter the race for the presidency right after the Tet Offensive in Vietnam, a massive breakout surprise to U.S. authorities who thought they could contain and defeat the Vietnamese struggle for independence; that they had them trapped. Kennedy has decided to enter the race for President and realizes that supporting a corrupt South Vietnamese government and their ruthless policies aimed at exterminating the Vietcong and North Vietnamese is morally wrong and runs counter to American attestations of the belief in democracy and justice for all. He says about such an impossible military victory:

. . . and that the effort to win such a victory will only result in the further slaughter of thousands of innocent and helpless people—a slaughter which will forever rest on all our consciences and the national conscience of the country.

His was a powerful moral voice. Who is standing with the innocent and helpless people today? And who is standing with the killers? As Martin Luther King, Jr., put it, “A time comes when silence is betrayal.” And procrastination is still the thief of time and conscience whispers those pathetic words: Too Late.

Don’t miss Four Died Trying. I am sure it will affect you deeply and force you to think twice over about what is going on today.

Yes, then and now. To slightly alter the song, As Time Goes By:

It’s still the same old story.
A fight for love and glory.
A case of do and die.
The world will always welcome lovers
As time goes by.

*

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.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

From Dallas to Gaza: Was JFK’s Assassination Instrumental in Strengthening Zionist Israel?

By Rick Sterling, December 13, 2023

President John F. Kennedy was assassinated 60 years ago. If he had  lived and won a second term, the Israeli Palestinian conflict would have evolved differently. Possibly the path toward Israeli apartheid and genocide in Gaza could have been avoided. 

A Wall and a Watchtower: Why Is Israel Failing? Ilan Pappe

By Ilan Pappe, December 14, 2023

These architects of Zionism were too racist and orientalist, like the rest of Europe, to realize how progressive Palestinian society was in relation to that period, with an educated and politicized urban elite and a rural community living at peace within a genuine system of co-existence and solidarity. 

Getting Serious About Halting Israeli Genocide

By Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies, December 14, 2023

On Friday, December 8, the UN Security Council met under Article 99 for only the fourth time in the UN’s history. Article 99 is an emergency provision that allows the Secretary General to summon the Council to respond to a crisis that “threatens the maintenance of international peace and security.”

Is Free Speech a Relic in America?

By James Bovard, December 13, 2023

Is the First Amendment becoming a historic relic? On July 4, 2023, federal judge Terry Doughty condemned the Biden administration for potentially “the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.”

The U.S. Is Complicit with Israel in the Genocide in Gaza

By Steven Sahiounie, December 13, 2023

A UN Security Council vote on December 8, demanding an immediate humanitarian cease-fire in the Israel-Gaza war, failed because the U.S. used their veto power in the sole dissenting vote. The U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, did not cast the damning vote, she sent her assistant instead, shielding herself from the disgust of the international community.

Zelensky’s “Rose-tinted” Speeches No Longer Convince His Team or Military

By Ahmed Adel, December 13, 2023

Sources familiar with Zelensky’s communications strategy told the Financial Times that the purpose of these messages is to maintain optimism at home and abroad and that there is a communications policy applied at all levels of the state, including strict censorship of bad news, such as the number of Ukrainian casualties or the success of Russian troops.

Pfizer Has a Criminal Record

By US Department of Justice and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, December 13, 2023

In September 2009, the U.S Justice Department attorneys and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius held a news conference “dealing with a health care-related settlement”. Pfizer Inc which is currently involved in the Worldwide distribution of the mRNA vaccine, was accused in 2009 of “Fraudulent Marketing”.

Genocide and a Holocaust – Palestine, Gaza AD 2023. Open Letter to Lord Cameron, U.K. Foreign Secretary

By Dr. David Halpin, December 13, 2023

I will be ‘personal’ but the current and most terrible holocaust in Gaza requires this. About a quarter of my practice involved looking after dear children, often from infancy and with skeletal defects such as congenital dislocation of the hip, club foot etc. Included were those with cerebral palsy – often caused by injury during birth.

Women’s Rights and the Dominant Neoliberal Agenda: The Current Global Trajectory Is Far from Sustainable

By Tina Renier, December 13, 2023

In these perilous times of growing unpredictability, I also think of how public debt as new form of colonialism and imperialism has influenced the everyday lives of peoples in the Global South, which are former colonies of Empires.

Ret. Col. Ann Wright Unmasks the Truth in Arms Transfer Debate

By Melissa Garriga, December 13, 2023

In a heated session at the United Nations Security Council, diplomats engaged in a vigorous debate over the provision of arms to Ukraine amid the protracted war with Russia. The eleventh meeting on this pressing issue since Russia invaded in February of 2022 drew sharp criticisms from multiple speakers, who accused Moscow of deflecting attention from its own aggression.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

It is quite possible that the early thinkers and leaders of the Zionist movement, back in late 19th century Europe, imagined, or at least hoped, that Palestine was an empty land and if there were people there, they were rootless nomadic tribes that, in essence, did not inhabit the land. 

If this had been the case, quite possibly the Jewish refugees making their way to that empty land would have built a prosperous society and, maybe, would have found a way to prevent polarizing themselves from the Arab World. 

What we do know, as a matter of fact, is that quite a few of the early architects of Zionism were perfectly aware of the fact that Palestine was not an empty land. 

These architects of Zionism were too racist and orientalist, like the rest of Europe, to realize how progressive Palestinian society was in relation to that period, with an educated and politicized urban elite and a rural community living at peace within a genuine system of co-existence and solidarity. 

Palestinian society was on the threshold of modernity – like so many other societies in the region; a blend of traditional heritage and new ideas. This would have been the basis for a national identity and a vision of freedom and independence on that very land they had inhabited for centuries. 

Zionists certainly knew in advance that Palestine was the land of the Palestinians, but they perceived the native population as a demographic obstacle, which had to be removed in order for the Zionist project of building a Jewish state in Palestine to succeed. 

This is how the Zionist phrase “The Palestine Question” or “The Palestine Problem” entered the political lexicon of world politics. 

In the eyes of the Zionist leadership, this “problem” could only be solved by displacing the Palestinians and replacing them with Jewish immigrants. 

Moreover, Palestine had to be torn out of the Arab world and built as a front post, serving the aspirations of Western imperialism and colonialism to take over the Middle East as a whole.

It all began with Homa and Migdal – literally, a wall and a watchtower. 

‘Wall and Watchtower’ 

These two elements were seen as the most important landmarks in the Jewish “return” to the supposedly empty land, and they are still present in every Zionist settlement until today.   

At the time, Palestinian villages had no walls or watchtowers, and they still do not have them today.  

People moved freely in and out, enjoying the view of villages along the road, as well as the food and water available for every passerby.  

Zionist settlements, on the contrary, religiously guarded their orchards and fields and perceived anyone touching them as robbers and terrorists. This is why, from the very beginning, they did not build normal human habitats, but bastions with walls and watchtowers – blurring the difference between civilians and soldiers in the settler community. 

For a short moment, the Zionist settlements won the accolade of the socialist and communist movements around the world, simply because they were places where communism was unsuccessfully and fanatically experimented with. The nature of these settlements, however, tells us, from the very beginning, what Zionism meant to the land and its people.

Whoever came as a Zionist, whether hoping to find an empty land, or determined to make it an empty land, was drafted into a settler military society that could only implement the dream of the empty land by sheer force. 

The native population declined the offer to, in the words of Theodore Herzl, be “spirited away” to other countries.  

Despite the huge disappointment by the British retraction from its early promises to respect the right of self-determination for all the Arab peoples, the Palestinians still hoped that the Empire would protect them from the Zionist project of replacement and displacement. 

By the 1930s, the leaders of the Palestinian community understood that this would not be the case. Therefore, they rebelled, only to be brutally crushed by the Empire that was meant to protect them, according to the ‘Mandate’ it received from the League of Nations. 

The Empire also stood by when the settler movement perpetrated a huge ethnic cleansing operation in 1948, resulting in the expulsion of half of the native population during the Nakba.

After the Catastrophe, however, Palestine was still full of Palestinians, and those expelled refused to accept any other identity and fought for their return, as they do to this day.

Keeping the ‘Dream’ Alive

 Those who remained in historical Palestine continued to prove that the land was not empty and that the settlers needed to use force to achieve their goal of turning an Arab, Muslim and Christian Palestine into a European Jewish one. 

With every passing year, more force needed to be used to achieve this European dream at the expense of the Palestinian people. 

By 2020, we have already marked one hundred years of an ongoing attempt to implement, by force, the vision of turning an ‘empty land’ into a Jewish entity. Moreover, for some democratic as well as some theocratic reasons, it seems that there is no Jewish consensus on this part of the ‘vision’ 

Billions and billions of American taxpayers’ money was, and is still needed to maintain the dream of the empty land of Palestine – and the relentless Zionist quest to realize it.  

An unprecedented repertoire of violent and ruthless means had to be employed on a daily basis against Palestinians, their villages and cities, or the whole Gaza Strip, in order to maintain the dream.   

The human cost paid by the Palestinians for this failed project has been enormous – and is around 100,000 to date.  

The number of wounded, traumatized Palestinians is so high that probably every Palestinian family has at least one member, whether a child, a woman or a man, who can be included in this list.

The nation of Palestine – whose human capital was able to move economies and cultures around the Arab world – has been fragmented and prevented from exhausting this incredible potential for their own benefit. 

This is the background for the genocidal policy that Israel is now enacting in Gaza and for the unprecedented killing campaign in the West Bank. 

Only Democracy? 

These tragic events raise, once more, the conundrum: How can the West and the Global North claim that this violent project of maintaining millions of Palestinians under oppression, is carried out by the only democracy in the Middle East? 

Maybe even more importantly, why do so many supporters of Israel and the Israeli Jews themselves believe that this is a sustainable project in the 21st century?

The truth is, it is not sustainable. 

The problem is that its disintegration could be a long process and a very bloody one, whose principal victims would be the Palestinians. 

It is also not clear if the Palestinians are ready to take over, as a united liberation movement, following the final stages of the disintegration of the Zionist project.

Will they be able to shake off the sense of defeat and rebuild their homeland as a free country for all in the future? 

Personally, I have great faith in the young Palestinian generation, who will be able to do so.

This last phase could be less violent; it could be more constructive and productive for both societies, that of the settlers and that of the colonized people, if only the region and the world intervened now. 

If some nations stopped enraging millions of people by claiming that a century-old project – aimed to empty a land from its indigenous people by force – is a project that reflects an enlightened democracy and a civilized society. 

If this happened, Americans could stop asking “Why do they hate us?”.

And Jews around the world would not be forced to defend Jewish racism by weaponizing antisemitism and holocaust denial.

Hopefully, even Christian Zionists would return to the basic human precepts Christianity stands for and would join at the forefront of the coalition determined to stop the destruction of Palestine and its people.

Multinational corporations, security companies and military industries, of course, would not join a new coalition that opposes the project of emptying the land. However, they could be challenged.

The only necessary prerequisite is that we, a naive people who still believe in morality and justice, who serve as lighthouses in this age of darkness, truly understand that stopping the attempt to empty Palestine is the beginning of a new era, of a much better world for everyone.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Ilan Pappé is a professor at the University of Exeter. He was formerly a senior lecturer in political science at the University of Haifa. He is the author of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, The Modern Middle East, A History of Modern Palestine: One Land, Two Peoples, and Ten Myths about Israel. He is the co-editor, with Ramzy Baroud of ‘Our Vision for Liberation.’ Pappé is described as one of Israel’s ‘New Historians’ who, since the release of pertinent British and Israeli government documents in the early 1980s, have been rewriting the history of Israel’s creation in 1948. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

Featured image is from TPC

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Biden regime has made it clear that the US government is Zionist. Biden is clearly not an American patriot. He sacrifices America’s welfare and reputation, what little of it remains, in behalf of Zionist Israel’s Genocide of the Palestinian people.  

Since 1947 Israel has been stealing Palestine from its owners and 2,000 year inhabitants. For decades Israel has been driving Palestinians out of their villages, forcing them into refugee camps in foreign countries, and reducing their presence in Palestine to almost nothing. Israel has succeeded in renaming Palestine Israel. This has been going on for 76 years with the support of the great, moral, Western democracies who always express concerns with human rights only when their concern is directed at their chosen enemies.

Now that the Zionists have shrunk Palestine with American, European, and Muslim help to almost nothing, the decision has been made in Washington and Israel to erase Palestine altogether. There will be no more pointless talk about “two state solutions.”  

The Zionist Puppet–Biden, President of the United States of America–represents the Zionist propaganda that any criticism of Israel’s Genocide of the Palestinians is anti-semitic, that is, the criticism is allegedly only a product of hatred of Jews and has no relationship to  the impact on moral conscience of the Zionist mass murder of Palestinian women and children, which we can all see occurring every day.  

To see an American President sink so low tells us that what was once a Proud American is now a Shamed American. The President of the United States has our country on record as a complete supporter of genocide and the enabler of mass murder, a president who has used one hundred billion dollars of our money in support of mass murder, actually sending at America’s expense the bombs and missiles that are doing the work of Genocide.

Biden is Israel’s leader in America and the Western world, but Congress, especially the Republicans, agree with him. 

It was the House Republicans who called the presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to come before the House Education Committee and be scolded for having students who dare to protest agains Israel. Note that all three presidents of our leading educational institutions are women.

The outcome is that the House of Representatives has passed a resolution that criticism of Israel constitutes “anti-semitism.” See this. 

In Germany and other European countries a person can be arrested merely for correctly criticizing Israel’s violation of human rights laws. Those laws only apply to Washington’s enemies, never to Israel or to Washington. In Europe it is a criminal offense to disagree in any way with the official Zionist narrative of the Holocaust. Facts never are permitted to enter the official explanation, even if the facts support the narrative in a limited way. By banning protests of Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians, Europe has given a blank check to genocide.  

As is perfectly clear, evil is now the official foreign policy of the Western world. This makes the  defense of Western civilization ever more difficult.

I am finding it increasingly difficult to defend a civilization whose “Satanic evil” increases every day.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Getting Serious About Halting Israeli Genocide

December 14th, 2023 by Medea Benjamin

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On Friday, December 8, the UN Security Council met under Article 99 for only the fourth time in the UN’s history. Article 99 is an emergency provision that allows the Secretary General to summon the Council to respond to a crisis that “threatens the maintenance of international peace and security.” The previous occasions were the Belgian invasion of the Congo in 1960, the hostage crisis at the U.S. Embassy in Iran in 1979 and Lebanon’s Civil War in 1989.

Secretary General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council that he invoked Article 99 to demand an “immediate ceasefire” in Gaza because “we are at a breaking point,” with a “high risk of the total collapse of the humanitarian support system in Gaza.” The United Arab Emirates drafted a ceasefire resolution that quickly garnered 97 cosponsors.

The World Food Program has reported that Gaza is on the brink of mass starvation, with 9 out of 10 people spending entire days with no food. In the two days before Guterres invoked Article 99, Rafah was the only one of Gaza’s five districts to which the UN could deliver any aid at all.

The Secretary General stressed that

“The brutality perpetrated by Hamas can never justify the collective punishment of the Palestinian people… International humanitarian law cannot be applied selectively. It is binding on all parties equally at all times, and the obligation to observe it does not depend on reciprocity.”

Mr. Guterres concluded,

“The people of Gaza are looking into the abyss… The eyes of the world – and the eyes of history – are watching. It’s time to act.”

UN members delivered eloquent, persuasive pleas for the immediate humanitarian ceasefire that the resolution called for, and the Council voted thirteen to one, with the U.K. abstaining, to approve the resolution. But the one vote against by the United States, one of the five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council, killed the resolution, leaving the Council impotent to act as the Secretary General warned that it must.

This was the sixteenth U.S. Security Council veto since 2000 – and fourteen of those vetoes have been to shield Israel and/or U.S. policy on Israel and Palestine from international action or accountability. While Russia and China have vetoed resolutions on a variety of issues around the world, from Myanmar to Venezuela, there is no parallel for the U.S.’s extraordinary use of its veto primarily to provide exceptional impunity under international law for one other country.

The consequences of this veto could hardly be more serious. As Brazil’s UN Ambassador Sérgio França Danese told the Council, if the U.S. hadn’t vetoed a previous resolution that Brazil drafted on October 18, “thousands of lives would have been saved.” 

And as the Indonesian representative asked, “How many more must die before this relentless assault is halted? 20,000? 50,000? 100,000?”

Following the previous U.S. veto of a ceasefire at the Security Council, the UN General Assembly took up the global call for a ceasefire, and the resolution, sponsored by Jordan, passed by 120 votes to 14, with 45 abstentions. The 12 small countries who voted with the United States and Israel represented less than 1% of the world’s population.

The isolated diplomatic position in which the United States found itself should have been a wake-up call, especially coming a week after a Data For Progress poll found that 66% of Americans supported a ceasefire, while a Mariiv poll found that only 29% of Israelis supported an imminent ground invasion of Gaza.

After the United States again slammed the Security Council door in Palestine’s face on December 8, the desperate need to end the massacre in Gaza returned to the UN General Assembly on December 12.

An identical resolution to the one the U.S. vetoed in the Security Council was approved by a vote of 153 to 10, with 33 more yes votes than the one in October. While General Assembly resolutions are not binding, they do carry political weight, and this one sends a clear message that the international community is disgusted by the carnage in Gaza.

Another powerful instrument the world can use to try to compel an end to this massacre is the Genocide Convention, which both Israel and the United States have ratified. It only takes one country to bring a case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) under the Convention, and, while cases can drag on for years, the ICJ can take preliminary measures to protect the victims in the meantime.

On January 23, 2020, the Court did exactly that in a case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar, alleging genocide against its Rohingya minority. In a brutal military campaign in late 2017, Myanmar massacred tens of thousands of Rohingya and burnt down dozens of villages. 740,000 Rohingyas fled into Bangladesh, and a UN-backed fact-finding mission found that the 600,000 who remained in Myanmar “may face a greater threat of genocide than ever.”

China vetoed a referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Security Council, so The Gambia, itself recovering from 20 years of repression under a brutal dictatorship, submitted a case to the ICJ under the Genocide Convention.

That opened the door for a unanimous ruling by 17 judges at the ICJ that Myanmar must prevent genocide against the Rohingya, as the Genocide Convention required. The ICJ issued that ruling as a preventive measure, the equivalent of a preliminary injunction in a domestic court, even though its final ruling on the merits of the case might be many years away. It also ordered Myanmar to file a report with the Court every six months to detail how it is protecting the Rohingya, signaling serious ongoing scrutiny of Myanmar’s conduct.

So which country will step up to bring an ICJ case against Israel under the Genocide Convention? Activists are already discussing that with a number of countries. Roots Action and World Beyond War have created an action alert that you can use to send messages to 10 of the most likely candidates (South Africa, Chile, Colombia, Jordan, Ireland, Belize, Turkïye, Bolivia, Honduras and Brazil).

There has also been increasing pressure on the International Criminal Court to take up the case against Israel.

The ICC has been quick to investigate Hamas for war crimes, but has been dragging its feet on investigating Israel.

After a recent visit to the region, ICC prosecutor Karim Khan was not allowed by Israel to enter Gaza, and he was criticized by Palestinians for visiting areas attacked by Hamas on October 7, but not visiting the hundreds of illegal Israeli settlements, checkpoints and refugee camps in the occupied West Bank.

However, as long as the world is faced with the United States’ tragic and debilitating abuse of institutions the rest of the world depends on to enforce international law, the economic and diplomatic actions of individual countries may have more impact than their speeches in New York.

While historically there have been about two dozen countries that have not recognized Israel, in the past two months, Belize and Bolivia have severed ties with Israel, while others–Bahrain, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Honduras, Jordan and Turkey–have withdrawn their ambassadors.

Other countries are trying to have it both ways–condemning Israel publicly but maintaining their economic interests. At the UN Security Council, Egypt explicitly accused Israel of genocide and the U.S. of obstructing a ceasefire.

And yet Egypt’s long-standing partnership with Israel in the blockade of Gaza and its continuing role, even today, in restricting the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza through its own border crossings, make it complicit in the genocide it condemns. If it means what it says, it must open its border crossings to all the humanitarian aid that is needed, end its cooperation with the Israeli blockade and reevaluate its obsequious and compromised relationships with Israel and the United States.

Qatar, which has worked hard to negotiate an Israeli ceasefire in Gaza, was eloquent in its denunciation of Israeli genocide in the Security Council. But Qatar was speaking on behalf of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which includes Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Under the so-called Abraham accords, the sheikhs of Bahrain and the UAE have turned their backs on Palestine to sign on to a toxic brew of self-serving commercial relations and hundred million dollar arms deals with Israel.

In New York, the UAE sponsored the latest failed Security Council resolution, and its representative declared, “The international system is teetering on the brink. For this war signals that might makes right, that compliance with international humanitarian law depends on the identity of the victim and the perpetrator.”

And yet neither the UAE nor Bahrain has renounced their Abraham deals with Israel, nor their roles in U.S. “might makes right” policies that have wreaked havoc in the Middle East for decades. Over a thousand US Air Force personnel and dozens of U.S. warplanes are still based at the Al-Dhafra Airbase in Abu Dhabi, while Manama in Bahrain, which the U.S. Navy has used as a base since 1941, remains the headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

Many experts compare apartheid Israel to apartheid South Africa. Speeches at the UN may have helped to bring down South Africa’s apartheid regime, but change didn’t come until countries around the world embraced a global campaign to economically and politically isolate it.

The reason Israel’s die-hard supporters in the United States have tried to ban, or even criminalize, the campaign for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) is not that it is illegitimate or anti-semitic. It is precisely because boycotting, sanctioning and divesting from Israel may be an effective strategy to help bring down its genocidal, expansionist and unaccountable regime.

U.S. Alternate Representative to the U.N. Robert Wood told the Security Council that there is a “fundamental disconnect between the discussions that we have been having in this chamber and the realities on the ground” in Gaza, implying that only Israeli and U.S. views of the conflict deserve to be taken seriously.

But the real disconnect at the root of this crisis is the one between the isolated looking-glass world of U.S. and Israeli politics and the real world that is crying out for a ceasefire and justice for Palestinians.

While Israel, with U.S. bombs and howitzer shells, is killing and maiming thousands of innocent people, the rest of the world is appalled by these crimes against humanity. The grassroots clamor to end the massacre keeps building, but global leaders must move beyond non-binding votes and investigations to boycotting Israeli products, putting an embargo on weapons sales, breaking diplomatic relations and other measures that will make Israel a pariah state on the world stage.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

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

Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies are the authors of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, published by OR Books in November 2022. They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image source

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“If she (a nurse) reported a single COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Event, she would be fired.”

Click here to watch the video.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A new scientific study found that unvaccinated people were unfairly scapegoated during the pandemic. Psypost reports:

Source

I doubt that the “scientific discovery” of unwarranted and mean-spirited scapegoating of the unvaccinated surprises most of my readers, but the details of the “findings” are interesting.

However, this emphasis on vaccination has also given rise to a complex social phenomenon – the stigmatization and prejudice faced by those who choose not to get vaccinated against COVID-19. A recent study published in the Journal of Medical Ethics aimed to investigate whether the negative sentiments directed towards the unvaccinated can be considered a form of scapegoating.

“My colleagues and I have been studying the social divisions surrounding COVID-19 for some time. We have noticed that much of the existing research at that time focused on conflicts originating from people who discount COVID-19, believe in conspiracy theories, and generally undervalue the threat of the virus. We replicated many of those patterns in our own research as well,” said study author Maja Graso, an assistant professor at the University of Groningen.

The authors seem to be shocked by their discovery that much of the lies and misinformation came from the government and media:

“However, what we found to be missing was an address to misinformation and the consequences stemming from overestimating the threat. Consider, for instance, how in 2020, more than 30% of Americans believed that a COVID infection led to a 50% chance of hospitalization; it never did, nor was there ever evidence to suggest it might. Left-leaning individuals tended to over-estimate COVID harms to a greater degree than conservatives.”

The scientific study by Maja Graso et al. examined attitudes toward unvaccinated people by presenting a questionnaire with fictional characters: a vaccinated person named Katy and an unvaccinated person named Mark. Both Katy and Mark carried the COVID-19 virus and infected a vulnerable individual.

It turns out that, despite being in the identical position, the unvaccinated individual was selected for blame and targeted with extremely negative emotions:

 

You would expect me to rant against the above-mentioned left-leaning individuals. Instead, I would like to point out that “Trump supporters” were also prone to scapegoating and hatred towards the unvaccinated, although to a lesser extent:

The pandemic propaganda was strong!

The truth, of course, was that the Covid vaccine did not work and did not prevent any transmission, and after a month or two past vaccinations, it made the vaccinated MORE likely to be infected.

However, the impact of the media’s fear-mongering was all-encompassing. 35% of adults believed that half of Covid infections required hospitalization! The authors tried hard to make their findings palatable for an official medical journal:

Second, scapegoating implies that the blame is either undeserved or disproportional. Thus, we encourage public health researchers, practitioners and science communicators to consider the implications of relying primarily on fear-based approaches to mitigating the harms caused by C19.65 For example, if 35% of US adults believed that at least half of C19 infections require hospitalisation,18 it suggests a significant health communication failure. A result is that it can lead people to turn against and blame each other when doing so is not justified by available facts, which may not have been adequately presented to the public. We submit that a relevant ethical question that public health officials should debate is whether it is morally obligatory for them to correct misinformation regardless of whether it overestimates or underestimates of C19 risk.

Third, our findings also show the impact of citizens’ political ideology on scapegoating. We did not test the sources of liberals’ greater likelihood to scapegoat the unvaccinated individuals, but we encourage further investigation of whether media exposure could be a contributing factor. Just as conservative media and politicians are culpable for misinformation leading people to underestimate certain C19 risks,66 67 it is possible that liberal outlets introduced misinformation in the opposite direction. For instance, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, an outlet with a decidedly liberal audience,68 noted in March 2021: ‘Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person.’69However, this claim was not possible to make at that time,70 nor was it true. The original clinical trials did not test for effectiveness on transmission.71Early evidence, and reasonable deduction from the research in vaccinology and virology, suggested that the vaccines would not fully stop transmission. By April 2021, more than 10 000 vaccine breakthrough infections had been officially reported across the USA (a substantial undercounting), 10% of which had been hospitalised and 2% of which had died.72 An outbreak investigation by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in July 2021 found that 74% of cases linked to a summer event in Massachusetts were vaccinated and most were symptomatic.73 Therefore, we argue that it is important to correct the dubious claims made by both sides of the political spectrum, as both may distort risk and fuel polarisation.

Worse still, this scapegoating, based on complete fiction by official health experts and media, broke many families, as this highly typical 2021 Reddit post from a confused pregnant woman describes:

More details about what happened to that mother two years later and how COVID vaccinators broke families are here.

Hatred and Division Were Intentional!

The authors of the Graso et al. study did not mention an important fact: fear and creating divisions and hatred towards the unvaccinated were completely intentional and had a purpose: to force vaccine refusers (who knew everything Maja Graso et al. described above, in 2021) to vaccinate through alienating their relatives and friends.

Consider this agenda article by the World Economic Forum, which mentioned creating “FOMO,” or fear of missing out.

Source

The “another way” link above points to concepts of using social division, hatred, and lies developed in January 2021… guess where… at Harvard University!

Source

Harvard authors recommend:

Inspire FOMO. Second, we recommend incentivizing the fear of missing out, both socially and economically. For example, recently 82 percent of adults said they are not comfortable visiting family or close friends inside their homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. This inability to socialize is more likely to influence late majority and laggard groups to take the vaccine than health-related messages. …

Harvard researchers call for inducing “guilt and regret,” by scapegoating the unvaccinated:

Inducing guilt and regret. This method was successfully employed in Canada in the 1930s and 1940s to confront diphtheria, which was affecting up to one in seven Canadian children. Simple messages of guilt, with statements like “if your children die of diphtheria, it is your fault because you prefer not to take the trouble to protect against it” proved to be effective and led the late majority to vaccinate their children.

The hatred and division were relentless:

What is the result of it? Almost everyone had COVID anyway. Fortunately, few have died, although both COVID-19, a lab-made SARS-HIV chimera, and COVID-19 vaccines have killed millions and undermined the health of billions.

The worst outcome is thousands of broken families, economic devastation among the families of fired unvaccinated workers, and persisting social alienation and division – all created in the name of anti-human “science” driven by profit and careerism.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image source


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Member States adopted a resolution, demanding an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire”, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages and well as “ensuring humanitarian access”.

  • It passed with a large majority of 153 in favour and 10 against, with 23 abstentions
  • The resolution also reiterated the General Assembly’s demand that all parties comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, “notably with regard to the protection of civilians”
  • Prior to the resolution, two amendments making specific reference to extremist group Hamas were voted down by members
  • The General Assembly will resume the emergency session on Friday afternoon in New York starting at 3pm
  • At the start of the session, Assembly President Dennis Francis underscored the urgency of ending the suffering of innocent civilians in Gaza. “We have one singular priority – only one – to save lives,” he stressed
  • Check out this explainer on what an emergency special session of the Assembly is and how it works

6:16 PM

The acting President of the General Assembly adjourned the meeting. The session will reconvene at 3 PM (New York time) on Friday, 15 December, with the Assembly resuming its debate.

4:30 PM

Delegations are now speaking in explanation of their votes, after the vote.

4:26 PM

Resolution adopted

The vote on the main resolution is as follows:

For: 153

Against: 10

Abstaining: 23

The resolution has passed by a large majority, securing the needed two-thirds of members. Widespread applause rings out around the General Assembly Hall.

Those voting against were the US, Israel, Austria, Czechia, Guatemala, Liberia, Micronesia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea and Paraguay.

Among those abstaining were the UK, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Argentina, Malawi, the Netherlands, Ukraine, South Sudan, and Uruguay.

Text of the adopted resolution

Protection of civilians and upholding legal and humanitarian obligations 

The General Assembly, 

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Recalling its resolutions regarding the question of Palestine,

Recalling also all relevant Security Council resolutions,

Taking note of the letter dated 6 December 2023 from the Secretary-General, under Article 99 of the Charter of the United Nations, addressed to the President of the Security Council,

Taking note also of the letter dated 7 December 2023 from the CommissionerGeneral of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East addressed to the President of the General Assembly,

Expressing grave concern over the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip and the suffering of the Palestinian civilian population, and emphasizing that the Palestinian and Israeli civilian populations must be protected in accordance with international humanitarian law,

1. Demands an immediate humanitarian ceasefire;

2. Reiterates its demand that all parties comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, notably with regard to the protection of civilians;

3. Demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access;

4. Decides to adjourn the tenth emergency special session temporarily and to authorize the President of the General Assembly at its most recent session to resume its meeting upon request from Member States.

The resolution does not condemn Hamas or make any specific reference to the extremist group.

Results of the General Assembly's vote on the resolution on “Protection of civilians and upholding legal and humanitarian obligations” during the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session on 12 December 2023.

UN Photo/Loey Felipe. Results of the General Assembly’s vote on the resolution on “Protection of civilians and upholding legal and humanitarian obligations” during the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session on 12 December 2023.

4:24 PM

Amendments fail to pass

The second draft amendment from the US sees 84 in favour, 62 against and 25 abstaining. Again, the amendment fails.

4:22 PM

The first draft amendment has secured 89 for, 61 against and 20 abstentions. This means the Austrian amendment fails under the two-thirds rule.

4:20 PM

A two-thirds majority is required for an adoption of the resolution. The voting process is about to begin, and that rule applies to the amendments as well, explains General Assembly President Francis.

4:08 PM

Image: United Nations. Ambassador Gilad Erdan of Israel addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Israel’s Permanent Representative, Gilad Erdan, said that the General Assembly finds itself “about to vote on another hypocritical resolution.”

Ambassador Gilad Erdan of Israel addresses the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session meeting on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

“Not only does this resolution fail to condemn Hamas for crimes against humanity, it does not mention Hamas at all. This will only prolong the death and destruction in the region, that is precisely what a ceasefire means,” he said.

He added that the only intention of Hamas is to destroy Israel and that the group has declared that it will repeat its atrocities again and again until Israel ceases to exist.

“So why would anyone want to aid Hamas in continuing their rule of terror and actualizing their satanic agenda?”, he asked.

“We all know that the so call humanitarian ceasefire in this resolution has nothing to do with humanity. Israel is already taking every measure to facilitate the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza,” he added.

He underscored the need to hold Hamas accountable. He said a ceasefire means one thing only – “the survival of Hamas.”

“I honestly don’t know how can someone look in the mirror and support a resolution that does not condemn Hamas and does not even mention Hamas by name,” he said, urging all Member States to vote against the resolution.

Click here to read the full UN report.

***

“It is very interesting to see which countries did not vote for the UN General Assembly resolution for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza, on the 12 December 2023. Nearly all of them are the closest vassals of the USA.” (Karsten Riise)

Below is the list of votes for the Resolution:

Against

Americas:

  • USA
  • Paraguay

Africa:

  • Liberia

Europe:

  • Austria
  • Czechia

Asia and Pacific:

  • Israel
  • Papua New Guinea
  • Micronesia
  • Nauru

Abstained

Americas:

  • Argentina
  • Panama
  • Uruguay

Africa:

  • Malawi
  • Cameroon
  • Equatorial Guinea
  • South Sudan
  • Togo

Europe:

  • Germany
  • UK
  • Italy
  • Netherlands
  • Hungary
  • Lithuania
  • Romania
  • Bulgaria
  • Slovakia
  • Georgia
  • Ukraine

Asia and Pacific:

  • Marshall Islands
  • Palau 
  • Tonga

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from the UN

Is Free Speech a Relic in America?

December 13th, 2023 by James Bovard

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Is the First Amendment becoming a historic relic? On July 4, 2023, federal judge Terry Doughty condemned the Biden administration for potentially “the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.” That verdict was ratified by a federal appeals court decision in September 2023 that concluded that Biden administration “officials have engaged in a broad pressure campaign designed to coerce social-media companies into suppressing speakers, viewpoints, and content disfavored by the government.”

In earlier times in America, such policies would have faced sweeping condemnation from across the political spectrum. But major media outlets like the Washington Post have rushed to the barricades to defend the Biden war on “misinformation.” Almost half of Democrats surveyed in September 2023 affirmed that free speech should be legal “only under certain circumstances.” Fifty-five percent of American adults support government suppression of “false information” — even though only 20 percent trust the government.

Biden’s War on Free Speech

The broad support for federal censorship is perplexing considering that courts have vividly laid out the government’s First Amendment violations. Doughty delivered 155 pages of damning details of federal browbeating, jawboning, and coercion of social-media companies. Doughty ruled that federal agencies and the White House “engaged in coercion of social media companies” to delete Americans’ comments on Afghanistan, Ukraine, election procedures, and other subjects. He issued an injunction blocking the feds from “encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”

Censors reigned from the start of the Biden era. Barely two weeks after Biden’s inauguration, White House Digital Director Rob Flaherty demanded that Twitter “immediately” remove a parody account of Biden’s relatives. Twitter officials suspended the account within 45 minutes but complained they were already “bombarded” by White House censorship requests at that point.

Biden White House officials ordered Facebook to delete humorous memes, including a parody of a future television ad: “Did you or a loved one take the COVID vaccine? You may be entitled….” The White House continually denounced Facebook for failing to suppress more posts and videos that could inspire “vaccine hesitancy” — even if the posts were true. Facebook decided that the word “liberty” was too hazardous in the Biden era; to placate the White House, the company suppressed posts “discussing the choice to vaccinate in terms of personal or civil liberties.”

Flaherty was still unsatisfied and raged at Facebook officials in a July 15, 2021, email: “Are you guys f–king serious?” The following day, President Biden accused social-media companies of “killing people” by failing to suppress all criticism of COVID vaccines.

Federal Censorship

Censorship multiplied thanks to an epic bureaucratic bait-and-switch. After allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Act was created to protect against foreign meddling. Prior to Biden taking office, CISA had a “Countering Foreign Influence Task Force.” In 2021, that was renamed the “Mis-, Dis- and Mal-information Team (‘MDM Team’).”

But almost all the targets of federal censorship during the Biden era have been Americans. Federal censorship tainted the 2020 and 2022 elections, spurring the suppression of millions of social-media posts (almost all from conservatives). During the 2020 election, CISA targeted for suppression assertions such as “mail-in voting is insecure” — despite the long history of absentee ballot fraud.

CISA aims to control Americans’ minds: A CISA advisory committee last year issued a report that “broadened” what it targeted to include “the spread of false and misleading information because it poses a significant risk to critical function, like elections, public health, financial services and emergency responses.” Thus, any idea that government officials label as “misleading” is a “significant risk” that can be suppressed.

Where did CISA find the absolute truths it used to censor American citizens? CISA simply asked government officials and “apparently always assumed the government official was a reliable source,” the court decision noted. Any assertion by officialdom was close enough to a Delphic oracle to use to “debunk postings” by private citizens. Judge Doughty observed that the free-speech clause was enacted to prohibit agencies like CISA from picking “what is true and what is false.”

COVID-inspired Censorship

“Government = truth” is the premise for the Biden censorship regime. In June 2022, Flaherty declared that he “wanted to monitor Facebook’s suppression of COVID-19 misinformation ‘as we start to ramp up [vaccines for children under the age of 5].’” The FDA had almost zero safety data on COVID vaccines for infants and toddlers. But Biden announced the vaccines were safe for those target groups, so any assertion to the contrary automatically became false or misleading.

Biden policymakers presumed that Americans are idiots who believe whatever they see on Facebook. In an April 5, 2021, phone call with Facebook staffers, White House Strategy Communication chief Courtney Rowe said, “If someone in rural Arkansas sees something on FB [Facebook], it’s the truth.”

In the same call, a Facebook official mentioned nose bleeds as an example of a feared COVID vaccine side effect. Flaherty wanted Facebook to intervene in purportedly private conversations on vaccines and “Direct them to CDC.” A Facebook employee told Flaherty that “an immediate generated message about nose bleeds might give users ‘the Big Brother feel.’” At least the Biden White House didn’t compel Facebook to send form notices every 90 seconds to any private discussion on COVID: “The Department of Homeland Security wishes to remind you that there is no surveillance. Have a nice day.” Flaherty also called for Facebook to crackdown on WhatsApp exchanges (private messages) between individuals.

Federal agencies responded to legal challenges by portraying themselves as the same “pitiful, helpless giants” that President Richard Nixon invoked to describe the U.S. government when he started bombing Cambodia. Judge Doughty wrote that federal agencies “blame the Russians, COVID-19 and capitalism for any suppression of free speech by social-media companies.” But that defense fails the laugh test.

Federal agencies pirouetted as a “Ministry of Truth,” according to the court rulings, strong-arming Twitter to arbitrarily suspend 400,000 accounts, including journalists and diplomats.

The Biden administration rushed to sway the appeals court to postpone enforcement of the injunction and then sought to redefine all its closed-door shenanigans as public service. In its briefs to the court, the Justice Department declared, “There is a categorical, well-settled distinction between persuasion and coercion,” and castigated Judge Doughty for having “equated legitimate efforts at persuasion with illicit efforts to coerce.”

Biden’s Justice Department denied that federal agencies bullied social-media companies to suppress any information. Instead, there were simply requests for “content moderation,” especially regarding COVID. Actually, there were tens of thousands of “requests” that resulted in the suppression of millions of posts and comments by Americans.

Team Biden champions a “no corpse, no delicta” definition of censorship. Since federal SWAT teams did not assail the headquarters of social-media firms, the feds are blameless. Or, as Justice Department lawyer Daniel Tenny told the judges, “There was a back and forth. Sometimes it was more friendly, sometimes people got more testy. There were circumstances in which everyone saw eye to eye, there were circumstances in which they disagreed.”

It’s irrelevant that President Joe Biden publicly accused social-media companies of murder for not censoring far more material and that Biden appointees publicly threatened to destroy the companies via legislation or prosecution. Nope: It was just neighborly discussions between good folks.

The Courts Strike Back

At the appeals court hearing, Judge Don Willett, one of the most principled and penetrating judges in the nation, had no problem with federal agencies publicly criticizing what they judged false or dangerous ideas. But that wasn’t how Team Biden compelled submission: “Here you have government in secret, in private, out of the public eye, relying on … subtle strong-arming and veiled or not-so-veiled threats.” Willett vivified how the feds played the game: “That’s a really nice social-media platform you’ve got there, it would be a shame if something happened to it.”

Judge Jennifer Elrod compared the Biden censorship regime to the Mafia: “We see with the mob … they have these ongoing relationships. They never actually say, ‘Go do this or else you’re going to have this consequence.’ But everybody just knows.”

Yet the Biden administration was supposedly innocent because the feds never explicitly spelled out “or else,” according to the Justice Department lawyer. This is on par with redefining armed robbery as a consensual activity unless the robber specifically points his gun at the victim’s head. As economist Joseph Schumpeter aptly observed, “Power wins, not by being used, but by being there.”

In its September decision, the appeals court concluded that the White House, FBI, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the U.S. Surgeon General’s office trampled the First Amendment by coercing social media companies and likely “had the intended result of suppressing millions of protected free speech postings by American citizens.”

The court unanimously declared that federal

officials made express threats…. But, beyond express threats, there was always [italic in original] an “unspoken or else.” The officials made clear that the platforms would [italic in original] suffer adverse consequences if they failed to comply, through express or implied threats, and thus the requests were not optional.

The appeals court also took a “real world” view of the nation’s most feared law enforcement agency: “Although the FBI’s communications did not plainly reference adverse consequences, an actor need not express a threat aloud so long as, given the circumstances, the message intimates that some form of punishment will follow noncompliance.” The federal appeals court upheld part of the injunction while excluding some federal agencies from anticensorship restrictions. The Biden administration quickly appealed the partial injunction to the Supreme Court, telling the court: “Of course, the government cannot punish people for expressing different views…. But there is a fundamental distinction between persuasion and coercion. And courts must take care to maintain that distinction because of the drastic consequences resulting from a finding of coercion.”

The Biden brief bewailed that the appeals court found that “officials from the White House, the Surgeon General’s office and the FBI coerced social-media platforms to remove content despite the absence of even a single instance in which an official paired a request to remove content with a threat of adverse action.” But both the federal district court and the appeals court decisions offered plenty of examples of federal threats.

The New Civil Liberties Alliance, one of the plaintiffs, scoffed: “The Government argues that the injunction interferes with the government’s ability to speak. The Government has a wide latitude to speak on matters of public concern, but it cannot stifle the protected speech of ordinary Americans.” And the injunction impedes federal officials from secretly coercing private companies to satisfy White House demands.

As the Biden administration pressured the Supreme Court, the anticensorship lawyers on September 25 secured an en banc rehearing of their case, which consists of a panel of all 17 active Fifth Circuit judges. The plaintiffs were especially concerned that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Act was excluded from the injunction. CISA and its array of federal censorship contractors have sowed far too much mischief in recent years. The appeals court modified the injunction to put a leash on CISA.

Censorship could cast the deciding vote in the 2024 presidential election. Judge Doughty issued his injunction in part because federal agencies “could use their power over millions of people to suppress alternative views or moderate content they do not agree with in the upcoming 2024 national election.”

Much of the mainstream media is horrified at the prospect of reduced federal censorship. The Washington Post article on Doughty’s decision fretted, “For more than a decade, the federal government has attempted to work with social media companies to address criminal activity, including child sexual abuse images and terrorism.” The Post did not mention the Biden crusade to banish cynicism from the Internet. Journalist Glenn Greenwald scoffed, “The most surreal fact of U.S. political life is that the leading advocates for unified state/corporate censorship are large media corporations.”

Fifty years ago, philosopher Hannah Arendt wrote of the “most essential political freedom, the right to unmanipulated factual information without which all freedom of opinion becomes a cruel hoax.” The battle over federal censorship will determine whether Americans can have more than a passing whiff of that political freedom. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost joined the lawsuit against censorship and commented in September: “The federal government doesn’t get to play referee on the field of public discourse. If you let them decide what speech is OK, one day yours might not be.”

On October 20, the Supreme Court announced that it would rule on this case, with a decision expected within a few months. Stay tuned for plenty of legal fireworks and maybe even good news for freedom.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

James Bovard is a policy adviser to The Future of Freedom Foundation. He is a USA Today columnist and has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, New Republic, Reader’s Digest, Playboy, American Spectator, Investors Business Daily, and many other publications. Read his blog. Send him email.

Featured image source

The U.S. Is Complicit with Israel in the Genocide in Gaza

December 13th, 2023 by Steven Sahiounie

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A UN Security Council vote on December 8, demanding an immediate humanitarian cease-fire in the Israel-Gaza war, failed because the U.S. used their veto power in the sole dissenting vote. The U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, did not cast the damning vote, she sent her assistant instead, shielding herself from the disgust of the international community. Thomas-Greenfield is the direct descendant of African slaves held in America without citizenship or human rights, similar to the Palestinian people today.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken met with Qatari Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani ahead of the December 8 meeting with the Arab-Islamic Ministerial Committee, including Qatari Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, Jordan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Ayman Al-Safadi, Egypt’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Sameh Shoukry, Palestinian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Riyad Al-Maliki, and Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Hakan Fidan.

Some had envisioned the meeting between Blinken and the Arab ministers would take place prior to the UN vote, and the ministers could present their case as to why a ceasefire to save children’s lives should be supported by the U.S., as initiated by Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

But, instead Blinken waited until after the U.S. voted no, and the ceasefire was an impossibility, to sit around the table with the Arab-Islamic Ministerial Committee, who all looked dejected, and hopeless. They all told Blinken they reject the U.S.-Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people in Gaza, and called on the U.S. to assume its responsibilities and take the necessary measures to push Israel towards an immediate ceasefire. They also called for a lifting of the siege which prevents adequate amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza.

They voiced their rejection against attempts to displace Palestinians from Gaza, emphasizing on “creating a real political climate that leads to a two-state solution,” after over 75 years of brutal occupation of the Palestinian people.

However, their concerns have fallen on deaf ears. The Biden administration is stuck in the past, thinking itself immune to criticism from the international community, and the Middle Eastern countries which are key allies of the U.S., energy providers, and housing some of the largest American military bases in the world.

“Our message is consistent and clear that we believe that it is absolutely necessary to end the fighting immediately,” Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said.

“I certainly would hope that our partners in the U.S. will do more… we certainly believe they can do more,” the Saudi minister added.

Before the Vote

Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said prior to the UN vote that if the resolution fails, it would be giving a license to Israel “to continue with its massacre.”

“Our priority for now is to stop the war, stop the killing, stop the destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure,” Safadi said adding, “The message that’s being sent is that Israel is acting above international law… and the world is simply not doing much. We disagree with the United States on its position vis-a-vis on the cease-fire.”

“The solution is a cease-fire,” said Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry,

What Can the Arab World Do?

Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, and Egypt are all stanch American allies. They host some of the largest U.S. military bases on earth. Most of them buy their weapons from the U.S., and all of them are consumers of very large amounts of products made in the USA. Saudi King Faisal shut-off the oil in support of the Palestinians in the past, but they would never do that now as they are locked into OPEC pumping schedules. But, the Arabs have other leverage they could use to move the U.S. position from blind acquiescence to Israeli orders.

Israeli Plan to Wipe-out Gaza

Mustafa Barghouti is a Palestinian physician, activist, and politician who serves as General Secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative.

“I am 100% sure that their main goal right from the beginning was the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, complete ethnic cleansing of Gaza, trying to push people to Egypt, a terrible war crime. And if they managed to do so, I think their next goal will be to try to ethnically cleanse the West Bank and force people to join them,” said Barghouti.

Barghouti added,

“If they fail to ethnically cleanse all Gazans, I am sure that Netanyahu’s plan B is to annex Gaza City and the north of Gaza completely to Israel and claim it as a security area.”

Concerning the prospect of Israeli troops remaining in Gaza, he said

“Israel did that before and it didn’t work. And there will be resistance to their occupation, which they cannot tolerate. And that’s why Netanyahu’s goal really is to ethnically cleanse people. He wants to have military control of Gaza without people. He knows very well that Gaza with people is something that is unmanageable.”

Boycott Israel and the U.S.

The Arab world comprises about 300 million people. The populations are consumers of American products in huge amounts.

During World War II, a movement by American Jews called for a boycott of Nazi Germany. That was followed by a boycott of the Apartheid regime in South Africa that began in the late 1950s and is largely credited for raising awareness of the injustice in the following decades.

Purchasing Nazi products in Germany, or the Apartheid regime in South Africa, supported their crimes and gave their existence and activities a legitimacy that enabled them to continue.

In the past two months, ever since Starbucks’ corporate office announced it would sue its union for posting a pro-Palestine statement, a strong boycott has left the company with a loss of nearly $12 billion.

The company’s support for Israel has caused a drop in sales while the company was hosting its Red Cup Day, an annual event where baristias hand out reusable holiday themed cups. Over 5,000 workers at 200 stores went on strike in solidarity with Palestine and worker rights.

Coffee drinkers are looking to switch to a local café which does not support the ongoing genocide in Gaza.

Across the Arab world, and around the globe, consumers are finding their power to confront the Israeli war which is supported by the U.S. Posters with the slogans of various products with drops of blood from victims of war and aggression, compared the act of drinking “Coca-Cola” or “Pepsi” to drinking the blood of dead children.

American public is isolated, insulated, and far-removed from the war in Gaza, and often they have no idea what Europeans, South Americans, Canadians, Africans and Asians are thinking about the U.S. policy to support the genocide in Gaza and prevent a cease-fire.

Since 2005, the official BDS (Boycott, Divest, Sanctions) Movement has run a coordinated boycott effort to help Palestine, which called for “a broad boycott of Israel and the implementation of divestment from it, in steps similar to those applied against South Africa during the apartheid era.”

In the U.S., many college campuses have passed resolutions to divest from these companies, bringing boycotts to a new, younger, more energetic generation. President Joe Biden is far out-of-step with these younger people, who in a recent poll showed 70% disapprove of Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza.

Recent campaigns urging people to boycott companies such as McDonald’s, Disney, Starbucks, Coca Cola and others have gone viral around the world. In some countries, restaurants have removed Coca Cola and Pepsi products.

Many people globally have cancelled their Disney+ subscriptions, and young children have been heard saying they won’t eat McDonald’s because it kills children in Gaza.

There are lists of large companies around the world, owning hundreds of famous brands, that operate in Israel or support them in one way or another, such as L’Oréal, Nescafe coffee or Heinz products.

The boycott results in dwindling sales and revenues of American and Israeli products. With the academic and cultural boycott, the American Anthropological Association decided to boycott Israeli academic institutions.

Social Media

Information, videos, photos and comments are being delivered to our phones and laptops constantly. The global audience can’t turn away from the genocide in Gaza. In the 2014 war on Gaza, which lasted six weeks, Israel killed about 2,300 Palestinians. But now, the Palestinian death toll exceeded 12,000 during the first six weeks, and is edging upward of 17,000.

The Biden administration has supported the genocide in Gaza, and has done nothing to stop the Israeli war machine. State Department employees and White House staffers have also voiced condemnation of the un-checked and un-restrained Israeli war machine marching through Gaza, which has left no place safe, and has caused the survivors to face actual starvation according to the UN. America is the chief supporter of Israel, and holds immense leverage over Israel, but refuses to demand that they stop the genocide and bring home the hostages. Biden and Blinken are oblivious to American public opinion, and the international community.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from MD

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s daily positive messages no longer seem to convince citizens or his troops, who realise that the president’s optimistic words are far from reality. Sources familiar with Zelensky’s communications strategy told the Financial Times that the purpose of these messages is to maintain optimism at home and abroad and that there is a communications policy applied at all levels of the state, including strict censorship of bad news, such as the number of Ukrainian casualties or the success of Russian troops.

The article, citing officials from the Ukrainian armed forces, former presidential staffers and communication strategists, highlights how, for more than 650 days in a row, “Zelensky has given at least one video address to the nation—praising his troops, celebrating advances along the front lines … but with Ukraine enjoying few military achievements this year and Western support faltering, the communications strategy is creating a rift between the presidential administration and military leadership.”

In addition to this division within the government and the military, political opponents have begun to openly criticise the president, while military leaders argue that the discrepancy between official messages and the actual situation is no longer convincing and, therefore, does not motivate Ukrainians or the country’s Western partners to move forward.

Iryna Zolotar, a communications advisor for former Ukrainian Defence Minister Oleksii Reznikov, told the publication that the strategy that simulates the dominance of optimism is also confusing outside of Ukraine, leaving Western audiences questioning why they should contribute to aid if the ally in Eastern Europe is always about to “win.”

“In order for society not to build castles in the air, and to take off its rose-tinted glasses… it is necessary to stop being afraid to speak the truth,” Zolotar said to FT

Judging by Western media reports in the past few months, it is very evident that the “rose-tinted glasses” have started to come off, with the discouraging situation in Ukraine revealed, the conflict between Zelensky, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny and other regime figureheads exposed, and the need to freeze the conflict and negotiate with Moscow urged.

The much-hailed counteroffensive was an utter failure, and morale in the war-torn country is at an all-time low, with even the most optimist now beginning to realise that the endgame is approaching as the winter deepens. Despite this reality, according to the FT, Zelensky sees optimistic messages as the only way to reassure Ukraine’s hesitant partners in the West and bolster the confidence of Ukrainian businesses, which remain an important source of tax revenue.

FT recounts that disagreements between the military and the presidential office became obvious in November when Zaluzhny said in an interview with The Economist, “There will most likely be no deep and beautiful breakthrough” for Ukraine in the war. One Ukrainian official said Zaluzhny’s revelation shocked Ukrainians, something unsurprising since they have been fed endless propaganda for nearly two years, and some Western leaders, who called Kiev to ask what it meant and whether negotiations were now considered a priority for Ukraine.

It is for this reason that Zolotar told the FT that at the beginning of the war, optimistic statements helped Ukrainians, but now, this has created a confusing narrative where “expectations are overstated and do not correspond to the real state of affairs.”

Zelensky now finds himself in a conundrum that could very well end his political career, as he is now being exposed for lying for the sake of trying to present an image of Ukraine making steady progress this year on the battlefield, which is now crumbling along with Western support. The Ukrainian president cannot abandon the positive narrative as he believes this is the only way to motivate the West to provide support, especially now that the globe’s attention has shifted to the Middle East, where a humanitarian catastrophe is occurring.

Ukraine’s inability to secure any tangible success on the battlefield will cause political turmoil in Kiev and leave Zelensky facing the anger of his military, who have effectively turned into sacrificial lambs by the Ukrainian president’s mad and delusional drive to conquer Russian territories, including Crimea.

This is why, on the sidelines of the meeting of European Union foreign ministers held in Brussels in November, the need to replace Zelensky was reportedly discussed. Among the causes of Western discontent are Ukraine’s failures on the battlefront, the rudeness of the Ukrainian president in dealing with foreign partners, nepotism, rampant corruption, and his loss of capacity to manoeuvre in the conflict with Russia in the interests of Washington and its allies.

Effectively, not only are Ukrainians beginning to take off their “rose-tinted glasses,” but so are Westerners.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The National American Renaissance Movement, a New Jersey nonprofit corporation is presenting a Petition to the Governor of New Jersey, the State Attorney General and twenty-one County Prosecutors Offices formally requesting a Grand Jury criminal investigation pursuant to the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution which enumerates, ” The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

David R. Meiswinkle, President, Introduces the National American Renaissance Movement July 2023

The 82-page petition with Exhibits asserts that numerous crimes were committed involving the Covid-19 pandemic.

These alleged crimes constitute both State and Federal offenses concerning Racketeering, Murder, Aggravated Assault, Fraud, False Information, Corporate and Official Misconduct, Conspiracy and Domestic Terrorism.

The crimes also deal with the use and deployment of biological weapons. Furthermore, these crimes involve treason, crimes against humanity and violations of the Nuremberg Code.

The criminal allegations are that a cabal of National and Global Racketeers developed and implemented a scheme to empower themselves through a number of orchestrated events which consisted of the following:

A. An outbreak of Covid-19, claimed to be from a bat infecting a human being in a Wuhan wet market was a lie, as the pathogen known as Covid-19 coming from SARS 2 Virus was either man made, developed in both American and Chinese laboratories using illegal gain-of-function research and involving both American and Chinese scientists, or a virulent influenza made to appear as Covid-19 through false PCR tests and media hype, or a biosynthetic pathogen.

B. The March 11, 2020, WHO declaration of Lockdowns, with the countries of the world following in lock-step, engendering fear and freezing social life, was a drastic and totally unnecessary act which caused incalculable losses decimating businesses and households and creating record transfer of wealth away from the middle class.

C. The failure to recommend early treatment with repurposed licensed drugs, and the demonization of these drugs despite their ability to treat and cure people from Covid-19 was a monumental fraud which costs countless lives of individuals as repurposed safe and effective drugs were available and worked.

D. Vaccine approval through Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of unsafe and ineffective drug treatment was also a monumental fraud as the “experimental vaccines” neither protected against infection nor stopped transmission.

E. The proactive vaccine push to have everyone vaccinated and the continued demonization of repurposed medicines was a ploy not to insure the public’s health but the pharmaceuticals profits, and also presented the greatest opportunity to experiment with injections of nano material into the human body on a massive global scale via the “experimental gene therapy” called a vaccine. There was no informed consent of what was being put into people.

F. The disregard of significant increases in deaths and adverse reactions where more deaths and adverse reactions resulted from these vaccines than all previous vaccines together for the past thirty-three years but amazingly there has been no caution to slow down the vaccination process or cease and desist.

G. The continued push of vaccines despite their failures coinciding with the failure to publicly recognize that in-depth microscopic inspection of the vaccines shows they contain strange previously unseen components, an unknown payload which appears to be bio-synthetic and is self-assembling and genetically modifying the human body clandestinely.

The evidence of this hellish Racketeering scheme responsible for wrecking businesses and personal life’s, killing and maiming countless individuals based on monumental frauds, the raking in of enormous profits, the looting of the United States treasury, the unprecedented attacks on freedoms and sovereignty guaranteed by the United States Constitution, the experimentation on human beings with novel nano technology without informed consent demands a Grand Jury criminal investigation.

The evidence of these crimes includes but is not limited to the following:

1. Books, videos, Substack newsletters, articles and statements of medical experts showing that the pandemic was man made, the vaccines were dangerous and not necessary and that repurposed drugs such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are safe and effective treatments. 

2. Books, videos, Substack newsletters, articles and statements of attorneys and legal experts concluding the same as the medical experts, that the pandemic was man made, the vaccines are dangerous and not necessary and repurposed medicines such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are safe and effective treatments.

3.  Expert analysis and interpretation of corona virus patents timeline including SARS CoV-2/ Covid-19 and implications that the Covid-19 pathogen was created through illegal gain of function in a laboratory in North Carolina and China and not from a person being bitten by a bat or was a virulent influenza virus camouflaged as Covid-19 and hyped by the media and certain government agencies through use of a fraudulent PCR test or was an unknown biosynthetic pathogen. 

4. VAERS (vaccination early reporting system) data for United States and New Jersey showing record deaths and injuries caused by the Covid-19 vaccines.

5. V-Safe data indicting record deaths and injuries caused by Covid-19 vaccines.

6.  Testimony of expert medical physicians before the Senate hearings indicating the brutal smears, harassment and professional injuries they have experienced for treating patients with repurposed drugs which are testified to as safe and effective. 

7. Expert economic analysis of the impact of Covid-19 on the massive shift of wealth away from the middle class to the super-wealthy and select corporations.

8.  Project Veritas Video exposing Pfizer fraud with boosters.

9. Video statement of inventor of PCR that they should not be used to test for live virus.

10. Videos and statements including Substack newsletters of medical analysis by professional researchers/investigators that the vaccines are bioweapons.

11. Independent, scientific laboratory analysis by doctors examining the vaccines with sophisticated electronic equipment revealing a nano-world with self-assembling parts and artificial intelligence, no informed consent given to have this scaffolding inserted into the human cells.

12. Videos and statements exposing the nano-world contained in the vaccines. 

13. Movies documenting the psychological, physical and economic damage caused by Covid-19 pandemic protocols

14. Open letter to Dr. Fauci regarding beneficial use of hydroxychloroquine in treating Covid-19

15. Open Letter to the WHO regarding the dangers of Covid-19 vaccinations and requesting  immediate banning.

16. Great Barrington Declaration, a petition signed by over 10,000 scientists concerning devastating effects of lockdowns        

15. Pfizer Clinical Trial Data showing “vaccines” were not safe and effective.

16. Comparative studies and articles on effectiveness and harms of masks from Childrens’ Health Defense Fund.

17. Microscopic examination of blood of vaccinated individuals showing a desiccation of the red blood cells.

18. Impact on life insurance claims, highest ever since introduction of vaccines.

19. Findings of funeral directors of synthetic blood clots, never seen before the introduction of vaccines.

20. Florida Grand Jury Petition investigating Covid-19 crimes.

21. Articles on Covid-19 virus and vaccines raising questions of the protocols the public was subjected to.

22. Testimony of numerous witnesses before the Corona Investigative Committee exposing the Covid pandemic as a criminal action.

23. Videos, articles and Substack newsletters showing the coordinating influence of the Department of Defense in implementing Operation Warp Speed. 

These allegations and request for criminal investigation are non-partisan and should not be politicized. It appears, however that United States citizens experienced more Covid-19 vaccine deaths and serious adverse reactions from vaccines than anywhere else in the world. Why? 

There also appears a treasonous clique in the United States government and corporations who would betray their country, their fellow countryman and the public trust to global interests who do not recognize National sovereignty, individual sovereignty or freedom.  Not to address these crimes as attacks on the Nation State and its citizens is to opt for National suicide. These crimes will be repeated unless they are confronted and dealt with.

The National American Renaissance Movement hereby requests a Grand Jury criminal investigation.

Click here to read the full petition.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

I now address Lord David William Donald Cameron, of Chipping Norton, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development (Secretariat in the HoL), please forward urgently to Lord Cameron.

*

Dear Lord Cameron,

I write as a retired Orthopaedic and trauma surgeon who has healed thousands with good teams by my side in OUR NHS – this being dismantled steadily since the Centre for Policy Studies/PM Thatcher’s ‘Internal Market’ – 1988.

I will be ‘personal’ but the current and most terrible holocaust in Gaza requires this. About a quarter of my practice involved looking after dear children, often from infancy and with skeletal defects such as congenital dislocation of the hip, club foot etc. Included were those with cerebral palsy – often caused by injury during birth.

One girl I easily remember. At age thirteen, and with very severe spasm in the muscles serving her right hip, the hip dislocated – and no doubt after I had cut tendons in an attempt to stop the dislocation. I then excised the femoral head on the advice of a very experienced senior colleague because her pain was so severe. That gave her no relief. She went on to join other angels. Her humble parents made a generous donation to our Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Hospital, whose life we surgeons were fighting for, and this provided a room where parents could sleep and relax by the airy children’s ward whilst the ones they loved were treated – and schooled. Some few years later this fine hospital of 120 beds and the best esprit de corps was bulldozed – essentially by central diktat, an upmarket housing development replacing healing. It is but one of many facets of fascism in our fine country.

I can easily imagine the pain you and your wife Samantha felt so deeply when your eldest child Ivan died, but after suffering from a vicious combination of cerebral palsy with grand mal epilepsy. So there was also a feeling that he had been released from the pain and shackles of severe spasticity.

You will easily imagine just one child, alive – but with limbs trapped under slabs of concrete caused by CARPET BOMBING of the ‘temples of the family’ – the homes of 2.2 million souls. Whilst she or he remains alive, there is concrete dust in her mouth and lungs, and she hears the blasts as US-provided F16s with British Ae head-up cockpit display kits drop ‘ordnance’ ferried from the US –  onto a civilian population, 60% of which are innocent women and children.

You must immediately contact your fascist colleagues in No 10, absent now of Mrs Braverman, and demand the immediate recall of the UNSC, and make certain that you represent the will of the peoples of this land and call for all holocaust activity by the fascist High Command of ‘Israel’ to cease immediately.

My current definition of the ‘fascist’: “A subhuman who delights in crushing the life out of humans.”

The most recent posting on my ‘political’ website, the other focusing on Palestine and the criminal actions of the Zionist Entity being is here.

This being Part One to do with the continuum of fascism, starting with the necessary mouthpiece of ‘government’. Part Two will shock you. In it I will call for a Nürnberg 2. Your part in the destruction of Libya and the hideous assassination of President Muammar Gaddafi will be included. See Capture and killing  and a record of other ‘settler colonialism’ – a euphemism.

I end by saying that those who came to take another but peaceful people’s land, and to imprison, torture and kill, will be leaving the Promised Land. The native and noble people will return as UNGA 194 demanded on 11th of December 1948, rebuild their villages – over 500 razed (Ilan Pappe’s seminal book ‘The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine’ records it all, including the summary execution of males 12 to 50 in the thousands) and rejoice in peace and  – justice – which comes before peace. And in ‘a state for all its citizens’. Leyla Khalid.

Finally, view this with your family – and not within the foetid bubble of ‘Westminster’. If there are infants there, so much the better – to see the lights of the tree of Christ Mass reflected in their lovely eyes. This is a 4-minute video recording of children of the Friends School of Ramallah singing with absolute determination and love of life – as against a Death Cult overshadowing them.

And I attach first a most harrowing account from a press conference by the Ministry of Health spokesman, Dr. Ashraf Al-Qudra, on the 64th day of the aggression on the Gaza Strip.  That is the Health Ministry of the current Hamas government, its forum now rubble – as the Stern Gang planned for our House of Commons in 1946.

Second is a statement by the WHO of today which with the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), and with support from the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS), completed a high-risk mission to Al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza City all part of this Death Cult.

David Halpin MB BS FRCS

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on the author’s website, David Halpin.

Dr David Halpin is a specialist in trauma and orthopedic surgery. Together with two other doctors he brought doubts about David Kelly’s death to the attention of the media. He is today pushing for a coroner’s inquest into Kelly’s death. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ever since Russia started its full-scale strategic counteroffensive against NATO aggression in Europe, the political West has been insisting on the idea that the Eurasian giant is supposedly “isolated” and the “international pariah”. However, time and again, Moscow keeps debunking this laughable notion. Recent events have not only confirmed this, but are showing that the opposite is happening.

The Qatar trip of German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has been mired in controversy as he was left waiting at least 30 minutes for someone to greet him during his visit on November 29. This could be partially explained by the fact that Berlin’s position is decidedly pro-Israeli, while Doha is firmly on the Palestinian side, formally at least.

However, this doesn’t explain why Russian President Vladimir Putin got virtually a hero’s welcome in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) during a visit to the Middle Eastern country exactly a week after Steinmeier’s trip to Qatar. These sharply differing, albeit seemingly unrelated events demonstrate an enormous paradigm shift in the geopolitics of the Middle East, arguably the most strategically important region on the planet. After the start of the special military operation (SMO), the political West has been trying to isolate Russia and limit its (geo)political maneuverability. However, ever since, this has only backfired, becoming a sort of litmus test for sovereignty and actual independence from the political West’s diktat.

After the sanctions warfare proved to be a spectacular failure, resulting in Russia even becoming the largest economy in Europe and fifth largest in the world, the United States and its numerous vassals and satellite states tried to find other ways to isolate Moscow and its leadership. That was when the so-called “International Criminal Court” (ICC), effectively a glorified NGO under the full control of the political West, issued an arrest warrant for Putin for allegedly “kidnapping Ukrainian children”, despite the fact that their parents, including enemy combatants, were able to reach them and even take them out of Russia. In contrast, the Neo-Nazi junta’s blatant child trafficking (aided by Washington DC) is completely unreported in the US and European Union.

Worse yet, any information about this horrendous practice is being actively suppressed, along with the fact that pregnant women are being forcibly conscripted by the Kiev regime, as evidenced by the recent attempt by NewsGuard to censor such information. It seems that this blatant hypocrisy is so obvious to the rest of the world which simply decided that Western demands for isolating Russia are unacceptable and should simply be ignored. The UAE could’ve easily chosen to follow basic protocol and greet Putin without any pomp. However, the fact that he was welcomed by Emirati jets painting the colors of the Russian flag in the sky signals something completely different from basic diplomatic protocol.

It should be noted that this in and of itself isn’t only about Putin, but Russia as a whole. Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s role as the German President is largely ceremonial, as most of the political power is officially held by the Chancellor. However, he is the foremost representative of his country and the fact that he was not welcomed as expected shows the increasing isolation of the political West in the actual world, where truly sovereign countries aren’t compelled to follow every foreign demand. Obviously, Putin’s balanced position in regard to the Israel-Gaza conflict certainly contributes to his popularity in the Arab world, but so does his firm stand in the face of NATO aggression, demonstrating time and again that Moscow has a geopolitical backbone.

Putin’s follow-up visit to Saudi Arabia was no less important in this regard, while the mainstream propaganda machine is trying to denigrate both trips. In reality, alarm bells are going off in the US, as having nations that are effectively the cornerstones of the highly exploitative petrodollar system welcome the political West’s archenemy so warmly is certainly a bad omen (for the neocolonialists, obviously). The process of dedollarization is a long-term one and will certainly not be completed overnight, but it’s virtually unstoppable at this point. The blatant theft of hundreds of billions in Russia’s forex (foreign exchange) reserves has left numerous countries worried that their assets are simply not safe, prompting them to find alternatives to the USD.

Another interesting aspect of Putin’s trip was the fact that his Ilyushin Il-96-300PU or “Russian Air Force One” was flanked by four Sukhoi Su-35S fighter jets all the way from Russia to the UAE, flying up to 2500 km nonstop, with no aerial refueling and no drop tanks. As if this technologically unprecedented accomplishment wasn’t brilliant enough, the Russian air superiority fighters did so while armed. They flew over the Caspian Sea, parts of Azerbaijan, the entirety of Iran and the Persian Gulf, touching down in Abu Dhabi. Now, it should be noted that countries rarely allow such escorts (much less armed) for state visits, but Moscow secured their free passage over three countries, including the temporary basing in the UAE. This has clear geopolitical implications.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

I have contemplated deeply about next year’s conference theme and would love to share my ideas with potential participants, attendees and the Conference Chair who is also the current Director of the Institute of Gender and Development Studies (IGDS) at UWI, Mona in Jamaica as UWI is my alma mater and Jamaica the country of my birth and where I am now situated for over a year.

When I first heard the conference theme, I immediately had a flashpoint of a quote from a 2023 United Nations Mid Year update on the World Economic And Social Prospects where it states:

“today’s policy makers or change makers face multiple challenges of promoting the construction of inclusive and sustainable societies by largely focusing on social equity, human and sustainable development, gender justice, economic growth and environmental sustainability amidst lingering uncertainties and structural vulnerabilities.”

The lingering uncertainties and structural vulnerabilities which the report speaks of, refers to the dominant neo liberal agenda and corresponding macroeconomic policies that valorises economic growth over people-centred development, deregulation and the reduced public spending on all aspects of sustainable infrastructure and social development policy including gender equality programs or reducing budgetary allocations to social protection programs that adversely affects women’s lives and livelihoods in both developing, emerging market economies and industrialized nations.

I also thought of another quote from the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) bleak outlook on social and economic development for the incoming new year where it states that 2024 is unlikely to show any substantial improvement with respect to economic, social and ecological development indicators of progress. We must be reminded that women and gender studies and interdisciplinary studies including but not limited to history, cultural studies, sociology, labour studies, anthropology, organisational behaviour in management studies, migration and citizenship studies, international development studies, international relations, public international law, political science, public health, economics, natural sciences and identity based disciplines, emerged in the 1960s and 1970s as counter movements to the ethnocentric, infantilizing accounts that the Global North created through research conducted in the Global South on women and other vulnerable groups who are depicted as helpless victims that require intervention, saving and civilizing strategies in order to be improved (Heron, 2007; Lynch et al, 2023). 

As a result of this canonical, imperial and racial-colonial discourses, practices and logics, the political question on who did women or woman constitute has been debated thoroughly by decolonial and transnational feminist scholars including Chandra Talpade Mohanty. Caribbean feminist scholars like Dr. Alissa Trotz (2007) reconceptualised the examination of global sisterhood among women beyond using the simplistic, binary assumptions associated with liberal feminism.

Liberal feminism only looks at gender oppression or patriarchy as the only axis of power and domination which affects women’s lives and this is insufficient analyses. Instead Dr. Trotz challenges her readers and audience to examine systemic inequalities and structural violence that affects racialized women and marginalized communities who are seen and constructed as the Others because a singular focus on gender oppression and one discipline of knowledge is insufficient to analyse the global mechanics of power (Esposito and Winters, 2022).

When I thought of the theme, I asked myself the question: what is the broader macroeconomic, social, cultural and political configuration of today’s world that pose a challenges of women’s studies scholarship and activism?

Two weeks ago in Jamaica, there was a strike among UWI lecturers for better salaries and working conditions amidst the fact that of rising inflation (5.1% as of October 2023, according to OUR Today, 2023) and cost of living and the fact that they have been worse off as result of the Government of Jamaica’s recent wage compensation review exercise.

Despite the fact our nation has been given an indicator of 0.709 and has been ranked for high human development on the UNDP’s Human Development Index, our country still continues to be plagued by high poverty and inequality levels where every 3 in 5 Jamaican households indicated that their primary source of income is not enough to meet basic necessities and demands and majority of poverty-stricken households are female led/women led (PIOJ, 2022). Wealth and income inequality at the global level has become so alarming to the point where UNESCO has released a 2022 publication highlighting the fact that the world’s top 1,000 billionaires have taken nine (9) months to regain their pre pandemic wealth while the world’s most poor and vulnerable, majority of which are women will take an additional ten (10) years or more to regain their wealth. Thus, global recovery is occurring but recovery is uneven and the current global trajectory is far from sustainable.

I also thought of where next year’s conference is situated (Sri Lanka). Sri Lanka was highlighted as a case study in a recent Guardian article that is championing for debt relief and debt justice, given the fact that private companies have made profits up to USD $30 billion by charging premium interest rates and taking a hard line stance of debt repayment obligations. This provides an added barrier to poverty alleviation and reduction in Sri Lanka and thus derails progress on poverty eradication (SDG1- No poverty). 

Globally, the sustainable development goals (SDGs) represent an ambitious agenda yet only 15% of SDG targets have been met and at a regional level in Latin America and the Caribbean, only a meagre 5% of SDGs targets have been achieved as the COVID 19 pandemic and the Russia Ukraine war have hampered progress. The SDGs have been criticised for being aspirational on paper but in reality, these goals are difficult to attain given the global political economy landscape characterized by power asymmetries which affect resource allocation and power distribution.

In terms of politics and political ideologies, right wing populism and the election of centre right and right wing leaders across the world paints a grim outlook and this also brings more perplexing problems as ideologies of nationalism, xenophobia, homophobia and transphobia, anti Black and indigenous racisms, sexism and heteropatriarchy have subverted decades of women’s movements’ social organising, advocacy, critical scholarship, gains in progressive policies and claims for gender and reparative justice on behalf of marginalized communities who are victims of descendants of lives lost to crimes against humanity, dispossession, displacement and genocide.

In these perilous times of growing unpredictability, I also think of how public debt as new form of colonialism and imperialism has influenced the everyday lives of peoples in the Global South, which are former colonies of Empires. According to UNCTAD, 81 developing countries lost 241 billion dollars in their net international reserves in 2022 and more than 60% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is allocated to debt repayment obligations than financing healthcare, education, social assistance and infrastructure and 500 million people in 37 developing countries are expected to continue experience suffering because of a deteriorating global financial landscape. The present and future for women as change makers remain daunting as the challenges are complex and interconnected.

Additionally, I also think about the climate crisis and disproportionate impacts on developing countries and on women and other vulnerable groups. Ambassador Ronald Sanders in his Jamaica Gleaner article on COP 28 climate conference pointed out that industrialized or wealthier nations continue to be the highest carbon and greenhouse gas emitters and despite their vocal commitment to combatting climate change, there is little action to solve the climate crisis. Air, land and water pollution at the expense of declining standards of living and dehumanising treatment of some groups than other is the full embodiment of a concept called the Imperial Mode of living (Brand and Wissen, 2021). Fuel multinational companies like Exon Mobbil makes a profit of up to USD 17.9 billion in profits at the end of 2022 while developing countries like Guyana where Exon Mobil conducts oil discovery and production, more than 60% of people are living below the poverty line and the country suffers from one of the highest emigration of skilled and education professionals (brain drain rates) in the Caribbean region (Mohammed, 2022).

I think of how women’s scholar activism would interrogate issues such as war and political instability affects women’s and men’s lives in different ways as seen in the example of ongoing Israel Palestinian conflict. I think of the limitations of public international law whereby there is no overarching mechanisms for accountability and enforcement of legal rules and principles unlike domestic law as I see the escalation of the land dispute between Venezuela and Guyana and even in light of the fact that the case has been brought to the attention of the UN Security Council, the UN Security Council remains legally and politically limited in its power (McGlinchey, 2023). 

As this year comes to end so quickly and we welcome 2024, let us also think about change making as a political act of delinking and undoing belief systems, norms, values, notions, narratives and practices that undermine women’s autonomy and quest for liberation from structures of domination – the change is conceptual, epistemic, spatial, social, cultural, economic, political and symbolic and it is full time we envision and act on a vision of alternatives to the dominant neoliberal dogma that is ever so pervasive. As Barbadian Prime Minister, Mia Motley, states,

“we cannot afford to continue doing nothing about the current crisis or get lost in all of what is happening by forgetting what our real mission is.”

I urge our audience at WCWS 2024 to be part of a change that not only champions to end gender-based violence but the many manifestations of structural violence that plague our world today.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

In a heated session at the United Nations Security Council, diplomats engaged in a vigorous debate over the provision of arms to Ukraine amid the protracted war with Russia. The eleventh meeting on this pressing issue since Russia invaded in February of 2022 drew sharp criticisms from multiple speakers, who accused Moscow of deflecting attention from its own aggression.

While various briefers and delegates presented conflicting perspectives, CODEPINK member Ann Wright, a retired United States Army colonel and former diplomat, took a different stance. As a civil society representative, she introduced herself as a concerned citizen and taxpayer who resigned from the U.S. Government in 2003 in protest against the Iraq War.

Wright emphasized her opposition to the continued supply of weapons, asserting that it only serves to prolong conflicts.

The United States and its European allies have provided tens of billions of dollars in aid to support Ukraine over the past two years. With the war at an indefinite stalemate with the death toll rising, Wright argued that fueling conflicts with substantial amounts of weapons ultimately profits corporations and politicians, but not the innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. A position that antiwar groups like CODEPINK has held since the beginning of this deadly war.

Highlighting the lengthy process of conflict resolution, Wright drew parallels with historical conflicts, such as the Korean War, which required 575 meetings before reaching a ceasefire agreement. She underscored the devastating toll on human lives during U.S. funded wars, referencing the significant casualties in the Korean War. 

Drawing attention to not only the lack of diplomacy but also an attempt to stop any form of negotiations from happening, she expressed concern along with the historical fact that the supply of weapons prevents the possibility of peace. Wright referred to the reports that informed Washington, D.C., and London had pressured the Ukrainian Government to avoid peace negotiations with Russia, emphasizing the importance of preserving diplomatic efforts.

In a powerful conclusion, Mary Ann Wright shared a poem depicting a plea in Gaza for children’s names to be written on their legs as a means of identification in the event of death due to Israeli bombings. While specifically referencing Gaza, she asserted that the sentiment applies universally to children in conflict zones, including Ukraine, Russia, Palestinel, or Yemen.

As the Security Council debates the “complexities’ ‘ of arms transfers and their impact on international peace and security, Wright’s testimony emphasizes the importance of addressing the root causes of conflicts and fostering meaningful resolutions. She makes the case that this is not, in fact, a complex issue nor should it be a debate. It is quite simple, more weapons only create more war and prohibit lasting peace. 

Click here to watch the video.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Melissa Garriga is the communications and media analysis manager for CODEPINK. She writes about the intersection of militarism and the human cost of war. She volunteered for the Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign and resides in Burlington, VT’s sister city, Moss Point, MS.

UN Resolution 181: The Partition of Arab Palestine in 1947

December 13th, 2023 by Hans Stehling

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

In May 1947, the then newly constituted United Nations had 55 states as members. There are now 193 members representing the global community of nation states. Out of that then (current) minority of 55 states, in 1947, just 33 voted for UN Resolution 181 to partition then Arab Palestine that had been overwhelmingly Muslim-settled for more than a thousand years, with only a very small Jewish minority, extant.

On 29 November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly voted 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions and 1 absent, in favour of the modified Partition Plan. The final vote, was: in favour (33 countries, 72% of total votes) at that time. 

There are currently 193 member states of the UN representing the entire global community.

In 1947, 33 member states were just a fraction of the total global membership today and represented primarily only America and its political allies, who were then, and are now, geographically on the other side of the world.

That Resolution would never pass today because it was the last gasp of a colonial empire structure that still existed post-WW2, which was patently unlawful by international standards today and whereby the massacre of an indigenous population and/or its dispossession would be a criminal offence and/or a war crime with those alleged responsible being subject to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Hans Stehling is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from edgarwinkler / Pixabay

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

President John F. Kennedy was assassinated 60 years ago. If he had  lived and won a second term, the Israeli Palestinian conflict would have evolved differently. Possibly the path toward Israeli apartheid and genocide in Gaza could have been avoided. 

In his short time in office, Kennedy changed US foreign policy in significant ways. As documented in the book “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why he died and why it still matters”, JFK resisted the CIA and military industrial complex in the policies he set regarding the Third World and Soviet Union. The Vietnam War, assassination of Indonesia’s President Sukarno, and continued hostility to Cuba and the Soviet Union would not have happened had Kennedy lived and won a second term.   

Less well known, Kennedy’s policies also challenged and opposed the military and political ambitions of Zionist Israel. At the time, Israel had only existed for thirteen years. It was still evolving and the course was not totally set. There was significant international resolve to find a compromise solution regarding Palestinian refugees from the 1948 Nakba. When Israel attacked Egypt and seized the Sinai peninsula in 1956, the Eisenhower administration demanded Israel withdraw from the captured territory. They complied. 

At this time, in the early 1960’s, prominent Jewish voices criticized the racism and discrimination of the Israeli government. Israelis like Martin Buber assailed Ben-Gurion and noted that “At the inception of the state, complete equality with the Jewish citizens was promised to the Arab population.” Many influential Israelis realized their long term security and well-being depended on finding a just settlement with the indigenous Palestinian population. 

In the United States, the Jewish community was divided and many were anti-Zionist. The American Council for Judaism was influential and anti-nationalist. The racist and militaristic character of Israel was not yet set in stone. Nor was American Jewish support for Israel. When Menachim Begin came to the United States in 1948 he was denounced by prominent Jewish leaders including Albert Einstein. They said Begin, who later became Israeli Prime Minister, was a “terrorist”  who preached  “an admixture of ultra-nationalism, religious mysticism and racial superiority.” Many American Jews had mixed feelings and did not  identify with Israel. Others supported Israel but on the basis of there being peace with the indigenous Palestinians. 

There are four key areas where the Kennedy policy was substantially different from what followed after his death.  

Kennedy Was Not Biased in Favor of Israel  

The Kennedy administration sought good relations with both Israel and the Arab nations. Kennedy aimed to extend US influence throughout the Middle East, including with nations friendly with the Soviet Union and at odds with NATO partners. 

JFK personally supported Arab and African nationalism. As a senator in 1957, he criticized the Eisenhower administration for supporting and sending weapons to France in their war against the Algerian independence movement. In a 9,000 word presentation to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he criticized “western imperialism” and called for the US to support Algerian independence. Algerian President Ben Bella, who France had tried to assassinate and considered far too radical by many in NATO, was given a huge and impressive welcome to the White House. 

Kennedy changed the previous frosty relations with the United Arab Republic (Egypt and Syria) led by Gamal Abdel Nasser. For the first time, the US approved loans to them. Kennedy wrote respectful letters to the Arab presidents before he welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Ben Gurion to Washington. The Arab leaders could see the difference and responded with appreciation. Those who claim there was no difference with Kennedy ignore the fact that Egypt’s Nasser, Algeria’s Ben Bella and other nationalist leaders saw a big difference.   

In 1960, when Kennedy was campaigning for the presidency, he spoke at the Zionists of America Convention. He made complimentary remarks about Israel but also expressed the need for friendship with all the people of the Middle East. He said the US should “act promptly and decisively against any nation in the Middle East which attacks its neighbor” and “The Middle East needs water, not war; tractors, not tanks; bread, not bombs.” 

Kennedy frankly told the Zionists, “I cannot believe that Israel has any real desire to remain indefinitely a garrison state surrounded by fear and hate.” By maintaining objectivity and neutrality on the Israeli Arab conflict, Kennedy wanted to steer the  Jewish Zionists away from the racist, militaristic and ultra-nationalistic impulses which have led to where we are today.  

Kennedy Wanted the Zionist Lobby to Follow the Rules 

The second difference in Kennedy’s policy is regarding Zionist lobbying on behalf of Israel. Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), organizations that promote or  lobby on behalf of a foreign government are required to register and account for their finances and activities. Under Attorney General Robert Kennedy, the Department of Justice (DOJ)  instructed the American Zionist Council (AZC) to register as agents of a foreign country. AZC is the parent organization of the American Israel Public Affairs Council (AIPAC). 

As documented in detail here, on 21 November 1962,  the Assistant Attorney General wrote to them “the receipt of such funds from the American sections of the Jewish Agency for Israel constitutes the (American Zionist) Council an agent of a foreign principal…. the Council’s registration is requested.”  

The emergence of Israeli  political influence was also scrutinized in the Senate. Under Senator William Fulbright, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held hearings in May and August 1963. They revealed that tax free donations to the United Jewish Appeal, supposedly for humanitarian relief in Israel, were being channeled back to the US where the money was used for lobbying and Israeli public relations.  

Attorneys for AZC stalled for time. On August 16, 1963, a DOJ  analyst reviewed the case and concluded, “Department should insist on the immediate registration of the American Zionist Council under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.” 

On October 11  the DOJ demanded that AZC register and “Department expects a response from you within 72 hours.”  

On October 17, a DOJ memorandum  reports that attorneys for AZC pleaded for not being required to register as foreign agents. They offered to provide the required financial disclosures but that registering as a foreign agent “would be so publicized by the American Council on Judaism that it would eventually destroy the Zionist movement.” As indicated in this discussion, political zionism was not yet dominant in the American Jewish community and was actively opposed by the American Council on Judaism and other Jewish groups. 

Kennedy Supported Palestinian Rights

A third difference is regarding Palestinian rights. Although he was only 44 when he became president, Kennedy had more international experience than most US presidents. In 1939 he spent two weeks in Palestine. In a lengthy letter to his father, he described the situation and difficulties. He wrote,

“The sympathy of the people on the spot seems to be with the Arabs. This is not only because the Jews have had, at least some of their leaders, an unfortunately arrogant, uncompromising attitude, but they feel that after all, the country has been Arabic for the last few hundred years …. Palestine was hardly Britain’s to give away.” 

In comments that are still true, Kennedy remarks how the Jewish residents are divided between “strongly Orthodox Jewish group, unwilling to make any compromise” and a “liberal Jewish element composed of the younger group who fear these reactionaries”. His analysis is sympathetic to both Jewish and Arab peoples and addresses the difficulty but necessity to find a compromise solution. 

In the early 1960’s, the US State Department was not locked in to a biased acceptance or approval of Israeli policies. The US supported UN Resolution 194 resolving (in paragraph 11) that “refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”  This has become known as the “right of return”.

On November 21, 1963, the day before Kennedy’s assassination, the NY Times has two news stories which exemplify the discord  between Washington and Tel Aviv. A report from the United Nations is titled “Israel Dissents as U.N. Group Backs U.S. on Arab Refugees”. It begins,

“A United States resolution calling for continued efforts to resolve the predicament of the Palestinian Arab refugees was approved tonight 83 to 1… Israel cast the single negative vote….The issue centers on a 1948 resolution whose key section, paragraph 11, concerns the future of the Arabs who were displaced from their homes by the Palestine conflict. They have been living in the lands bordering Israel …. The revised United States text calls on the Palestine Conciliation Commission to ‘continue its efforts for the implementation of Paragraph 11’.” 

The second NYT story is titled “U.S. Stand Angers Israel”. It reports from Jerusalem that “Premier Levi Eshkol expressed extreme distaste today for the United States’ position in the Palestine refugee debate….Israel’s anger was conveyed ‘in the strongest terms’ to the US Ambassador …. The Israeli Government is upset about the American resolution before the UN Political Committee and by American maneuvers over the issue.” Israel was angered and objecting because the Kennedy administration was trying to resolve the Palestinian refugee situation including the right of return. 

Kennedy Tried to Stop the Israeli Nuclear Weapons Program 

The fourth and biggest contention between Kennedy and the Israeli leadership was regarding their developing nuclear weapons. This issue was kept so secret that crucial documents and letters have only been released in recent years.  

President Kennedy was a strong advocate for stopping nuclear proliferation.  After the 1962 Cuba missile crisis, he realized how easy it would be to intentionally or accidentally trigger a catastrophic nuclear war. If nuclear weapons were allowed to spread to more countries, the risks of global catastrophe would be all the greater. It was also predicted that if Israel acquired nuclear weapons capability, they would become more aggressive and less likely to reach  a compromise agreement regarding Palestinian refugees.   

When intelligence indicated that Israel might be trying to build a nuclear weapon at Dimona in 1962, Kennedy was determined to find out if this was true, and if so to stop it. This caused an intense diplomatic confrontation between JFK and Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion. The proof of this has recently been revealed in the exchange of letters between President Kennedy and Prime Minister Ben-Gurion and his successor Levy Eshkol. They are all labeled “Top Secret” or “Eyes Only”.  

It is important to see the sequence and some details to understand how intense this showdown was. These communications are all from 1963. (Note to reader: skip ahead to the next section if you become tired of the detail in the following exchanges.) 

In March  the US State Department instructed the US Ambassador to inform the government of Israel (GOI) that for “compelling reasons” the “USG seeks GOI assent to semi-annual repeat semi-annual visits to Dimona, perhaps May and November, with full access to all parts and instruments in the facility, by qualified US scientists.” 

On April 19 the State Department instructed the US Ambassador to Israel to “press” for an “affirmative reply” to the earlier request for semi-annual inspections of Dimona. 

On April 26, Israeli PM Ben Gurion replied to President Kennedy. He evaded the issue of  nuclear facility inspections and instead expressed his concern regarding a recent proclamation from Egypt, Syria and Iraq. He compared Egyptian President Nasser to Germany’s Hitler. 

On May 4  JFK responded to Ben Gurion’s concerns and underscored the US commitment to Israel and peace in the Middle East. He told the Israeli leader he is much less worried about an “early Arab attack”  than the “successful development of advanced offensive systems”. 

On May 8, a Special National Intelligence Estimate concluded, “Israel intends at least to put itself in a position to be able to produce a limited number of weapons” and that “unless deterred by outside pressure [the Israelis] will attempt to produce a weapon sometime in the next several years.”  The analysis predicted that if   Israelis had the bomb it would “encourage them to be bolder in their use of the conventional resources both diplomatic and military in their confrontation with the Arabs.” 

On May 10, US State Department sent an “Eyes Only Ambassador” telegram to the US Ambassador to Israel. The ambassador was instructed to remind the Israeli leadership that they have previously agreed to the bi-annual inspections. The telegram also says Israeli concerns about Arab development of a nuclear bomb “are not valid” because there is nothing comparable to the “advanced Israeli program.” 

The tensions between the Kennedy administration and Tel Aviv caused the Israel lobby to escalate pressure on the White House. This is revealed in a May 11 TOP SECRET State Department memo regarding “White House Concern with Arab-Israeli Matters”.  It begins,

“In recent weeks, as you are aware, it has become increasingly clear that the White House is under steadily mounting domestic political pressure to adopt a foreign policy in the Near East more consonant with Israeli desires. The Israelis are determined to use the period between now and the 1964 Presidential election to secure a closer, more public security relationship with the Unites States, notably through a public security guarantee and a cooler, more antagonistic relationship beween the United States and the UAR [United Arab Repubic].” 

Source

This is a highly interesting memo showing Israeli influence in US foreign policy and electoral politics. It further shows Kennedy’s effort to mitigate this influence while standing firm on the goal to stop nuclear proliferation. 

On May 12, 1963 Ben Gurion wrote another long letter to President Kennedy. Again evading the US request, Ben Gurion gives a distorted history including the claim that Palestinian refugees left Palestine “at the demand of Arab leaders”. He again compares Nasser to Hitler and suggests the danger of a new Holocaust. 

He says, “Mr, President, my people have the right to exist … and this existence is in danger.” 

Source

On May 19, Kennedy responded to Ben Gurion emphasizing the importance he placed on not allowing the spread of nuclear weapons.

“We are concerned with the disturbing effects on world stability which would accompany the development of a nuclear weapons capability by Israel.” 

Kennedy underscores the “deep commitment to the security of Israel” but says the commitment and support “would be seriously jeopardized” if the US is unable to obtain reliable information about “Israel’s efforts in the nuclear field.” 

On May 27, Ben Gurion responded to Kennedy saying that the nuclear reactor at Dimona “will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes”. He counters Kennedy’s request for bi-annual visits starting in June by suggesting annual visits “such as have already taken place” starting at the end of the year. The condition is significant because the previous “visit” to Dimona was restricted in time and space. 

undefined

The Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center as viewed from a Corona satellite in the late 1960s (Public Domain)

On June 15, Kennedy wrote to Ben Gurion after he had received a scientific evaluation of the minimum requirements for a nuclear site inspection, After welcoming Ben Gurion’s assurances that Dimona will only be devoted to peaceful purposes, Kennedy issued a polite ultimatum. “If Israel’s purposes are to be clear to world beyond reasonable doubt, I believe the schedule which would best serve our common purpose would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, thereafter at intervals of six months.”  He specifies that  the “visit” must include access to all areas and “sufficient time be allotted for thorough examination.” 

On June 16, the US Embassy in Israel reported that Ben Gurion resigned as Israel’s Prime Minister. This was a huge surprise; the explanation was that it was for “personal reasons”. It is likely that Ben-Gurion knew the contents of the forthcoming letter from Washington (received at the embassy the day before). The impact of his resignation was to stall for time. US Ambassador Barbour suggested waiting until the “cabinet problem is worked out” before sending JFK’s near ultimatum to the next Prime Minister. 

Kennedy did not wait long. On July 4, he wrote to new Israeli Prime Minister Levy Eshkol. After congratulating Eshkol on becoming new Prime Minister, he goes straight to the point “concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona.” Kennedy says, “I regret having to add to your burdens to soon after your assumption of  office, but …” He then goes on to request inspections as was requested in the letter to Ben-Gurion and that “support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized” if this is not done.  

On July 17, Eshkol wrote to Kennedy that he needed to study the issue more before responding to Kennedy’s request for visits to Dimona. US Ambassador Barbour added that Eshkol verbally conveyed that he was “surprised” at Kennedy’s statement that US commitment to Israel might be jeopardized. Indicating Israeli defiance, Eshkol told the US Ambassador “Israel would do what it had to do for its national security and to safeguard its sovereign rights.” 

On August 19, Eshkol wrote to Kennedy re-iterating the “peaceful purpose” of Dimona and ignoring the request for a summer inspection. He proposed the inspection take place “toward the end of 1963”. 

On August 26, Kennedy wrote to Eshkol accepting the visit at year end but emphasizing it needs to be done “when the reactor’s core is being loaded and before internal radiation hazards have developed.” Kennedy set these conditions because they were essential for determining whether the facility could be used for developing a nuclear weapon. 

On September 16, State Department prepared a Memorandum of Conversation with a counselor from the British Embassy. There was joint concern but agreement that  Dimona would be visited and inspected “prior to the activation of the reactor.” 

After the Assassination of JFK on November 22

After Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) became president, US mideast policy changed significantly. From the start, LBJ told  an Israeli diplomat, “You have lost a very great friend. But you have found a better one.” The Israeli publication Haaretz says, “Historians generally regard Johnson as the president most uniformly friendly to Israel.” The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs writes “Lyndon Johnson Was First to Align U.S. Policy with Israel’s Policies” and “Up to Johnson’s presidency, no administration had been as completely pro-Israel and anti-Arab as his.” 

On the crucial issue of  Dimona inspection, the Israelis ignored JFK’s condition and the reactor went critical on December 26. When the inspection occurred three weeks later, they could not inspect the areas that had been irradiated. A handwritten comment on the report says, “We were supposed to see this first!” We do not know what would have happened it JFK had been in the White House but given the intensity of his effort, and deep convictions regarding the dangers of nuclear proliferation, it would not have been ignored as it was under LBJ. 

Under LBJ, relations with Egypt deteriorated. The US stopped providing direct assistance loans and grants to Egypt. The US became increasingly antagonistic to President Nasser, as desired by the Israel lobby. 

US support for a resolution to the Palestinian refugee issue decreased and then stopped. 

The Department of Justice efforts to require the American Zionist Council to register as foreign agents became increasingly weak until they were dropped under LBJ’s new Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach. The sequence of exchanges includes: 

On December 11, 1963, the AZC attorney wrote to the DOJ saying, “Our client is not prepared to register as an agent of a foreign government.” Instead, he proposed to provide “voluntarily” the required financial information.  

In January and February 1964, there were more exchange between AZC and the DOJ. AZC expressed concern because the American Council on Judaism publicly said that AZC was acting as “propaganda agents for the state of Israel and that the Jewish Agency was being used as a conduit  for funds for the Zionist organization in the United States.” 

In summer 1964 Nicholas Katzenbach becomes Attorney General. Negotiations continued. DOJ staff noted that AZC was “stalling” and not providing acceptable information despite the increasingly special and favorable treatment. In spring of 1965 the DOJ accepted that AZC was NOT required to register as foreign agent. Their financial information was kept in a unique expandable folder. In November 1967 the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) applied for a federal tax exemption. The US Treasury Department granted it, backdated to 1953. 

 Increasingly Aggressive and Uncompromising Zionist Israel 

The successful development of nuclear weapons  added to Israel’s aggressive actions and unwillingness to resolve the Palestinian refugee crisis. 

With intelligence information provided by Washington, Israel made a surprise attack on Egypt, Syria and Jordan in June 1967. The “Six Day war” was a crucial turning point in middle east history. Israel quickly defeated the unprepared combined armies. In the West, public perception of Israel changed overnight. The mythology of Israeli military (and general) superiority was created. Among the American Jewish population, doubts and concerns about Israel evaporated and support skyrocketed. 

Israeli leaders arrogance and deceit is exemplified by the attack on the USS Liberty during the Six Day War. The communications navy vessel was monitoring the air waves in the eastern Mediterranean when it was attacked by Israeli aircraft and boats. Thirty four US sailors were killed and 172 injured. Amazingly , the ship managed to stay afloat. The plan was evidently to sink the ship, blame it on Egypt and consolidate US support and hostility to Egypt and the Soviet Union. 

Lyndon Johnson over-ruled the calls for help from the vessel, saying “I will not have my ally embarrassed.” 

The deadly incident was covered up for decades. 

We do not know for sure what might have happened had JFK not been assassinated. It is possible that Israel would have been stopped from acquiring the bomb.  Without that, they may not have had the audacity to launch the 1967 attacks on their neighbors, seizing the Golan, West Bank and Gaza Strip. If the Zionist lobby had been required to register as foreign agents, their influence would have been moderated. Perhaps Israel could have found a reasonable accommodation with Palestinians in one or two states.

Instead, Israel hardened into an apartheid regime committing increasingly outrageous massacres. As Kennedy warned in 1960, Israel has become a “garrison state” surrounded by “hate and fear”. The assassination of John F Kennedy insured Zionist control of Israel, suffering for Palestinians and permanent instability.  

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Rick Sterling is an independent journalist based in the San Franciso Bay Area of  California. He can be reached at [email protected]. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

First published by Global Research on May 27, 2021

This article by Dr Gérard Delépine was first published in French on our French language  website mondialisation.ca 

The English text below is an AI Translation with some minor edits by Global Research.

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

“And everywhere they have been followed by a dramatic rise in new infections and mortality for several weeks or months”

Dr Delépine carefully analyses the pre and post vaccine trends for 14 countries in major regions of the World.

The latest official figures (September 15, 2021) point to approximately: 

 40,666 mRNA vaccine reported and registered deaths in the EU, UK and US (combined) and

6.6 Million reported “adverse events”.

But only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities.

Those death and injury figures (EU, UK, US) SOFAR are at least ten times higher than the official reported cases. 

410,000 deaths, 66 million injuries out of a population of  approximately 850 million. 

Moreover, the health authorities are actively involved in obfuscating the deaths and injuries resulting from the mRNA “vaccine”, while inflating the number of Covid-19 related deaths. (“autopsies not required”). 

Ironically, not only does Pfizer have a criminal record with the US Department of Justice for “fraudulent marketing”, the EU Commission has chosen Pfizer BioNTech as its “Reliable Partner” for the production of 1.8 billion doses over the next 3-4 years, in a  contract which is currently under negotiation.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 28, 2021,

 

***

Two months ago, we tried to alert people to the paradoxical results of the covid19 vaccines by publishing the pre- and post-vaccination mortality curves for Israel and Great Britain [1] which already showed that these vaccinations were followed by ‘a considerable increase in contamination and mortality lasting 6 to 8 weeks after the start of vaccination. [2]

Since this period, vaccination campaigns have spread worldwide even to countries where covid was not present. And everywhere they have been followed by a dramatic rise in new infections and mortality for several weeks or months. [3]

How many deaths and severe accidents will it take for executives, WHO, health agencies FDA, EMA among others, to look at the proven results of this experimental pseudo-vaccination in the real world and derive the results from it? consequences ?

Reminder of the proven facts published by the WHO

We present below the epidemic curves of the most vaccinated countries as published by the WHO (with our comments in red).

ASIA

In Nepal, a country of 28 million inhabitants

The vaccination campaign, using the Chinese vaccine and the Indian Astra Zeneca, began at the end of January 2021. So far, after ten months of the epidemic, the country had 270,092 confirmed cases and 2017 deaths and the daily average of new cases s ‘amounted to 350.

Four months after vaccination began, the epidemic has exploded with a current average of 8,000 new cases daily. As of May 22, Nepal had 497,052 (+ 90%) confirmed cases and 6,024 deaths (+ 200%.)

In Thailand, a country of 70 million inhabitants

The vaccination campaign using the Chinese vaccine began in the first week of March. So far, since the start of the epidemic, the country has only recorded 25,000 infected and 83 deaths attributed to Covid19.

Since the start of vaccination, in 2 months, the number of infected has multiplied by 5 (123,066 on 22/5) and that of deaths by 9 (735 on 22/5).

In Cambodia, a country of 27 million inhabitants

In Mongolia, a country of 3.3 million inhabitants

South America

In Colombia , a country of 50 million inhabitants

country severely affected by the disease, the epidemic began to decline sharply until the start of the vaccination campaign on February 18, 2021.

Since then, the number of daily infections has quadrupled and daily mortality has multiplied by 3

Chile, country of 18 million inhabitants

Vaccination began on December 24 and a total of nearly 17.1 million doses of the vaccine have been administered to less than 20 million people. But despite the highest vaccination coverage rate in South America and harsh confinements, the number of daily infections and the number of deaths remain close to triple what they were before the start of the vaccination campaign …

In Brazil, a country of 217 million inhabitants

Vaccination began on January 18 as weekly mortality stabilized around 7,000

Middle East

In the United Arab Emirates, a country of 10.5 million inhabitants

In Kuwait, a country of 4.2 million inhabitants

EUROPE

In Hungary, a country of 9.8 million inhabitants

The vaccination campaign, which began at the end of February, was followed by a sharp increase in weekly contaminations, which rose from 25,576 on February 25 to 62,265 a month later, before gradually falling back to the pre-vaccination level.

In two and a half months, Hungary has doubled its figures of infected (400,000 to 800,000) and deaths (from 14,000 to 29,000) reached after 11 months of epidemic

In Romania, a country of 20 million inhabitants

The vaccination campaign began at the end of December at a time when the epidemic was waning, and according to official data from May 4, 21 Bucharest has the highest vaccination rate in the country with 31.2% of its eligible population vaccinated. . But shortly after the start of vaccination, the number of daily infections and mortality increased.

Before vaccination after ten months of the epidemic, Romania had 618,000 infected and 15,000 dead. After five months of vaccination, she counts twice as much.

Monaco, country of 38,000 inhabitants

had only 3 deaths before vaccination and 32 since vaccination

Gibraltar, 34,000 inhabitants

: vaccination of the entire population was followed by an 800% increase in mortality from 10 to 94)

What can be deduced from these official data. Hypotheses

The Israeli and British Pyrrhic victories [4]

Vaccination advocates claim vaccinations in Israel and Britain have been successful, as current, daily contaminations and mortality are low.

But these apparent successes correspond in fact to the disappearance of a large part of the people at risk (the “harvesting  ”) achieved by vaccination and to the spontaneous regression of the disease observed also in countries with little vaccination.

Vaccine “harvesting”

In these two countries, the mortality attributed to Covid increased sharply for 4 to 6 weeks, equaling all the deaths in 2020. The covid per vaccination mortality curve in Israel is demonstrative.

The “harvest” of 1,404 people in January and 949 others in February, the equivalent of a full year of Covid mortality without a vaccine (the year 2020) sharply reduced the number of Israelis at risk, resulting in de facto probably a decrease in the apparent risk of mortality in the coming year, in this age group.

But along with this decrease in its original target, the virus has mutated to attack other segments of society and especially younger age groups.

In November 2020, data from the Israeli Ministry of Health revealed that Israel had detected 400 cases of the coronavirus in children under the age of two. In February 2021, that number increased to 5,800.

The same “harvesting  ” has been observed in Great Britain. As the Covid19 threatens only a small part of the population (the elderly with comorbidity), the peri-vaccination disappearance of a large part of this population (as much as the deaths of the year 2020) at risk, mathematically reduces mortality observed, at least transiently.

Since the British vaccination campaign, the average mortality per million inhabitants in Great Britain (934 / M) is more than double that of the Netherlands (411 / M).

The natural regression of the epidemic

Also explains the drop in mortality as shown in the comparison between the highly vaccinated Great Britain and the very poorly vaccinated Netherlands

The mortality curves per million inhabitants follow the same temporality in these two neighboring countries. That of the United Kingdom suffers from a much higher peri-vaccination peak, the current mortality in the Netherlands is slightly higher reflecting the absence of the English “harvest”.

The current vaccination, accelerator of the epidemic and mortality?

The review of the main countries which have adopted broad vaccination shows that in real populations, generalized vaccination behaves more as an accelerator of the epidemic and of mortality than as a prevention thereof. [5]

In all highly vaccinated countries, the mortality recorded during the two months after vaccination is equal to or exceeds that of the whole of 2020.

LACK OF SOLID EXPERIMENTAL DATA

The tests of these vaccines were insufficient, without hindsight, because they are in progress. The first results are promised for early 2023.

None of them pointed out the possibility of a possible increase in contamination and mortality, which fortunately appear to be transitory. They are not very informative on the more or less serious side effects, such as the frequency of early vascular accidents in the days following vaccination, or the multiplication of miscarriages and menstrual disorders in women for example and of course the possible more complications. late in the medium and long term.

The race for accelerated vaccination at all costs could ultimately be ineffective for popular confidence in all vaccinations. There’s no point in running, you have to start on time, La Fontaine would have said. But new billionaires like the CEO of Moderna probably don’t think like the turtle in the Fable who has already amassed a fortune.

THE FUTURE IS EARLY TREATMENTS MASTERED BY FIELD PHYSICIANS

Transparent studies are essential to understand the mechanism of these transient worsening of the epidemic after vaccination and to deduce possible preventive measures, if a new outbreak occurs.

Especially since the future, after this vaccine hecatomb, remains very uncertain. The leaders who have violated the bases of medicine and democracy by imposing express vaccination without respecting the usual procedures for the safety and effectiveness of drugs placed on the market, all find themselves promising their populations early treatment for future waves, thus proving, like Boris Johnson, that they no longer believe in the vaccination they have imposed. [6]

MEDICINE SHOULD NOT BE DECIDED BY POLICY

Health policy should no longer be imposed or guided by often inaccurate simulations (and their displays sometimes influenced by policies as English scientists admit), but should be based on respect for democracy and clinical experience. field physicians possibly guided by simple non-binding recommendations.

All data must be transparent like the figures of the Sentinels Network which reflects the number of real patients, consulting doctors for clinical signs. Much more reliable than the perennial contamination figures based on unreliable PCR tests.

FREEDOM TO CARE AND BE CAREFUL

Surtout les médecins doivent être autorisés à traiter librement leurs patients avec tous les moyens à leur disposition sans diktat bureaucratique, et ce dès le début de la maladie, comme dans toute autre pathologie. Dès le début de l’épidémie, les traitements précoces basés sur les antibiotiques, macrolides, l’hydroxychloroquine, l’Artemisia, les vitamines D et C et le zinc, puis l’ivermectine étaient connus et diabolisés par les médecins de plateau au service de nouvelles drogues hors de prix comme le remdésivir, et surtout des futurs vaccins.

The political choice to prohibit the free choice of treatment by the authorities has led in several countries of the world, including France, to numerous deaths, at least part of which was preventable. The ongoing trials will give voice to the families of the victims without repairing the irreparable loss of a loved one.

ESSENTIAL MORATORIUM

Totalitarianism, systematic censorship and persecution of opponents and the suppression of fundamental freedoms in science, medicine and economics only lead to more or less long-term catastrophes, including for those responsible for them.

It is high time to go back to the proven facts and to their critical examination without a priori. In all countries, experimental vaccinations were followed by an increase in contamination and mortality attributed to Covid19 and the appearance of mutants. As long as the phenomenon has not been elucidated, a moratorium on anticovid vaccinations is essential and urgent.

Dr Gérard Delépine

 

Notes:

[1] Great Britain: actual results of the anti-Covid-19 vaccination as of March 29 – (ripostelaique.com) [ ↩]

[2] Analysis of the results of the anti-Covid19 vaccination in Israel as of February 23, 2021 – Nouveau Monde (nouveau-monde.ca) [ ↩]

[3] https://nouveau-monde.ca/et-surgit-une-hecatombe-post-vaccinale/ [ ↩]

[4] A Pyrrhic victory is a tactical victory, achieved at the cost of losses so heavy to the winner that they compromise his chances of final victory. [ ↩]

[5] F Gobert Since we were vaccinated (anticovid), the average daily mortality has increased in 13 countries out of 14 Agoravox https://www.agoravox.fr/actualites/sante/article/depuis-qu-on-vaccine- anticovid-la-233252 [ ↩]

[6] https://www.francesoir.fr/societe-sante/boris-johnson-veut-un-traitement-precoce-contre-la-covid-dici-lautomne [ ↩]

 
 

 

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on Covid-19 Vaccines Lead to New Infections and Mortality: The Evidence is Overwhelming
  • Tags:

Canada’s UN Vote for Ceasefire Shows It Is Gradually Ceding to Public Pressure

December 13th, 2023 by Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME) welcomes Canada’s vote at the United Nations General Assembly in support of a ceasefire in Gaza, which shows that the government is gradually ceding to popular pressure. Israel’s military offensive has killed more than 18,000 Palestinians over the last two months, and UN experts warn that Israel’s actions point to “a genocide in the making.” CJPME urges Canada to be unequivocal in demanding an end to Israel’s genocidal war, and to back up its words with the suspension of military trade with Israel.

“There are over 7,700 Palestinian children who could be alive today if Canada had called for a ceasefire from the start,” said Michael Bueckert, Vice President of CJPME. “Today’s UN vote shows that this government is slowly coming to the right position, but it has come too late to prevent horrific suffering. Canada must now put pressure on Israel to end its war by imposing a two-way arms embargo,” added Bueckert.

For two months, Canada refused to call for a ceasefire while expressing support for limited “humanitarian pauses.” On October 28, Canada abstained on a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly in support of a humanitarian truce. Ahead of today’s UN vote, CJPME notes that Trudeau issued an ambiguous joint statement which appeared to endorse the idea of a ceasefire in the future: it claimed that Canada supports “urgent international efforts towards a sustainable ceasefire,” but did not call on all parties to immediately end hostilities. When asked in Parliament about how Canada would vote at the UN, Trudeau would not say, and specifically avoided using the word “ceasefire.” CJPME urges Canada to be consistent in its position, and unequivocally withdraw its support for Israel’s war.

“It has taken two months for Canada to walk back its kneejerk reaction to Hamas’s attack, which gave a green light to genocidal violence,” added Bueckert. “From the beginning, Canada should have recognized that international law provided no basis for Israel’s illegal military assault and siege against the population of Gaza. From the very start, Canada should have enacted an arms embargo to address the root causes of this conflict: Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine, its structurally racist policies, and its desires to push out the Palestinian population into Egypt.”

The demand for a ceasefire has been supported by the NDP, the Bloc Québécois, the Green Party, and many Liberal MPs who signed a statement from the Canada-Palestine Parliamentary Friendship Group. At least 268 Canadian civil society organizations have signed a joint statement urging a ceasefire, and a Parliamentary e-petition for a ceasefire received 286,700 signatures, making it the most popular in Parliament’s history. The call for an arms embargo is supported by the NDP.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image: Pro-Palestine supporters rally at the Human Rights Monument on Elgin Street in Ottawa. Dec. 9, 2023. (Shaun Vardon/CTV News Ottawa)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Ukrainian former defense minister Oleksii Reznikov recently stated that the Kremlin’s goal is to “destroy” Ukraine completely, “assimilating” its citizens into the Russian Federation. Such wild claims have not been much challenged by journalists and opinion-makers in the West. After all, according to Western media Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “plan” is and has always been “to conquer” Ukraine all along. This pervasive Western narrative, also pushed by Kyiv, far from being a kind of self-evident truth, is challenged by voices within the US Establishment such as Jeffrey Sachs and by many respected scholars in the West, including some who are very critical of Moscow. Such a one-sized narrative in fact removes any context regarding the current crisis and completely ignores Russian perspective, goals, and security concerns.

Although a harsh critic of Russian ongoing military campaign in Ukraine, Wolfgang Richter (a Senior Associate in the International Security Division at the Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik – SWP) acknowledged, for example, in a 2022 article that in December 2021, Moscow had “made clear in two draft treaties” what it was after: “preventing a further expansion of NATO to the east and obtaining binding assurances to this end.” The Alliance and Washington, however, according to Richter, “were not prepared to revise the principles of the European security order” and thus Moscow obviously “did not accept this and resorted to the use of force.”

According to this expert, although the US is “far from the theater of conflict in Europe”, French and British nuclear weapons and “the deployment of US sub-strategic nuclear weapons in Europe and NATO’s conventional forces on Russia’s borders” are indeed a security risk in the European continent from Moscow’s perspective. This is so, he argues, quite convincingly, because Russia understands that a future threat could arise from the new American intermediate-range weapons in the continent, which could even reach Russian strategic targets (in the European part of the country) “should Washington and NATO partners decide to deploy them.” Moreover, NATO’s enlargement “has created more potential deployment areas in Central and Eastern Europe.” The Kremlin sees the Atlantic Alliance today, after all, as merely an American tool to advance its geopolitical interests (to the detriment of Russian security).

Sometimes, critics claim that the fact that Moscow cooperated in varying degrees with NATO from the nineties to around 2010 “proves” that Russian claims about NATO’s enlargement should not be taken seriously. This fact, if anything, corroborates Moscow’s arguments.

In his 2018 associated professorship habilitation thesis, Sao Paulo University History Professor Angelo de Oliveira Segrillo describes Putin as a moderate (albeit ambiguously) “Westernist”, rather than an Eurasianist, citing as evidence for it the Russian President’s well know admiration for Peter the Great. Segrillo argues that Putin was never a radical Westernist such as Boris Yeltsin, but rather a pragmatic and moderate one, while also being a gosudarstvennik, that is, someone who advocates for a strong State, in line with Russia’s political tradition. The Brazilian professor thus compares Putin to the French leader Charles de Gaulle, who often opposed Washington and NATO not simply out of an “anti-Western stance” but as someone who is in a position of defending the national interests of one’s own country.

Alas, whether the aforementioned thesis is fully accurate or not, that being something which interests mostly historians and biographers anyway, one can in any case argue that far from being staunchly “anti-Western” due to the supposed personal inclinations of the President (as Western propaganda would have it), the Kremlin in fact has had to take a defensive and counter-offensive approach towards the US-led West over the latter’s many provocations and developments which, from a Russian perspective, constituted crossing red lines.

In the NATO-Russia Founding Act of May 1997, NATO in fact pledged to limit the number of stationed troops, promising not to bring about any “additional permanent stationing of sub­stantial combat forces”, while  claiming it had no plan to deploy nuclear weapons in the accession countries. Such agreements eroded over several episodes, as Ritter demonstrates. Countries that did not belong to the CFE started joining the Alliance in 2004 and, to make matters worse, Washington in 2007 established a permanent military presence on the Black Sea. The US had withdrawn from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 which for the Kremlin was a threat to strategic stability, a perception enhanced by Washington’s 2007 bilateral agreements with the Czech and Poland to deploy missile defense systems in these countries (allegedly to counter an Iranian “threat”).

NATO’s war against Serbia in 1999 (denounced by Russia) had of course already violated the ban on the use of force, and the 1997 and 1999 agreements. Moreover, the brutal invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 demonstrated America’s capacity and willingness to break international law, by relying on a “coaling of the willing” of new Eastern European partners and allies (even without NATO consensus). One could also cite Western recognition of Kosovo’s (unilateral) declaration of independence and the 2008 offer of the prospect of joining NATO to Ukraine and Georgia which, according to Richter, was “the breaking point in NATO’s relations with Russia.”

The 2014 Crimea referendum and the Donbass War might have been the culmination of the erosion of an already declining European security order, argues Richter but such erosion “had already begun in 2002 with the growing potential for conflict between Washington and Moscow”, George W. Bush having played an important role in this.

Which brings us to the current situation. For American political scientist John Mearsheimer, if Kyiv and Moscow had reached a deal, which could have happened if it were not for Western interference, Ukraine today would control a greater share of territory. As he writes, “Russia and Ukraine were involved in serious negotiations to end the war in Ukraine right after it started on 24 February 2022”. Regarding that, he adds: “everyone involved in the negotiations understood that Ukraine’s relationship with NATO was Russia’s core concern… if Putin was bent on conquering all of Ukraine, he would not have agreed to these talks.” The main issue was NATO.

To sum it up, although at times Russia considered the possibility of engaging in further dialogue and cooperation with NATO, there have always  been tensions about the Atlantic Alliance’s expansion, and Moscow security concerns pertaining to it, far from being a mere excuse, are in fact well-founded.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Mercola

A Flawed and Dangerous Presence: US Troops in Syria

December 13th, 2023 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Despite a focus on boxing China in the Indo-Pacific, US involvement in the Middle East continues to be widespread and problematic.  While Israel is given its regular steroid diet of murderous arms, US military personnel find themselves scattered throughout a myriad of bases and countries. Recently, Kentucky Republican Senator Rand Paul decided that Syria should not be one of them.

In his bill to the Senate, Paul called for “the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in Syria that have not been authorized by Congress”, leaving a 30-day timeframe for the measure to take place. It notes, among a number of events, that US armed forces in Syria and Iraq since October 17 “have been attacked at least 52 times, with 28 attacks in Syria and 24 attacks in Iraq.  Such attacks resulted in at least 56 members of the United States Armed Forces being injured, of whom at least 25 members have sustained traumatic brain injuries.” Such are the travails of empire.

The concern is valid enough.  With the Israel-Hamas war continuing in its heaving murderousness, allies for the Palestinian cause are getting tetchy. From the US perspective, that tetchiness deserves retaliation, notably targeting any forces backed by Iran throughout the Middle East. The soldiers, in other words, are not just in harm’s way, but likely to cause widening harm.

As Paul explained to his fellow senators, “It seems to be, though our 900 troops have no viable mission in Syria, that they’re sitting ducks.” Even more saliently, he insisted that they were “a tripwire to a larger war, and without a clear-cut mission, I don’t think they can adequately defend themselves, yet they remain in Syria.”

The problem here, as with all childish impulses of US power, is the fear that its freedom loving forces might look like insufferable sissies in the face of armed savages who have no innate sense of that same freedom.

The impulse for remaining in Syria is treated by desk spanking wonks in the Pentagon and State Department as one of those good ideas to dampen and snuff out any prospect of renewal on the part of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. But this, as we have known for a while, is merely a case of medium and vehicle. In December 2018, President Donald Trump noted that the caliphate aspirants had lost 99 of their territory.

“We have defeated ISIS in Syria, my only reason for being there,” he declared.  He subsequently promised a “full” and “rapid” withdrawal of US forces.

Apoplexy, and various sabotaging efforts from those hostile to the suggestion, followed. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis resigned in protest. As Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, who served as special representative for Syria Engagement put it to Defense One,

“When the situation in northeast Syria had been fairly stable after we defeated ISIS, [Trump] was inclined to pull out. In each case, we then decided to come up with five better arguments for why we needed to stay. And we succeeded both times. That’s the story.”

The broader reason for maintaining US personnel in the Levant and Iraq is largely based on keeping the theocratic mullahs in Teheran in check. On this point, former US ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, is helpfully candid

“ISIS hasn’t controlled Tanf (near the junction of Syria/Jordan/Iraq) for 7 years. The real (but unstated) reason the US is there is to block Iran from using a road coming from Iraq into Syria.”

Pundits with their stick-figure commentary (it’s all in the form, not substance, see?) continue to scratch for their crust and wisdom on the theme that withdrawing occupation forces from a territory spells doom and disaster for the broader project.  Call it civilisation, democracy, or whatever fable might so happen to satisfy the memorandum and itch of the moment.  Yes, the US did invade and impose itself with muscular violence, but why leave the violated party even as the effects of molestation continue to be felt? 

“With a withdrawal of US forces from Syria (as well as Iraq) becoming more likely,” warn the earnest authors of a report for the New Lines Institute, “US policy  makers must understand the long-term effects of withdrawal will cause and then adapt accordingly.  This is particularly urgent given the possibility of a US withdrawal triggering malign actors in Syria, including Iran, to rush to fill the power vacuum.”

Pentagon advisor Michael Rubin was also one to rush to the podium of common values in justifying what he regarded as a rather modest US investment in Syria for excellent returns. Washington had, for instance, supported the Autonomous Administration in North and East Syria (AANES), and insisted that more funding was needed. The ongoing relationship with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) was also of value.

Paul, at least on this score, was always going to struggle in getting the resolution across the line. Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, may, or may not have been suffering some seizure in observing that passing “such a resolution would be a gift to Iran and its terrorist network.” The removal of US forces from the Middle East was “exactly what they’d like to see.” The resolution was duly defeated, with 13 members favouring it, and 84 opposed.

The more level-headed observers have, like Paul, concluded that Washington’s forces in Syria are merely ripening targets, fodder for deeper and wider conflict. Justin Logan of the CATO Institute has made the self-evident point that US forces in Syria, after the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, “have served as little more than shooting gallery targets for regional militias backed by Iran.  Contrary to their ostensible purpose, they are not fighting ISIS.”

Such conservative outlets as the National Review agree. One of its senior writers, Michael Brendan Dougherty, is lacerating about the presence. “Our troops in Syria have no mission, and they have no lawful reason given to them by our Congress to remain there. In the meantime, they serve as convenient targets for Iranian-backed militias who otherwise would have no way of threatening American lives.” For those inclined towards permanent wars, that remains a most desirable state of affairs.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Featured image: U.S. military vehicle runs past the Tal Tamr area in the countryside of Hasakah province, northeastern Syria, Nov. 14, 2019. | Photo: Str/Xinhua

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

I do not believe that anything I say about what is happening in Gaza will affect Israeli or American policy in that conflict. But I want to be on record so that when historians look back on this moral calamity, they will see that some Americans were on the right side of history.

What Israel is doing in Gaza to the Palestinian civilian population – with the support of the Biden administration – is a crime against humanity that serves no meaningful military purpose. As J-Street, an important organization in the Israel lobby, puts it,

“The scope of the unfolding humanitarian disaster and civilian casualties is nearly unfathomable.”[1]

Let me elaborate.

Featured image: US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin (L) and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant meet in Brussels on June 15, 2023. (Photo Credit Elad Malcha/Defense Ministry)

First, Israel is purposely massacring huge number of civilians, roughly 70 percent of whom are children and women. The claim that Israel is going to great lengths to minimize civilian casualties is belied by statements from high level Israeli officials. For example, the IDF spokesman said on 10 October 2023 that “the emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy.” That same day, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced:

“I have lowered all the restraints – we will kill everyone we fight against; we will use every means.”[2]

Moreover, it is clear from the results of the bombing campaign that Israel is indiscriminately killing civilians. Two detailed studies of the IDF’s bombing campaign – both published in Israeli outlets – explain in detail how Israel is murdering huge numbers of civilians. It is worth quoting the titles of the two pieces, which succinctly capture what each has to say:

“‘A Mass Assassination Factory’: Inside Israel’s Calculated Bombing of Gaza”[3]

“The Israeli Army Has Dropped the Restraint in Gaza, and the Data Shows Unprecedented Killing.”[4]

Similarly, the New York Times published an article in late November 2023 titled: “Gaza Civilians, Under Israeli Barrage, Are Being Killed at Historic Pace.”[5] Thus, it is hardly surprising that the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, said that

“We are witnessing a killing of civilians that is unparalleled and unprecedented in any conflict since” his appointment in January 2017.[6]

Second, Israel is purposely starving the desperate Palestinian population by greatly limiting the amount of food, fuel, cooking gas, medicine, and water that can be brought into Gaza. Moreover, medical care is extremely hard to come by for a population that now includes approximately 50,000 wounded civilians. Not only has Israel greatly limited the supply of fuel into Gaza, which hospitals need to function, but it has targeted hospitals, ambulances, and first aid stations.

Defense Minister Gallant’s comment on 9 October captures Israeli policy:

“I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.”[7]

Israel has been forced to allow minimal supplies into Gaza, but the amounts are so small that a senior UN official reports that “half of Gaza’s population is starving.” He goes on to report that, “Nine out of 10 families in some areas are spending ‘a full day and night without any food at all’.”[8]

Third, Israeli leaders talk about Palestinians and what they would like to do in Gaza in shocking terms, especially when you consider that some of these leaders also talk incessantly about the horrors of the Holocaust. Indeed, their rhetoric has led Omar Bartov, a prominent Israeli-born scholar of the Holocaust, to conclude that Israel has “genocidal intent.”[9] Other scholars in Holocaust and genocide studies have offered a similar warning.[10]

To be more specific, it is commonplace for Israeli leaders to refer to Palestinians as “human animals, ”human beasts,” and “horrible inhuman animals.”[11] And as Israeli President Isaac Herzog makes clear, those leaders are referring to all Palestinians, not just Hamas: In his words,

“It is an entire nation out there that is responsible.”[12]

Unsurprisingly, as the New York Times reports, it is part of normal Israeli discourse to call for Gaza to be “flattened,” “erased,” or “destroyed.”[13] One retired IDF general, who proclaimed that

“Gaza will become a place where no human being can exist,” also makes the case that “severe epidemics in the south of the Gaza Strip will bring victory closer.”[14]

Going even further, a minister in the Israeli government suggested dropping a nuclear weapon on Gaza.[15] These statements are not being made by isolated extremists, but by senior members of Israel’s government.

Of course, there is also much talk of ethnically cleansing Gaza (and the West Bank), in effect, producing another Nakba.[16] To quote Israel’s Agriculture Minister,

“We are now rolling out the Gaza Nakba.”[17]

Perhaps the most shocking evidence of the depths to which Israeli society has sunk is a video of very young children singing a blood-curdling song celebrating Israel’s destruction of Gaza: 

“Within a year we will annihilate everyone, and then we will return to plow our fields.”[18]

Fourth, Israel is not just killing, wounding, and starving huge numbers of Palestinians, it is also systematically destroying their homes as well as critical infrastructure – to include mosques, schools, heritage sites, libraries, key government buildings, and hospitals.[19] As of 1 December 2023, the IDF had damaged or destroyed almost 100,000 buildings, including entire neighborhoods that have been reduced to rubble.[20]Consequently, a stunning 90 percent of Gaza’s 2.3 million Palestinians have been displaced from their homes.[21] Moreover, Israel is making a concerted effort to destroy Gaza’s cultural heritage; as NPR reports, “more than 100 Gaza heritage sites have been damaged or destroyed by Israeli attacks.”[22]

Fifth, Israel is not just terrorizing and killing Palestinians, it is also publicly humiliating many of their men who have been rounded up by the IDF in routine searches. Israeli soldiers strip them down to their underwear, blindfold them, and display them in a public way in their neighborhoods – sitting them down in large groups in the middle of the street, for example, or parading them through the streets – before taking them away in trucks to detention camps. In most cases, the detainees are then released as they are not Hamas fighters.[23]

President Joe Biden participates in a restricted bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Hotel Kempinski in Tel Aviv, Israel, Wednesday, October 18, 2023. (Official White House Photo by Cameron Smith)

Sixth, although the Israelis are doing the slaughtering, they could not do it without the Biden administration’s support. Not only was the United States the only country to vote against a recent UN Security Council resolution demanding an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, but it has also been providing Israel with the weaponry necessary to wage this massacre.[24] As one Israeli general (Yitzhak Brick) recently made clear:

“All of our missiles, the ammunition, the precision-guided bombs, all the airplanes and bombs, it’s all from the U.S. The minute they turn off the tap, you can’t keep fighting. You have no capability.… Everyone understands that we can’t fight this war without the United States. Period.”[25]

Remarkably, the Biden administration has sought to expedite sending Israel additional ammunition, by-passing the normal procedures of the Arms Export Control Act.[26] 

Seventh, while most of the focus is now on Gaza, it is important not to lose sight of what is simultaneously going on in the West Bank. Israeli settlers, working closely with the IDF, continue to kill innocent Palestinians and steal their land. In an excellent article in the New York Review of Books describing these horrors, David Shulman relates a conversation he had with a settler, which clearly reflects the moral dimension of Israeli behavior toward the Palestinians.

“What we are doing to these people is actually inhuman,” the settler freely admits, “But if you think about it clearly, it all follows inevitably from the fact that God promised this land to the Jews, and only to them.”[27]

Along with its assault on Gaza, the Israel government has markedly increased the number of arbitrary arrests in the West Bank. According to Amnesty International, there is considerable evidence that these prisoners have been tortured and subjected to degrading treatment.[28]

As I watch this catastrophe for the Palestinians unfold, I am left with one simple question for Israel’s leaders, their American defenders, and the Biden administration: have you no decency?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Notes

[1] https://jstreet.org/press-releases/moment-of-truth-for-israels-government/

[2] Both quotes can be found in: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-12-09/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/the-israeli-army-has-dropped-the-restraint-in-gaza-and-data-shows-unprecedented-killing/0000018c-4cca-db23-ad9f-6cdae8ad0000

[3] https://www.972mag.com/mass-assassination-factory-israel-calculated-bombing-gaza/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[4] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-12-09/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/the-israeli-army-has-dropped-the-restraint-in-gaza-and-data-shows-unprecedented-killing/0000018c-4cca-db23-ad9f-6cdae8ad0000

[5] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/25/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-death-toll.html

[6] https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/press-encounter/2023-11-20/secretary-generals-press-conference-unep-emissions-gap-report-launch

[7] https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/defense-minister-announces-complete-siege-of-gaza-no-power-food-or-fuel/

[8] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67670679

Also see: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/11/opinion/international-world/us-government-gaza-humanitarian-aid.html

[9] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/opinion/israel-gaza-genocide-war.html

Also see: https://www.nybooks.com/online/2023/11/20/an-open-letter-on-the-misuse-of-holocaust-memory/

[10] https://contendingmodernities.nd.edu/global-currents/statement-of-scholars-7-october/

[11] https://youtu.be/Fr24GcCDgyM

[12] https://news.yahoo.com/israeli-president-says-no-innocent-154330724.html#:~:text=“It%20is%20an%20entire%20nation,It%27s%20absolutely%20not%20true.

[13] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/15/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-war-rhetoric.html

[14] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/10/opinion/israel-gaza-genocide-war.html

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023-11-23/ty-article-opinion/.premium/giora-eilands-monstrous-gaza-proposal-is-evil-in-plain-sight/0000018b-f84b-d473-affb-f9eb09af0000

https://mondoweiss.net/2023/11/influential-israeli-national-security-leader-makes-the-case-for-genocide-in-gaza/

[15] https://www.timesofisrael.com/far-right-minister-says-nuking-gaza-an-option-pm-suspends-him-from-cabinet-meetings/

[16] https://mondoweiss.net/2023/10/israeli-think-tank-lays-out-a-blueprint-for-the-complete-ethnic-cleansing-of-gaza/

[17] https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-12/ty-article/israeli-security-cabinet-member-calls-north-gaza-evacuation-nakba-2023/0000018b-c2be-dea2-a9bf-d2be7b670000

[18] https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/watch-israeli-children-sing-we-will-annihilate-everyone-gaza

[19] https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-war-gaza-public-library-destroyed-bombing

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20231211-report-israel-destroyed-192-mosques-in-gaza-strip/

https://www.npr.org/2023/12/09/1218384968/mosque-gaza-omari-israel-hamas-war

[20] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67565872#

[21] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-gaza-attacks-north-south-us-veto-un-ceasefire-resolution/

[22] https://www.npr.org/2023/12/03/1216200754/gaza-heritage-sites-destroyed-israel

[23] https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/israel-says-groups-of-hamas-militants-surrendered-amid-gaza-fighting-7891bc22

[24] https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-vetoes-un-security-council-resolution-demanding-immediate-gaza-ceasefire/

[25] https://www.jns.org/biden-is-the-primary-obstacle-to-israeli-victory/

[26] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/09/world/middleeast/us-israel-tanks-ammunition.html

[27] https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2023/12/21/a-bitter-season-in-the-west-bank-david-shulman/

[28] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/11/israel-opt-horrifying-cases-of-torture-and-degrading-treatment-of-palestinian-detainees-amid-spike-in-arbitrary-arrests/

History of Post Cold War Era: Western Interference and Subversion Abroad

By Shane Quinn, December 12, 2023

Beginning in 1997 the US had been conducting military exercises in former Soviet republics, under the banner of NATO’s so-called Partnership for Peace Program. In 1999 Washington helped to integrate Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldova into an organisation (GUUAM) that was a potential step to including those territories in NATO, and which was meant to rival the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) led by Russia.

The Safety of the COVID Jabs: The Pro Homine Argument, As Fallacious as Ad Hominem

By Dr. Emanuel Garcia, December 12, 2023

The argumentum ad hominem is widely understood to be a means or tactic designed to divert attention away from the facts of a matter onto the person. It seeks to discredit a proposition or presentation of evidence by attacking its proponent, the character of traits of the person himself or herself.

We’ve Already Got a Dictator-in-Chief: How Absolute Power Corrupted the President

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, December 12, 2023

Power-hungry, lawless and steadfast in its pursuit of authoritarian powers, the government does not voluntarily relinquish those powers once it acquires, uses and inevitably abuses them.

What Happens When Kiev Regime Runs Out of American Money?

By Drago Bosnic, December 12, 2023

It could be argued that this was inevitable because the United States effectively created the Neo-Nazi junta, but still, its leadership could’ve certainly expected what focusing only on one part of the American establishment would do to their future. However, the Kiev regime’s absolute lack of sovereignty is such they couldn’t even make that decision and the consequences are coming back to bite them.

Cranking Up the Ukraine Phony History Mill

By Stephen Karganovic, December 12, 2023

What took the British so long? We learned from the Guardian recently that British “partners” have embarked on a long-overdue project to fabricate a history for Ukraine, “to wrest Ukraine’s past from the shadow of Russian and Soviet narratives.”

Summer of Died Suddenly: Athletes and Retired Athletes

By Dr. William Makis, December 12, 2023

41 year old NFL football player, Super Bowl champion and retired Indianapolis Colts offensive guard Matt Ulrich died on November 8, 2023. Cause of death not reported.

Polish Minister ‘Saw UK Special Forces Operating in Ukraine’

By Phil Miller, December 13, 2023

Declassified revealed that 50 elite British troops were in Ukraine, citing a leaked US intelligence file. The UK contingent was three times larger than any other ally. Among those who claimed to have been trained by UK special forces was Daniil Lyashuk, who had previously been convicted of torture by a Ukrainian court.

A Conversation with Claudia Junghyun Kim, Author of Base Towns: Local Contestation of the U.S. Military in Korea and Japan

By Steve Rabson and Claudia Junghyun Kim, December 12, 2023

Rabson discusses the new book, Base Towns: Local Contestation of the U.S. Military in Korea and Japan with the author, Claudia Junghyun Kim, who traces contentious politics surrounding twenty U.S. military bases across Japan and Korea—two of the largest U.S. base hosts in the world. Kim’s book focuses on the municipalities hosting these bases and differing levels of community acceptance and resistance over time. The following excerpt from the book introduces key actors who shape base-community relations and their many twists and turns.

COVID mRNA Vaccination Has Caused Damage in US Air Force. Government Offers Up to $600,000 Bonus to Keep Pilots

By Martin Armstrong, December 12, 2023

The Biden Administration’s stupidity mandating that those in the military submit to this worthless experiment MRNA vaccine or be dishonorably discharged has resulted in not just a shortage of pilots.

How Many Secrets Is the President Hiding? The US Government’s Secret Plan for Censorship

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, December 12, 2023

Over the past year, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government has released several reports detailing how the government is a) harassing and intimidating citizens to shut down undesirable viewpoints b) using misinformation and propaganda to drive false narratives and c) censoring protected speech using third parties

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Elite British special forces were operating on the ground in Ukraine weeks after Russia invaded last year. That is the allegation contained in a new book, Poland at War, by Polish journalist Zbigniew Parafianowicz.

The author is Ukraine correspondent for a daily newspaper in Warsaw and had access to political insiders and senior officials. He quotes an unnamed Polish government minister who claims to have run into British commandos in mid-March 2022 as he was travelling between Kyiv and the city of Zhytomyr.

The minister said:

“It was a time when the Russians were still standing in Bucha, and the route was a grey zone. It was possible to run into Russians. We passed the last checkpoint. The Ukrainians told us that we continue at our own risk. 

“Well, and who did we meet next? Ukrainian soldiers and… British special forces. Uniformed. With weapons. They moved with the Ukrainians in trucks and off-road vehicles with artillery radars. They were tracking targets. They were learning about this war. Such radar tracks where mortar or rocket shells fall and are fired.”

Zbigniew Parafianowicz’s book, Poland at War

The remarks add to evidence that UK soldiers were secretly deployed to the warzone without parliament being told, and took part in an operation – not just training. In mid-April 2022, The Times reported: “British special forces have trained local troops in Kyiv for the first time since the war with Russia began”.

It said two Ukrainian battalions had received instruction over the previous fortnight in the use of “NLAWs, British-supplied anti-tank missiles that were delivered in February as the invasion was beginning.”

A year later, Declassified revealed that 50 elite British troops were in Ukraine, citing a leaked US intelligence file. The UK contingent was three times larger than any other ally. Among those who claimed to have been trained by UK special forces was Daniil Lyashuk, who had previously been convicted of torture by a Ukrainian court.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has only confirmed that soldiers have been in Ukraine since the invasion to protect the British embassy. Declassified understands separately that members of the Parachute Regiment were secretly deployed to Kyiv this year.

Asked to comment on the book’s claims, an MoD spokesperson told Declassified:

“It is the longstanding policy of successive governments not to comment on speculation about Special Forces,” referring to a blanket no comment stance that Whitehall has operated since the late 1980s.

Stay Behind

In Poland at War, Parafianowicz states that President Zelensky’s bodyguards were trained by Britain’s Special Air Service (SAS). He also quotes the unnamed Polish minister as saying:

“On the first day of the war, we realised that there were [Polish] commandos – from the Lubliniec Military Commando Unit – in Brovary near Kyiv. 

“They, together with the Americans and the British, had been building special forces for the Ukrainians since 2014, that is, since the annexation of Crimea and the war against separatism in the Donbass.”

Their presence caused concern that NATO soldiers could be caught up in the invasion, prompting various officials to request their withdrawal. However, a high ranking Polish officer said:

“They, instead of returning to Poland on the first day of the war, went in the opposite direction. Among others, to Kharkiv, but also to cities in the Donbass, which the Ukrainians controlled. They cooperated with the British.”

Initially these NATO soldiers focused on helping with evacuations, however their presence in Kharkiv is potentially more significant. Declassified has reported how veterans of Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov movement were the first fighters in the city to receive British-supplied NLAWs.

Photos posted on social media showed “instructors from NATO countries” coaching men how to use the rocket launchers. The veterans formed an Azov spin-off unit known as Kraken, led by Konstantin Nemichev, a far-right politician.

The Polish officer added:

“Later we worked out a formula for our presence in Ukraine…we were simply sent on paid leave. Politicians pretended not to see this.”

Another Polish minister is quoted in the book as saying that on one diplomatic trip to Ukraine,

“the Americans asked us to bring their two wounded soldiers from Kyiv. They were there as civilians. But it is known what kind of civilians. 

“These two wounded Americans were coming back on the same train that [deputy PM Jarosław] Kaczynski took with [PM Mateusz] Morawiecki. One was missing a leg. Doctors had to amputate it.”

UK special forces are not subject to oversight by any parliamentary committee or the Freedom of Information Act. A judge-led inquiry is currently investigating allegations the SAS killed 80 civilians and detainees in Afghanistan between 2010-13. 

Meanwhile, Whitehall is attempting to suppress media reports that the SAS may deploy to Israel to help rescue British hostages held in Gaza. Government ministers have refused to answer questions about the claims when pressed in parliament by MPs Jeremy Corbyn and Kenny MacAskill.

Boris Johnson Derailed Peace Talks 

The revelations in Parafianowicz’s book come amid growing signs that Ukraine might have to enter peace talks with Russia. 

President Zelensky expressed disappointment at the counter-offensive this month, saying:

“We wanted faster results. From that perspective, unfortunately, we did not achieve the desired results. And this is a fact. There is not enough power to achieve the desired results faster.”

His counter-offensive, which was heavily backed by the US and UK, saw a significant rise in the number of Ukrainian soldiers killed, without any significant gains in territory. According to Foreign Affairs magazine, “Despite Ukraine’s much-heralded counteroffensive, Russia has actually gained more territory over the course of 2023 than Ukraine has.”

Such a set-back seems to have spurred some figures close to Zelensky to start speaking out about how the war has been waged. 

Davyd Arakhamiia, who led Ukraine’s delegation at peace talks with Russia in March 2022, said Putin’s side was “prepared to end the war if we agreed to – as Finland once did – neutrality, and committed that we would not join NATO.”

Although Arakhamiia lacked confidence in Russia’s offer, his pessimism was compounded “when we returned from [the negotiations in] Istanbul, Boris Johnson came to Kyiv and said that we would not sign anything with them at all, and let’s just fight.”

His claim corroborates other reports that Johnson, who was then Britain’s Prime Minister, was instrumental in dissuading Ukraine from continuing negotiations with Russia shortly after the invasion.

Alba MP Kenny MacAskill tabled a parliamentary question about the incident, asking whether Johnson “advised Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy during his visit to Kyiv on 9 April 2022 to stop negotiations with Russia.”

Foreign minister Leo Docherty replied:

“The former Prime Minister met President Zelenskyy in Kyiv on 9 April, where the leaders discussed support for Ukraine’s long-term survival as a free and democratic country, military aid, and economic assistance.

“The former Prime Minister reiterated that the UK will do everything in its power to support Ukraine’s fight against Russia’s brutal and unprovoked invasion and ensure its long term security and prosperity.” 

Journalist Branko Marcetic, writing for Responsible Statecraft, has pointed out Johnson “himself confirmed, albeit not in so many words, in a phone call to French President Emmanuel Macron that he had urged Zelensky against peace.”

Johnson told Macron he had “shared his conviction that Ukraine would win, supported with the right level of defensive military assistance. He urged against any negotiations with Russia on terms that gave credence to the Kremlin’s false narrative for the invasion, but stressed that this was a decision for the Ukrainian government.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Phil Miller is Declassified UK’s chief reporter. He is the author of Keenie Meenie: The British Mercenaries Who Got Away With War Crimes. Follow him on Twitter at @pmillerinfo 

Featured image: A UK sniper who joined Ukrainian special forces in March 2022. (Photo: Rick Mave via Getty)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As Israel continues its bombing, starvation and ethnic cleansing of the people of Gaza, hunger has reached epidemic proportions. Nine in 10 people in Gaza reported going to bed hungry, the United Nations’ World Food Program reported.

More than half of the population—over 63 percent—reported going for days without food.

“Hunger stalks everyone,” UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine), the United Nations body responsible for Palestinian refugees, wrote in a statement on Twitter. “Too many people haven’t eaten now for two, three days in the Gaza Strip.”

UN Special Rapporteur on Food Michael Fakhri told Al Jazeera Arabic,

“Every single Palestinian in Gaza is going hungry,” in an interview, in which he identified the mass murder of the population of Gaza as “genocide.”

These reports follow a veto Friday by the United States of a UN resolution calling for a ceasefire. This week, a non-binding ceasefire resolution is expected to pass the United Nations General Assembly. The United States, meanwhile, doubled down on calling for a “military” solution to the crisis, in an open endorsement of the genocide.

“We think there can be a military solution to taking out the leadership of Hamas that planned and carried out the attacks of October 7, in taking out the militants who crossed into Israel and carried out those attacks,” US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said in a briefing.

This followed the statement Sunday by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken:

“When it comes to a ceasefire in this moment, with Hamas still alive, still intact, and again, with the stated intent of repeating October 7th again and again and again, that would simply perpetuate the problem.”

On Monday, the Washington Post reported that Israel used US-supplied white phosphorus munitions to carry out attacks on Lebanon, in violation of international laws prohibiting the use of the incendiary weapon in densely populated areas. For weeks, videos have shown Israel raining down white phosphorus on populated areas. The report follows the announcement Friday by the White House that it would bypass congressional authorization to send Israel $100 million worth of tank ammunition.

On Monday, the death toll from the bombardment of the Gaza Strip surged to 18,205, with roughly another 7,000 still missing and likely buried under the rubble. The Palestinian Health Ministry warned that it is following 325,000 cases of infectious diseases, meaning that one in six people in Gaza are ill with such a disease, amid the dismantling of all infrastructure to support life.

Nicholas Papachrysostomou, the emergency coordinator in Gaza for Doctors Without Borders, told Al Jazeera,

“every other patient in Rafah has a respiratory infection, amid rainy and cold conditions. In some shelters, 600 people share a single toilet. We are already seeing many cases of diarrhea. Often children are the worst affected,” he said.

The United Nations reported,

“on 11 December, the maternity department at Kamal Adwan hospital in Beit Lahiya, north of Gaza, was hit. As a result, two mothers were reportedly killed, and several people were injured.”

The World Health Organization Executive Board issued a statement warning of a total breakdown of Gaza’s healthcare system.

“Gaza’s health system is on its knees and collapsing, with the risk expected to worsen with the deteriorating situation and approaching winter conditions,” said the WHO’s director-general.

“As more and more people move to a smaller and smaller area, overcrowding, combined with the lack of adequate food, water, shelter and sanitation, are creating the ideal conditions for disease to spread,” he added.

The UN reported:

“in the north and Gaza City, Israeli forces reportedly detained hundreds of men and boys staying in public spaces, schools serving as shelters for internally displaced persons (IDPs) as well as private homes. Reportedly, detainees were stripped to their underwear, handcuffed, and were ordered to sit on their knees in open areas, subjected to beatings, harassment, harsh weather, and denial of basic necessities.”

In a statement, Omar Shakir, the Israel and Palestine director at Human Rights Watch, condemned this flagrant war crime.

“The Israeli army’s publication of shocking photos of detained Palestinian men in Gaza stripped & blindfolded constitutes ‘outrages upon personal dignity’—a form of inhumane treatment that amounts to a war crime,” Shakir wrote on Monday. “Perpetrators should be held to account.”

To date, 81 Palestinian journalists have been killed in Israeli airstrikes since October 7, and 296 medical workers have been killed. On Monday, Al Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif was targeted in a bombing of his home in northern Gaza’s Jabaliya refugee camp, which killed his father. Al Jazeera said the murder came “after a series of threats received by [al-Sharif] last November in an attempt to deter him from carrying out his duty.”

The Committee to Protect Journalists responded to the attack by declaring it was “deeply alarmed by the pattern of journalists in Gaza reporting receiving threats, and subsequently, their family members being killed.” It added, “The killing of the family members of journalists in Gaza is making it almost impossible for the journalists to continue reporting, as the risk now extends beyond them also to include their beloved ones.”

Israel’s mass murder is accompanied by mass displacement. After ordering the entire population to evacuate from northern Gaza, a further 30 percent of southern Gaza has been marked for compulsory evacuation by the Israeli military. Hundreds of thousands of people are being crammed further and further south, huddled in squalid refugee camps near the Rafah border crossing with Egypt, through which Israeli politicians have called for Gazans to be displaced.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image source

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Josep Borrell, the European Union’s top foreign policy official, said Monday that the destruction in Gaza as a result of the Israeli bombing campaign could be “even greater” than the damage to German cities during World War II, AFP reported.

Borrell called the situation in Gaza “catastrophic, apocalyptic” and noted that the Israeli onslaught has resulted in “an incredible number of civilian casualties.” Discussing the destruction of buildings in Gaza, he said it is “more or less or even greater than the destruction suffered by the German cities during the Second World War.”

Borrell made similar comments on Friday, saying the Israeli bombing campaign in Gaza was “one of the most intense in history” and said the destruction is “comparable, if not higher, to levels of destruction of German cities during World War II.”

A report from Financial Times found the damage to northern Gaza was comparable to the most heavily bombed cities of Germany in World War II. “Dresden, Hamburg, Cologne — some of the world’s heaviest-ever bombings are remembered by their place names,” Robert Pape, a US military historian who focuses on air power, told FT. “Gaza will also go down as a place name denoting one of history’s heaviest conventional bombing campaigns.”

Israeli officials and their supporters in the US have invoked the allied strategic bombing campaigns of World War II to justify the mass slaughter in Gaza.

“There were many, many civilians [that] got attacked from your attacks on German cities,” Tzipi Hotovely, the Israeli ambassador to the UK, told a Sky News anchor in October, according to The Grayzone.

“Dresden was a symbol, but you attacked Hamburg, you attacked other cities, and altogether it was over 600,000 civilian Germans that got killed … Was it worth it in order to defeat Nazi Germany? And the answer was yes,” she added.

The Israeli bombing campaign has also been compared to the US bombing of Japanese cities during World War II, which includes the fire bombings of Tokyo that killed around 100,000 civilians in one night in 1945, as well as the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has said Gaza is “going to look like Tokyo and Berlin at the end of World War II when this is over. And if it doesn’t look that way, Israel made a mistake.” He made the comments in an interview where he said there was “no limit” to the number of civilians Israel kills in Gaza, which is the policy of the Biden administration as it continues to provide unconditional military aid despite the massive civilian death toll.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Featured image source

UN Members Support Gaza Ceasefire in Overwhelming 153-10 Vote

December 13th, 2023 by Jessica Corbett

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday passed a resolution demanding “an immediate humanitarian cease-fire” in Israel’s two-month war on Gaza after the U.S. last week used its permanent member status to veto a similar Security Council measure.

The resolution also demands “that all parties comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, notably with regard to the protection of civilians,” as well as “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access.”

The final vote during the General Assembly’s emergency special session in New York was 153-10 with 23 abstentions.

“Humanity has prevailed,” declared Egyptian Ambassador to the U.N. Osama Abdel Khalek after the vote. “This resolution must be implemented immediately. The Israeli aggression on Gaza must end. This bloodshed must stop.”

Tuesday’s meeting came after Egypt and Mauritania invoked Resolution 377A (V), which states that

“if the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately.”

Last week’s U.S. veto came after United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres invoked Article 99, a rarely used section of the U.N. Charter empowering him to bring to the attention of the Security Council “any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security,” for the first time in his tenure.

Noting Guterres’ message to the council as well as a recent letter from the commissioner-general of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, the General Assembly resolution expresses “grave concern over the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip and the suffering of the Palestinian civilian population,” and emphasizes that “the Palestinian and Israeli civilian populations must be protected in accordance with international humanitarian law.”

Israeli Ambassador Gilad Erdan on Tuesday had urged member states to oppose the resolution, arguing that it would amount to “voting in favor of a genocidal jihadist organization” and hamper Israel’s ongoing operation to destroy Hamas.

“A cease-fire is a death sentence,” claimed Erdan, who said the effort to pass the resolution made the United Nations “a moral stain on humanity.”

Israel’s assault on Gaza has killed at least 18,412 Palestinians and injured over 50,100 more, according to local health officials. The war has also devastated civilian infrastructure and displaced 85% of the besieged enclave’s 2.3 million residents.

Urging the assembly to support the resolution, Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, said Tuesday that “the Israeli army is fighting everyone and everything in Gaza—including the U.N.”

U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the General Assembly that the United States agrees with some “aspects” of the resolution, including that conditions in Gaza are dire, people in the Palestinian territory need more aid, and hostages must be released. However, she also claimed that “any cease-fire right now would be temporary at the best and dangerous at worst.”

The United States—which voted against the resolution on Tuesday— gives Israel $3.8 billion in annual military aid and Congress is now considering a new $14.3 billion package.

“Today the majority of the world stood together to demand an end to this bloodshed and suffering in Gaza. The United States has once again voted to allow the carnage against civilians in Gaza to continue,” said Avril Benoît, executive director of Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières USA, after the vote.

“Today the U.S. failed to show compassion or leadership in the face of continued bombardment of human beings who are trapped in Gaza without food, water, shelter, or access to proper medical care,” Benoît continued. “The U.S. is increasingly isolated in its steadfast support of a war that seems to have no rules and no limits, a war that Israel claims is focused on rooting out Hamas but that continues to kill large numbers of Palestinian civilians, mostly women, and children.”

“Israel has continued to indiscriminately attack civilians and civilian structures, impose a siege that amounts to collective punishment for the entire population of Gaza, force mass displacement, and deny access to vital medical care and humanitarian assistance. The U.S. continues to provide political and financial support to Israel as it prosecutes its military operations regardless of the terrible toll on civilians. It is impossible to deliver humanitarian aid at scale in Gaza under current circumstances,” she stressed. “For humanitarians to be able to respond to the overwhelming needs, we need a cease-fire now.”

In addition to the resolution, the General Assembly on Tuesday considered two amendments—one from the United States condemning “the heinous terrorist attacks by Hamas” on October 7 and the taking of hostages, and another from Austria to add language about Hamas to the line calling for the release of hostages.

Neither amendment got the two-thirds majority support needed to pass. The Austrian amendment vote was 89 in favor and 61 opposed with 20 abstentions while the U.S. amendment vote was 84-62 with 25 abstentions.

The General Assembly’s previously approved resolution on Gaza, passed in late October, called for “an immediate, durable, and sustained humanitarian truce leading to a cessation of hostilities.”

[From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.]

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Jessica Corbett is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

 

.

Author’s Introduction

In recent developments, World leaders are meeting in Dubai (UAE) at  The 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference or COP 28 Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC from November 30 to December, 12 2023.

To review the COP28 documents click here. Not a single word pertaining to “Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD)

The so-called “climate emergency”  is to be resolved by a “Race to Zero” which consists in drastically reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

The CO2 Consensus 

The “Race to Zero” is described as a: 

global campaign rallying non-state actors – including companies, cities, regions, financial, educational, and healthcare institutions – to take rigorous and immediate action to halve global emissions by 2030 and deliver a healthier, fairer, net zero world.

This “consensus” does not contribute to

“Helping Deliver A Healthier, Fairer, Net Zero World”

Quite the Opposite: It has devastating economic and social consequences. 

The Unspoken Truth: It serves powerful financial interests. 

As in previous Climate summits, environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) –which can trigger tsunamis, typhoons and earthquakes– have been casually dismissed by COP28. The emphasis is on CO2 and the dangers of Global Warming.  I should mention that since the mid-1990s ENMOD techniques are fully operational.

Ironically, Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) were acknowledged by the UN in 1977 upon the signing in Geneva of  the Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques. 

Environment Modification has been amply documented by scientists. It is acknowledged by the mainstream media including CBS and CBC (See video below) as well as by the US Air Force. 

Weather-modification, according to the US Air Force: Weather as a Force Multiplier. Owning the Weather in 2025) ‘offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary’, capabilities, it says, extend to the triggering of floods, hurricanes, droughts and earthquakes:

‘Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.’ *(Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025)

Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of manipulation of the weather has been excluded from the agenda on climate change.

In excluding it from the debate, the UN is in violation of its own mandate as defined by the 1977 Convention. (See text in Appendix)

What is published below is a revised and edited version of an article first published in 2009.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, December 11, 2023  

***

Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD)

and Climate Change

by

Michel Chossudovsky 

 

The term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva: 18 May 1977)

“Environmental warfare is defined as the intentional modification or manipulation of the natural ecology, such as climate and weather, earth systems such as the ionosphere, magnetosphere, tectonic plate system, and/or the triggering of seismic events (earthquakes) to cause intentional physical, economic, and psycho-social, and physical destruction to an intended target geophysical or population location, as part of strategic or tactical war.” (Eco News)

“[Weather modification] offers the war fighter a wide range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary… Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.” (US Air Force document AF 2025 Final Report)

The Debate on Climate Change

The debate on Climate Change focuses on the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions and measures to reduce manmade CO2 emissions under the Kyoto Protocol.

The underlying consensus is that greenhouse gas emissions constitute the sole cause of climate instability. Neither the governments nor the environmental action groups, have raised the issue of “weather warfare” or “environmental modification techniques (ENMOD).” for military use. Despite a vast body of scientific knowledge, the issue of climatic manipulations for military use has been excluded from the UN agenda on climate change.

John von Neumann noted at the height of the Cold War (1955), with tremendous foresight that:

 “Intervention in atmospheric and climatic matters ….will unfold on a scale difficult to imagine at present… [T]his will merge each nation’s affairs with those of every other, more thoroughly than the threat of a nuclear or any other war would have done.” (Quoted in Spencer Weart, Environmental Warfare: Climate Modification Schemes, Global Research, December 5, 20090

In 1977, an international Convention was ratified by the UN General Assembly which banned “military or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects.” (AP, 18 May 1977). Both the US and the Soviet Union were signatories to the Convention.

Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, … and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare, (…) Recognizing that military … use of such [environmental modification techniques] could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare, Desiring to prohibit effectively military … use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind. … and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective, (…) Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military … use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party. (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva, May 18, 1977. Entered into force: 5 October 1978, see full text of Convention in Annex)

The Convention defined “‘environmental modification techniques’ as referring to any technique for changing–through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes–the dynamics, composition or structure of the earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere or of outer space.” (Environmental Modification Ban Faithfully Observed, States Parties Declare, UN Chronicle, July, 1984, Vol. 21, p. 27)

The substance of the 1977 Convention was reasserted in very general terms in the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro:

“States have… in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the (…) responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.”  (UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York, 1992)

Following the 1992 Earth Summit, the issue of Climate Change for military use was never raised in subsequent climate change summits and venues under the auspices of the UNFCCC. The issue was erased, forgotten. It is not part of the debate on climate change.

In February 1998, however, the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held public hearings in Brussels on the U.S based weather warfare facility developed under the HAARP program.

The Committee’s “Motion for Resolution” submitted to the European Parliament:

“Considers HAARP.[The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program  based in Alaska].. by virtue of its far-reaching impact on the environment to be a global concern and calls for its legal, ecological and ethical implications to be examined by an international independent body…; [the Committee] regrets the repeated refusal of the United States Administration… to give evidence to the public hearing …into the environmental and public risks [of] the HAARP program.” (European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005/99, 14 January 1999).

The Committee’s request to draw up a “Green Paper” on “the environmental impacts of military activities”, however, was casually dismissed on the grounds that the European Commission lacked the required jurisdiction to delve into “the links between environment and defense”. Brussels was anxious to avoid a showdown with Washington. (see European Report, 3 February 1999).

In 2007, The Daily Express reported –following the release and declassification of British government papers from the National Archives– that:

“The [declassified] documents reveal that both the US, which led the field, and the Soviet Union had secret military programmes with the goal of controlling the world’s climate. “By the year 2025 the United States will own the weather, ” one scientist is said to have boasted.

These claims are dismissed by sceptics as wild conspiracy theories and the stuff of James Bond movies but there is growing evidence that the boundaries between science fiction and fact are becoming increasingly blurred. The Americans now admit that they invested L12million over five years during the Vietnam war on “cloud seeding” – deliberately creating heavy rainfall to wash away enemy crops and destroy supply routes on the Ho Chi Minh trail, in an operation codenamed Project Popeye.

It is claimed that rainfall was increased by a third in targeted areas, making the weather-manipulation weapon a success. At the time, government officials said the region was prone to heavy rain. (Weather War?, Daily Express, July 16, 2007)

The possibility of climatic or environmental manipulations as part of a military agenda, while formally acknowledged by official government documents and the US military, has never been considered relevant to the Climate debate. Military analysts are mute on the subject. Meteorologists are not investigating the matter, and environmentalists are strung on global warming and the Kyoto protocol.

The HAARP Program

The High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP) based in Gokona, Alaska, has been in existence since 1992. It is part of a new generation of sophisticated weaponry under the US Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Operated by the Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Vehicles Directorate, HAARP constitutes a system of powerful antennas capable of creating “controlled local modifications of the ionosphere” [upper layer of the atmosphere]:

HAARP has been presented to public opinion as a program of scientific and academic research. US military documents seem to suggest, however, that HAARP’s main objective is to “exploit the ionosphere for Department of Defense purposes.” (See Michel Chossudovsky, The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004

Without explicitly referring to the HAARP program, a US Air Force study points to the use of “induced ionospheric modifications” as a means of altering weather patterns as well as disrupting enemy communications and radar. (Ibid)

HAARP also has the ability of triggering blackouts and disrupting the electricity power system of entire regions:

“Rosalie Bertell, president of the International Institute of Concern for Public Health, says HAARP operates as ‘a gigantic heater that can cause major disruptions in the ionosphere, creating not just holes, but long incisions in the protective layer that keeps deadly radiation from bombarding the planet’.

Physicist Dr Bernard Eastlund called it ‘the largest ionospheric heater ever built’. HAARP is presented by the US Air Force as a research programme, but military documents confirm its main objective is to ‘induce ionospheric modifications’ with a view to altering weather patterns and disrupting communications and radar.

According to a report by the Russian State Duma: ‘The US plans to carry out large-scale experiments under the HAARP programme [and] create weapons capable of breaking radio communication lines and equipment installed on spaceships and rockets, provoke serious accidents in electricity networks and in oil and gas pipelines, and have a negative impact on the mental health of entire regions.’

Weather manipulation is the pre-emptive weapon par excellence. It can be directed against enemy countries or ‘friendly nations’ without their knowledge, used to destabilise economies, ecosystems and agriculture. It can also trigger havoc in financial and commodity markets. The disruption in agriculture creates a greater dependency on food aid and imported grain staples from the US and other Western countries.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007)

An analysis of statements emanating from the US Air Force points to the unthinkable: the covert manipulation of weather patterns, communications systems and electric power as a weapon of global warfare, enabling the US to disrupt and dominate entire regions of the World. According to an official US Air force report

Weather-modification offers the war fighter a wide-range of possible options to defeat or coerce an adversary… In the United States, weather-modification will likely become a part of national security policy with both domestic and international applications. Our government will pursue such a policy, depending on its interests, at various levels.” (US Air Force, emphasis added. Air University of the US Air Force, AF 2025 Final Report, http://www.au.af.mil/au/2025/ emphasis added)

The Manipulation of Climate for Military Use

The manipulation of climate for military use is potentially a greater threat to humanity than CO2 emissions.

Why has it been excluded from the debate under COP28, when the UN 1977 Convention states quite explicitly that “military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare”? (Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques United Nations, Geneva, 1977)

Why the camouflage?

Why are environmental modification techniques (ENMOD) not being debated by the civil society and environmentalist organizations.

 


CBC 1996 News documentary: HAARP – US military weather weapon

 


 

Related articles

Spencer Weart, Environmental Warfare: Climate Modification Schemes, Global Research, December 5, 2009

Weather War?, Daily Express, July 16, 2007

Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007

Michel Chossudovsky, The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Destruction: “Owning the Weather” for Military Use, Global Research, September 27, 2004


ANNEX

Adopted by Resolution 31/72 of the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1976. The Convention was opened for signature at Geneva on 18 May 1977.

Convention on the Prohibition of Military

or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques

 

The States Parties to this Convention, Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, and wishing to contribute to the cause of halting the arms race, and of bringing about general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control, and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare,

Determined to continue negotiations with a view to achieving effective progress towards further measures in the field of disarmament,

Recognizing that scientific and technical advances may open new possibilities with respect to modification of the environment,

Recalling the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, adopted at Stockholm on 16 June 1972,

Realizing that the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes could improve the interrelationship of man and nature and contribute to the preservation and improvement of the environment for the benefit of present and future generations,

Recognizing, however, that military or any other hostile use of such techniques could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare,

Desiring to prohibit effectively military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind from such use, and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective,

Desiring also to contribute to the strengthening of trust among nations and to the further improvement of the international situation in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Have agreed as follows:

Article I 1. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.

2. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to assist, encourage or induce any State, group of States or international organization to engage in activities contrary to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article.

Article II As used in article 1, the term “environmental modification techniques” refers to any technique for changing – through the deliberate manipulation of natural processes – the dynamics, composition or structure of the Earth, including its biota, lithosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere, or of outer space.

Article III 1. The provisions of this Convention shall not hinder the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes and shall be without prejudice to the generally recognized principles and applicable rules of international law concerning such use.

2. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to facilitate, and have the right to participate in, the fullest possible exchange of scientific and technological information on the use of environmental modification techniques for peaceful purposes. States Parties in a position to do so shall contribute, alone or together with other States or international organizations, to international economic and scientific co-operation in the preservation, improvement and peaceful utilization of the environment, with due consideration for the needs of the developing areas of the world.

Article IV Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to take any measures it considers necessary in accordance with its constitutional processes to prohibit and prevent any activity in violation of the provisions of the Convention anywhere under its jurisdiction or control.

Article V 1. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to consult one another and to co-operate in solving any problems which may arise in relation to the objectives of, or in the application of the provisions of, the Convention. Consultation and co-operation pursuant to this article may also be undertaken through appropriate international procedures within the framework of the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. These international procedures may include the services of appropriate international organizations, as well as of a Consultative Committee of Experts as provided for in paragraph 2 of this article.

2. For the purposes set forth in paragraph 1 of this article, the Depositary shall within one month of the receipt of a request from any State Party to this Convention, convene a Consultative Committee of Experts. Any State Party may appoint an expert to the Committee whose functions and rules of procedure are set out in the annex which constitutes an integral part of this Convention. The Committee shall transmit to the Depositary a summary of its findings of fact, incorporating all views and information presented to the Committee during its proceedings. The Depositary shall distribute the summary to all States Parties.

3. Any State Party to this Convention which has reason to believe that any other State Party is acting in breach of obligations deriving from the provisions of the Convention may lodge a complaint with the Security Council of the United Nations. Such a complaint should include all relevant information as well as all possible evidence supporting ItS validity.

4. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to cooperate in carrying out any investigation which the Security Council may initiate, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, on the basis of the complaint received by the Council. The Security Council shall inform the States Parties of the results of the investigation.

5. Each State Party to this Convention undertakes to provide or support assistance, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, to any State Party which so requests, if the Security Council decides that such Party has been harmed or is likely to be harmed as a result of violation of the Convention.

Article VI 1. Any State Party to this Convention may propose amendments to the Convention. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Depositary, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties.

2. An amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties to this Convention which have accepted it, upon the deposit with the Depositary of instruments of acceptance by a majority of States Parties. Thereafter it shall enter into force for any remaining State Party on the date of deposit of its instrument of acceptance.

Article VII This Convention shall be of unlimited duration.

Article VIII 1. Five years after the entry into force of this Convention, a conference of the States Parties to the Convention shall be convened by the Depositary at Geneva, Switzerland. The conference shall review the operation of the Convention with a view to ensuring that its purposes and provisions are being realized, and shall in particular examine the effectiveness of the provisions of paragraph 1 of article I in eliminating the dangers of military or any other hostile use of environmental modification techniques.

2. At intervals of not less than five years thereafter, a majority of the States Parties to this Convention may obtain, by submitting a proposal to this effect to the Depositary, the convening of a conference with the same objectives.

3. If no conference has been convened pursuant to paragraph 2 of this article within ten years following the conclusion of a previous conference, the Depositary shall solicit the views of all States Parties to this Convention concerning the convening of such a conference. If one third or ten of the States Parties, whichever number is less, respond affirmatively, the Depositary shall take immediate steps to convene the conference.

Article IX 1. This Convention shall be open to all States for signature. Any State which does not sign the Convention before its entry into force in accordance with paragraph 3 of this article may accede to it at any time.

2. This Convention shall be subject to ratification by signatory States. Instruments of ratification or accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

3. This Convention shall enter into force upon the deposit of instruments of ratification by twenty Governments in accordance with paragraph 2 of this article.

4. For those States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited after the entry into force of this Convention, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession.

5. The Depositary shall promptly inform all signatory and acceding States of the date of each signature, the date of deposit of each instrument of ratification or accession and the date of the entry into force of this Convention and of any amendments thereto, as well as of the receipt of other notices.

6. This Convention shall be registered by the Depositary in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations.

Article X This Convention, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send duly certified copies thereof to the Governments of the signatory and acceding States.

In witness whereof, the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto, have signed this Convention

Done at Geneva, on the 18 day of May 1977.

Annex to the Convention

Consultative Committee of Experts 1. The Consultative Committee of Experts shall undertake to make appropriate findings of fact and provide expert views relevant to any problem raised pursuant to paragraph 1 of article V of this Convention by the State Party requesting the convening of the Committee.

2. The work of the Consultative Committee of Experts shall be organized in such a way as to permit it to perform the functions set forth in paragraph 1 of this annex. The Committee shall decide procedural questions relative to the organization of its work, where possible by consensus, but otherwise by a majority of those present and voting. There shall be no voting on matters of substance.

3. The Depositary or his representative shall serve as the Chairman of the Committee.

4. Each expert may be assisted at meetings by one or more advisers.

5. Each expert shall have the right, through the Chairman, to request from States, and from international organizations, such information and assistance as the expert considers desirable for the accomplishment of the Committee’s work.

Argentina – La plaza del apocalipsis

December 12th, 2023 by Daniel Campione

The Climate Scam Revealed by COP28

December 12th, 2023 by Peter Koenig

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As COP28 draws to an end, it may be the moment to uncover the enormous scam these COPs are, have been and will be – if the fraud is maintained into the uncertain future.

For those who do not know by now, COP stands for Conference of the Parties; 28 means it is the 28th Conference of the Parties, referring to the United Nations Climate Change Conferences, held every year in the context of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

The present COP28 is hosted by the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It is taking place in Dubai from 30 November to 12 December 2023.

The COPs started with the (in)famous Earth Summit in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. That is when the multi-trillion-dollar scam began. Actually, the precursor of this fraud is the Club of Rome’s report “Limits to Growth” which remains the blueprint for much of UN Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset.

COPs are a worldwide swindle stretching over all 193 UN member countries, in a similar way as did the COVID con that began at midnight on 31 December 2019 – and marked the beginning of UN Agenda 2030, alias the WEF’s Great Reset.

In case you do not know, the World Economic Forum (WEF), a mere NGO registered in a lush suburb in Geneva, Switzerland, and the world body called the United Nations, have entered into an agreement in 2019, under which their agendas are paired and are supposed to be implemented hand-in-hand.

The UN Agenda 2030 and the WEF’s Great Reset are 2 in 1, a set of monstrous plans to massively reduce the world population, robotize and digitize the survivors for total control and use the multi-faceted man-made geoengineering technology to induce “climate change”. 

This brings us back to the topic at hand – a scam of unheard proportions, keeping still to this day some 90-plus percent of the world population spell-bound and indoctrinated by a monumental lie cast upon humanity for total control and enslavement by a small, utterly sick, insanely wealthy, and powerful “Big Money” elite.

The President of COP28 is UAE’s Sultan Al Jaber, also CEO of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), which is fully state-owned by UAE. It is the world’s 12th largest oil company by production. In 2021, the company had an oil production capacity exceeding 4 million bpd (barrels per day) with plans to increase to 5 million bpd by 2030.

undefined

The entrance to COP28 with the flags of all nations (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

COP28 UAE is taking place from 30 November to 12 December 2023 at Expo City, Dubai in the United Arab Emirates.

In addition, Sultan Al Jaber is also a member of the Abu Dhabi Supreme Council for Financial and Economic Affairs. He is chairman of the Emirates Development Bank and of the board of trustees of the Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence.

ADNOC prides itself for taking transformative steps to make today’s energy cleaner while investing in “clean energies of tomorrow.”

As a byline for the climate consciousness that precedes such events as COP28, a few weeks before the start of COP28, ADNOC announced the award of contracts for a huge natural gas production project. The company will invest in the Hail and Ghasha offshore gas fields off the coast of the Emirates. The two contracts are worth a total of $16.9 billion.

A joint venture between the Abu Dhabi National Petroleum Construction Company (NPCC) and two Italian companies are responsible for the infrastructure on the mainland. So much for Europe’s official climate fanatism.

The plan is to produce almost 42.5 million cubic meters of gas by 2030. The project is the first in the world that aims to be “climate neutral”, according to ADNOC.

Question – what is “climate neutral” by producing more than 40 million cubic meters of gas? Climate neutrality is a mere slogan that has been injected under the skin of the common people, so they must not think anymore. The thinking has been done for them. “Climate Neutral” equals all is good.

Let’s face it, Sultan Al Jabar is not leading COP28 to phase out the use of hydrocarbon energy, as the climate freaks may dream. Of course not.

So, let us give all climate fanatics – including those who glue themselves on the highways and on airport runways in Europe and in the US of A in protest against fossil fuel-driven cars and planes – a picture of what reality has in store for them.

Imagine, COP28, pretty much like COP27, held in Sharm El Sheikh Egypt in November 2022, is attended by some 70,000 people, or “participants”. Thousands are from NGOs and businesses who are using the event for networking. About 2,000 of them – maybe more – are lobbyists for oil companies or governments, or corporations, depending on fossil fuels for their economies, production and for their future.

They are not lobbying for phasing out the world’s most important source of energy. About 85% of all energy used in the world stems from hydrocarbons.

These lobbyists are in Dubai at the COP28 to make oil and gas deals for profit.

Image: COP 28 President Dr. Sultan Al Jaber: Inaugural Plenary Address (Source)

COP28 President Dr. Sultan Al Jaber: Inaugural Plenary Address

This year more than ever. And Sultan Al Jabar will connect them to ADNOC dealmakers, as well as commercial managers of other large petrol and gas companies present at the COP28 – and previously at COP27, and previously at… well, you get the picture.

Imagine, Since the Earth summit in 1992 in Rio, every year the same – just bigger – circus – while fossil fuel consumption rises.

Now as then, of the world’s total energy consumption, about 85% stems from fossil fuels. There has been no change in hydrocarbon energy use in 30 years of pledging “good doing” and temperature and CO2 emissions reduction – and what-not nonsense.

The number of lobbyists and the business deals grow — and the world’s public at large keeps slumbering away, and the number of COP participants grows every year.

What level of CO2 emission would a 2-week summit attended by 70,000 people, many of them big shots and big spenders, generate? Probably thousands of tons – or more – of CO2.

Just think of the air traffic for the participants, back and forth, many of the VIPs come in their private jets – not unlike the bigwigs going to the annual WEF meetings in Davos.

Plus, the food and drink – production, transport, consumption, the air-conditioned comforts of the attendees’ hotel rooms – and much more. You got it.

Or, has anybody dared to calculate the CO2 emissions of the currently active, lingering, and endless wars and conflicts around the globe? Driven, of course, by the dark forces behind the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), call it the hardly visible Financial-Military-IT-Media-Pharma (FMIMP) Complex?

Talking about CO2 and other “greenhouse gases” emissions emanating from wars is a strictly forbidden topic for the COPs. Otherwise, you might endanger the huge profit concept of the FMIMP Complex.

After all, they call the shots and pull the strings on the indoctrination and dumbing down of the people so they believe in climate change – which is so severe, it is said, that it affects life on earth within the span of a human life of about 80 years.

To be sure, climate changes all the time. But by far the main driver of real climate change is the sun. Solar movements account for about 97% of Mother Earth’s climate. That was the case since the earth exists.

Major climate changes may occur within 20,000 to 30,000 years with shorter cycles in between, but always at a pace, so that life on earth can adapt. That has been the history until now, and real science tells us, this history continues its course for the foreseeable billions of years left for Mother Earth.

Take this – nobody pays the slightest attention to the CO2 and other “greenhouse gas” generating events like these GOPs and the Western-driven endless wars. But the Dutch government plans to force close up to 3,000 farms, one-third of Dutch farmland to become idle, because – literally – of farting cows and other agricultural prone methane emissions, purportedly affecting our climate.

Tiny Holland, barely 42,000 km2 and about 18 million people, is the second largest agricultural goods exporter in the world, just after the United States. Might there be another Bill Gates agenda – misery and death by starvation – behind this ludicrous endeavor?

Also worth mentioning may be this little innocent zoom anecdote just a few days ago, between Mary Robinson, former Irish President, and Sultan Al Jaber, the head of COP28.

Ms. Robinson tells the Sultan,

“We are in an absolute crisis that affects particularly women and children… as we have not yet committed to phasing out fossil fuels…. You, as the President of COP28, could now say with much credibility as you are the CEO of ADNOC …. “We must phase out fossil fuels and convert world economies into affordable, renewable, and clean energies. It will not happen overnight, but it is urgent. That’s what I would like to hear, your word “urgent”.”

Sultan Al Jaber, with much patience, responds –

“There is no science behind what you are asking me to do, which is phase out fossil fuels, oil, gas, coal… you are lying about it and you want me to lie about it on your behalf.”

The ADNOC Chairman adds, that phasing out of coal, oil and gas would take the world ‘back into caves’. See video below.

COP28 will end like all the previous COPs – no firm conclusions.

The “agreements” of the Paris COP21 are still unfulfilled; they are talked about, but remain unfulfilled.

Countries’ governments will continue thinking about the Paris agreements, and consider solutions, and present and debate them at the next COP, and the next…

Amen.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He 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).

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“Individuals are the primary concern and addressees of human rights norms and principles.

Accordingly, all human rights instruments seek the best possible protection for the human person. This theory, which underpins the entire human rights system, is called the pro homine principle”

 

The argumentum ad hominem is widely understood to be a means or tactic designed to divert attention away from the facts of a matter onto the person. It seeks to discredit a proposition or presentation of evidence by attacking its proponent, the character of traits of the person himself or herself.

Let’s use a hypothetical debate between two scientists about the safety of the covid jabs as an example. 

Scientist number 1 offers evidence of an increased incidence of myocarditis, stroke, renal problems and miscarriages and heart attacks as a result of the Pfizer inoculation in New Zealand, and correlates the development of these conditions with the rollout of the jab.

If Scientist number 2 ignores the data and instead argues that his opponent is a delusional conspiracy theorist who also happens to have been convicted for drunk driving whose data therefore cannot be valid, he would be engaging in an ad hominem attack. Should the pursuit of truth be paramount he would never employ such a tactic, since drunk driving or delusions have nothing to do with the facts presented which themselves should be able to be confirmed or disconfirmed.

There is another side to this coin, however, which as far as I know has not been identified by logicians, debaters and philosophers with the same clarity or precision but which is in fact equally fallacious and destructive to the pursuit of truth: the argumentum pro homine.

Let’s say that Debater number 1 is generally esteemed as a solid, honest and decent person who is arguing that the sea level in Wellington is rising at an alarming rate so that the city will be engulfed within ten years. 

Debater number 2, who is a convicted arsonist, armed with numbers and charts and graphs, counters his argument.

The adjudicating panel sides with the upstanding citizen purely on the basis of his personal reputation and refuses to assess the material provided by his opponent. The inference is that whatever Debater number 1 says must be true simply because he’s a good guy or she’s a good gal, so to speak. This position is just as ludicrous and harmful as an ad hominem attack.

These are of course rather extreme examples used for purposes of demonstration. Life, being the messy conundrum that it is, doesn’t often present clear-cut situations, situations in which evidence may be easily assessed, so that we find ourselves dealing with ambiguities. Nonetheless, a reliance upon the perceived character of the person is not a sufficient indicator of the truth of a proposition. So often I hear that so-and-so is ‘good’ or ‘genuine’, which is a prelude to an admonishment that whatever he or she says must be correct — and so often I hear the opposite, despite the fact that the Devil, as we all know, can quote Scripture quite flawlessly. And as for who is saintly or ‘genuine’ or whatever, remember King Duncan’s admonition in Macbeth: ‘there’s no art to find the mind’s construction in the face’. In other words, only by our fruits shall we be known.

Just yesterday I promised to show a friend a few tips about violin technique and she, being a friend, responded with animation, saying “Oh, I know they will be excellent!”

I disagreed: she knew no such thing because I hadn’t yet demonstrated anything and I told her that she should reserve her judgment until I did! Sure, she trusted me and was well disposed out of friendliness, but she could only know whether my violin method would be helpful after she tried it out. Her premature pro homine conclusion had no basis and required a very real test before she could say anything with certainty.

This is not a matter of picking nits, but one of great importance: truth is truth, regardless of who propounds it, and falsity is falsity. In our topsy-turvy ever-changing wartime landscape a great deal rides on emotional response, on prejudice, on bias, on the wish to have one’s wishes come to fruition. I understand that well enough, but we must always be on our guard against allowing our reason to be thus overridden.

I recently chanced upon a nice neat edition of an old novel I had read many decades ago — Joseph Conrad’s Typhoon. I’d remembered nothing about it except that a ship was caught in a tremendous storm at sea and somehow managed to survive. In fact, that’s pretty much the plot of the short novel, but one doesn’t read Conrad for plot — or, at least, I don’t. It’s the perspicacity and thrill and wonder of his extraordinary prose, wherein virtually every sentence becomes an adventure of discovery, as in the following example:

The far-off blackness ahead of the ship was like another night seen through the starry night of the earth — the starless night of the immensities beyond the created universe, revealed in its appalling stillness through a low fissure in the glittering sphere of which the earth is the kernel.

I mean — well, how can one not but gape at the splendors of such writing!

Anyway, the novel did have a bit more a plot line than my faulty memory had dredged up. Yes, a ship passed through a devastating storm, but during its passage its rather dull and unimaginative Captain insisted on having his crew restore order among a cargo of Chinamen who, when their goods and monies had been scattered in their hold, had begun to riot.

If there is a ‘message’ in the wondrous work of Conrad’s imagination, it is about retaining one’s cool in the midst of the most dreadful of calamities, and of doing the right thing. In short, a message especially relevant for us in the here and now of our strange and cataclysmic world, where it is ever more essential for us to focus on the facts at hand, savory or unsavory as they may be.

Not every jab is a lethal bullet, nor is every natural supplement a panacea, no matter who says they are.

While navigating this long and deadly war, it is well to keep in mind the many emotional forces, within and without, that threaten to sway us from the steady course of fact.

There is yet one more facet of my thesis, that extends in another dimension. What if a nation has achieved a phenomenal triumph which is hailed universally as unique, beneficent and inspiring? Would that nation’s depredations be forgiven? Would this magnificent accomplishment and the enduring halo of its glow serve to run cover for its less palatable activities?

Hint: have the Apollo moon missions given my United States of America an undeserved free pass as they wrought havoc in Vietnam and so many wars since then?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. Garcia is a Philadelphia-born psychoanalyst and psychiatrist who emigrated to New Zealand in 2006. He has authored articles ranging from explorations of psychoanalytic technique, the psychology of creativity in music (Mahler, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Delius), and politics. He is also a poet, novelist and theatrical director. He retired from psychiatric practice in 2021 after working in the public sector in New Zealand. Visit his substack at https://newzealanddoc.substack.com/ where this article was first published.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The IDF Operations Directorate’s Influencing Department, which is responsible for psychological warfare operations against the enemy and foreign audiences, operates a Telegram channel called 72 Virgins – Uncensored, which targets Israeli audiences and shows the bodies of Hamas terrorists with the promise of “shattering the terrorists’ fantasy.” 

The channel, which boasts of “exclusive content from the Gaza Strip” and has published over 700 posts, images and videos of terrorists being killed and of destruction in the Strip, encourages its 5,300 followers to share the content so that “everyone can see that we’re screwing them.”

The Israel Defense Forces denies that it operates the channel, but a senior military official confirmed to Haaretz that the army is responsible for operating it.

“There is no reason for the IDF to conduct influence campaigns on Israeli citizens of Israel,” said the official, who requested anonymity. “The messages there are problematic. It doesn’t look like an awareness campaign of an army like the IDF, but more like talking points for [far-right rapper] The Shadow, and the fact that soldiers operate such a problematic page is egregious,” he said.

Images from the '72 Virgins - Uncensored' Telegram group.

Images from the ’72 Virgins – Uncensored’ Telegram group.

The channel was created October 9, two days after the war began, as The Avengers. The next day the name was changed to Azazel, echoing the Hebrew pronunciation of “Gaza” and a word for hell, and then 72 Virgins – Uncensored. An October 11 post read:

“Burning their mother … You won’t believe the video we got! You can hear the crunch of their bones. We’ll upload it right away, get ready.”

Images of Palestinian captives and the bodies of terrorists were captioned “Exterminating the roaches … exterminating the Hamas rats. … Share this beauty.” The following text accompanies a video of an Israeli soldier allegedly dipping machine gun bullets in pork fat:

“What a man!!!!! Lubricates bullets with lard. You won’t get your virgins.”

And:

“Garbage juice!!!! Another dead terrorist!! You have to watch it with the sound, you’ll die laughing.”

Each night, the channel posts a daily summary that includes several IDF updates on the activity in Gaza, with promises of exclusive images and videos.

“As always, we’re the first to bring you the information from the field,” it says. “We have crazy recordings of terrorists, how can we put it, swimming with the fishes. We have documentation no one else has. We promise much more!!!”

On October 14, alongside the caption, “Exclusive video of a good night, don’t forget to share and repost,” was a video of an Israeli vehicle repeatedly driving over the body of a terrorist.

“Very good, Gershon!!! Run him over run him over!!!! Screw the bastards! Flatten them,” the accompanying post said.

Images from the '72 Virgins - Uncensored' Telegram group.

Images from the ’72 Virgins – Uncensored’ Telegram group.

The channel administrators didn’t stop at images from Gaza. On October 11, hundreds of Israelis, including members of the Beitar Jerusalem soccer team’s violently racist fan club La Familia, rioted at the Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, near Tel Aviv, following a rumor that Hamas terrorists who had invaded Israel were being treated there. People roamed the hospital, cursing out and spitting on medical professionals. Within an hour, a video of the riot was uploaded to 72 Virgins with the title,

“My brothers, the heroesssss, La Familia fans, love you!!!!!!! What heroes, came to screw the Arabs.”

This isn’t the first time that an IDF psychological warfare operation targeting an Israeli audience has been exposed. Haaretz revealed this year that during the 2021 war in the Gaza Strip, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit conducted a deceptive campaign against Israeli citizens aimed at boosting awareness of the IDF’s attacks and their “cost” to the Palestinians. The army posted to fake social media accounts images of the widespread destruction in the Strip and called on followers to share “so they know we are retaliating big time.” Officials in the spokesperson’s unit admitted, after the operation was exposed, that they had “erred.”

The Telegram channel also urges followers to share its content. Next to an image of what are alleged to be captured terrorists is the exhortation,

“Don’t forget that all the content here is exclusive first for you!!!!!! Share it so everyone will see what crybabies they are.”

Over two years ago, Haaretz reported that the IDF hired the operator of a Telegram channel called Abu Ali Express as a consultant on the “war for public opinion on social media. The channel published exclusive reports, videos and pictures with its logo to its 100,000 followers, without proper disclosure of the cooperation with the IDF. More than once, the IDF spokesman referred journalists to Abu Ali Express for news on the fighting, while telling them that the information “did not come from the military.” Under the cloak of anonymity, Abu Ali Express discredited journalists who criticized IDF policy and then-Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman. In 2022, the IDF announced it had terminated the consultant’s contract. This week, 72 Virgins shared a post from Abu Ali Express, which was given a prominent credit.

Images from the '72 Virgins - Uncensored' Telegram group.

Images from the ’72 Virgins – Uncensored’ Telegram group.

For years, the IDF has used psychological warfare against Israel’s enemies in an effort to undercut their narratives, influence the population (including in the Gaza Strip, Iran and Lebanon) and tout its successes. These campaigns are conducted in secret, using fake accounts, without leaving evidence of IDF involvement. However, the IDF is barred by law from using these capabilities against Israelis.

In a statement, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit said 72 Virgins is not operated on the IDF’s behalf.

“If there was any connection by soldiers or other parties connected to the IDF with the page or its operation, this was done without approval and without authority.”

However, as mentioned, a senior military official confirmed that the channel was systematically operated by IDF personnel.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“He says, ‘You’re not going to be a dictator, are you?’ I said: ‘No, no, no, other than day one. We’re closing the border, and we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.’”—Donald Trump to Sean Hannity on being asked if he would abuse power after being re-elected

Once a dictator, always a dictator.

Power-hungry, lawless and steadfast in its pursuit of authoritarian powers, the government does not voluntarily relinquish those powers once it acquires, uses and inevitably abuses them.

Likewise, any presidential candidate who promises to be a dictator on day one, if elected, will be a dictator-in-chief for life.

Then again, the president is already a dictator with permanent powers: imperial, unaccountable and unconstitutional thanks to a relatively obscure directive (National Security Presidential Directive 51 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 20), part of the country’s Continuity of Government (COG) plan, which gives unchecked executive, legislative and judicial power to the president in the event of a “national emergency.”

That national emergency can take any form, can be manipulated for any purpose and can be used to justify any end goal—all on the say so of the president.

It doesn’t even matter what the nature of the crisis might be—civil unrest, the national emergencies, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters”—as long as it allows the government to justify all manner of government tyranny in the name of so-called national security.

The country would then be subjected to martial law by default, and the Constitution and the Bill of Rights would be suspended.

For all intents and purposes, the Constitution has long been suspended, and we’ve been operating in a state of martial law for some time now.

The emergency powers that we know about which presidents might claim during such states of emergency are vast, ranging from imposing martial law and suspending habeas corpus to shutting down all forms of communications, including implementing an internet kill switch, and restricting travel.

Yet according to documents obtained by the Brennan Center, there may be many more secret powers that presidents may institute in times of so-called crisis without oversight from Congress, the courts, or the public.

Deploying the same strategy it used with 9/11 to acquire greater powers under the USA Patriot Act, the police state—a.k.a. the shadow government, a.k.a. the Deep State—has been planning and preparing for such crises for years now, quietly assembling a wish list of presidential lockdown powers that could be trotted out and approved at a moment’s notice.

Indeed, President Trump’s administration even asked Congress to allow it to suspend parts of the Constitution whenever it deems it necessary during the COVID-19 crisis and “other” emergencies. The Department of Justice (DOJ) went so far as to quietly trot out and test a long laundry list of terrifying powers that override the Constitution.

We’re talking about lockdown powers (at both the federal and state level): the ability to suspend the Constitution, indefinitely detain American citizens, bypass the courts, quarantine whole communities or segments of the population, override the First Amendment by outlawing religious gatherings and assemblies of more than a few people, shut down entire industries and manipulate the economy, muzzle dissidents, “stop and seize any plane, train or automobile to stymie the spread of contagious disease,” reshape financial markets, create a digital currency (and thus further restrict the use of cash), determine who should live or die.

Bear in mind that the powers the government officially asked Congress to recognize and authorize barely scratch the surface of the far-reaching powers the government has already unilaterally claimed for itself.

Unofficially, the police state with the president at its helm has been riding roughshod over the rule of law for years now without any pretense of being reined in or restricted in its power grabs by Congress, the courts or the citizenry.

Although the Constitution invests the President with very specific, limited powers, in recent years, American presidents have claimed the power to completely and almost unilaterally alter the landscape of this country for good or for ill.

The powers amassed by each successive president through the negligence of Congress and the courts—powers which add up to a toolbox of terror for an imperial ruler—empower whoever occupies the Oval Office to act as a dictator, above the law and beyond any real accountability.

As law professor William P. Marshall explains, “every extraordinary use of power by one President expands the availability of executive branch power for use by future Presidents.”

Moreover, it doesn’t even matter whether other presidents have chosen not to take advantage of any particular power, because “it is a President’s action in using power, rather than forsaking its use, that has the precedential significance.”

In other words, each successive president continues to add to his office’s list of extraordinary orders and directives, expanding the reach and power of the presidency and granting him- or herself near dictatorial powers.

All of the imperial powers amassed by past presidents—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 operate a shadow government, and to act as a dictator and a tyrant, above the law and beyond any real accountability—were passed from Clinton to Bush to Obama to Trump to Biden and will be passed along to the next president.

These presidential powers—acquired through the use of executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements and which can be activated by any sitting president—enable past, president and future presidents to operate above the law and beyond the reach of the Constitution.

These are the powers that continue to be passed along to each successive heir to the Oval Office, the Constitution be damned.

The war on disinformation, the war on electoral corruption, the war on COVID-19, the war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration: all of these countermeasures have become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.

This is what you might call a stealthy, creeping, silent, slow-motion coup d’état.

We’ve been losing our freedoms so incrementally for so long—sold to us in the name of national security and global peace, maintained by way of martial law disguised as law and order, and enforced by a standing army of militarized police and a political elite determined to maintain their powers at all costs—that it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it all started going downhill, but “we the people” are paying the price for it now.

We are paying the price every day that we allow the government to continue to wage its war on the American People, a war that is being fought on many fronts: with bullets and tasers, with surveillance cameras and license readers, with intimidation and propaganda, with court rulings and legislation, with the collusion of every bureaucrat who dances to the tune of corporate handouts while on the government’s payroll, and most effectively of all, with the complicity of the American people, who continue to allow themselves to be easily manipulated by their politics, distracted by their pastimes, and acclimated to a world in which government corruption is the norm.

If we continue down this road, there can be no surprise about what awaits us at the end.

After all, it is a tale that has been told time and again throughout history about how easy it is for freedom to fall and tyranny to rise.

What we desperately need is a concerted, collective commitment to the Constitution’s principles of limited government, a system of checks and balances, and a recognition that they—the president, Congress, the courts, the military, the police, the technocrats and plutocrats and bureaucrats—answer to and are accountable to “we the people.”

Start locally—in your own communities, in your schools, at your city council meetings, in newspaper editorials, at protests—by pushing back against laws that are unjust, police departments that overreach, politicians that don’t listen to their constituents, and a system of government that grows more tyrannical by the day.

We must recalibrate the balance of power.

Congress must also put an end to the use of presidential executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements as a means of getting around Congress and the courts.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely—no matter which party holds office.

The process of unseating a dictator and limiting the powers of the presidency is far from simple but at a minimum, it must start with “we the people.”

Make the government play by the rules of the Constitution.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead 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.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

What Happens When Kiev Regime Runs Out of American Money?

December 12th, 2023 by Drago Bosnic

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

One of the gravest mistakes the Kiev regime ever made was to involve itself in American politics.

It could be argued that this was inevitable because the United States effectively created the Neo-Nazi junta, but still, its leadership could’ve certainly expected what focusing only on one part of the American establishment would do to their future. However, the Kiev regime’s absolute lack of sovereignty is such they couldn’t even make that decision and the consequences are coming back to bite them.

Namely, the fact that the Democrats, aided by the increasingly unpopular neocon Republicans, were the power behind the Maidan coup, is what will be the undoing of the Neo-Nazi junta. Of course, apart from the fact that they thought it was a good idea to fight the military superpower next door.

By going with the Democrats and even aiding their efforts to grab power in Washington DC, the Kiev regime did so thinking it was fighting for its own interests. However, this was only a very short-term solution and it was quite obvious it wouldn’t last. As the Biden administration kept sweeping rapidly growing domestic issues under the rug, while sending hundreds of billions of US taxpayer’s money to the Neo-Nazi junta, it was only a matter of time before the American people themselves would punish that with a landslide victory for the GOP during the midterms. The DNC knew this and it feared the midterms just like it’s terrified of the presidential election in 2024. However, there’s no going back now, or in 11 months, or ever, for that matter. And the Kiev regime might be the first “casualty”.

The Democrats are perfectly aware of this, but they can’t have a “change of heart” now. Their supporters have been brainwashed into thinking climate change and Ukraine are the world’s greatest problems, while the vast majority of Republican voters and an increasing number of neutral ones are simply enraged by the hellscape the DNC leaves wherever it’s in power.

The fact that the Democrats and the Neo-Nazi junta established this symbiotic relationship where US taxpayer’s money is sent to the latter only for it to them circle back to the former’s coffers is what’s driving people away from and against the DNC. By losing power in Congress, the Democrats lost the ability to secure “aid” for the Kiev regime (and by extension, for themselves). Worse yet, they gave Republicans the incentive to stop it.

Namely, the GOP has both financial and political reasons to leave the Neo-Nazi junta hanging, as this also stifles the DNC’s finances, and their ability to campaign. And while the so-called “Big Tech” and the mainstream propaganda machine are deeply intertwined with the Democrats and neocons (in other words, the Deep State), their chances for a win have plummeted and the only thing they’re left with at this point is election fraud. However, the time is running out, fast. The Kiev regime’s situation is only exacerbating the issue. The fact that it will be left without US money and that this will accelerate its downfall in the face of Russia’s counteroffensive will result in a downward death spiral that will finally destroy the DNC’s already grim prospects. Precisely this is why Moscow is in no hurry.

It’s important to note that the American money is what’s keeping the Neo-Nazi junta’s institutions functional, not only in terms of military power but all-round. Salaries of its corrupt officials, starting from Zelensky himself all the way to a mailman, are paid precisely by Washington DC. Due to the limited scope of the special military operation (SMO), most of Ukraine is completely intact and life goes on relatively normally. However, with US funding running dry, this will be unsustainable, very likely with graver consequences than the SMO itself. For instance, various interest groups within the Kiev regime will start competing for the dwindling funds, including the military and the Neo-Nazi battalions, which are already in competition with each other, causing the already low morale to plummet.

In turn, this will exacerbate the situation on the frontlines, particularly as the Kiev regime’s much-touted counteroffensive failed, with much (if not most) of its fighting capabilities either destroyed or damaged beyond repair. On the other hand, the Russian military is slowly moving from active defense and defense-in-depth to incremental offensive operations. The Kremlin will certainly not make the mistake of throwing tens of thousands of soldiers into the fire and “hope for the best” as the Neo-Nazi junta did. The high command in Moscow doesn’t have any illusions that the fight is easy. On the contrary, the Russians take these advances very seriously and are perfectly aware of the fact that NATO invested tens of billions and nearly a decade to fortify western parts of Donbass.

However, the Kiev regime’s ability to launch offensive operations is effectively gone. In any sort of conflict, focusing on defense only is simply unsustainable. The Russian military, despite all the reverie about it running out of fuel, shells, missiles, drones and other munitions, is actually getting stronger by the day. It hasn’t only increased its manpower, but it’s also adapting fast and using ever newer and more advanced technologies. This ensures its superiority, both strategic and tactical, limiting not only the Neo-Nazi junta’s room for maneuver, but also that of NATO itself. According to the belligerent alliance’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, the Kiev regime’s prospects are rather grim. He’s insisting on the need to continue financing the Neo-Nazi junta, but NATO is completely powerless without the US.

The world’s most aggressive military alliance needs to take the peculiarities of the American political system into account.

Without Washington DC, NATO will be unable to continue financing the Kiev regime, as it’s effectively composed of little more than the European Union. The process of de facto unifying EU and NATO is well underway, but this will only exacerbate the troubled bloc’s already dwindling economic power. The cumulative effect of these developments will further diminish the Neo-Nazi junta’s chances for survival. The official narrative of what a “victory over Russia” constitutes will change, going from “liberating Donbass and Crimea” to actually not losing any more regions. However, the disastrous effect that this will have on the overall morale will only accelerate the possibility of a complete defeat.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Biden Administration’s stupidity mandating that those in the military submit to this worthless experiment MRNA vaccine or be dishonorably discharged has resulted in not just a shortage of pilots.

Still, there has been a dramatic increase in heart problems among those who surrendered their human rights and took the vaccine. Heart problems have skyrocketed, and to add to this insanity, now this braindead government is offering up to $600,000 in bonuses to keep pilots.

You can’t make up this stuff. 

My own lawyer, who took the shot so he could travel, ended up with the blood clots and now cannot fly.

Pfizer should be shut down, and the head should be in prison for treason and manslaughter, but our wonderful “representatives” only represent themselves and will NEVER admit they passed such decrees on the order of Schwab’s WEF.

They have indeed fulfilled our model and its forecast for the collapse of “representative” forms of governments post-2032.

2023_12_10_09_27_17_Air_Force_again_dangles_600_000_in_bonuses_to_keep_pilots_in_uniform

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image: Pfc. Shaniah Edwards, Medical Detachment, prepares to administer the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine to soldiers and airmen at the Joint Force Headquarters, February 12, 2021. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Sgt. Leona C. Hendrickson – Source.)


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized. —Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. —Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page

Cranking Up the Ukraine Phony History Mill

December 12th, 2023 by Stephen Karganovic

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

What took the British so long? We learned from the Guardian recently that British “partners” have embarked on a long-overdue project to fabricate a history for Ukraine, “to wrest Ukraine’s past from the shadow of Russian and Soviet narratives.”

Projection is evident right from the start. A narrative, the definition of which is a self-serving false account, is being concocted in London to counter not another equally false narrative but to undermine the historically attested perception shared by inhabitants of both contemporary Russia and Ukraine that they are, indeed, “one people.” That is exactly what was pointed out in you know who’s famous essay ”On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians,“ published in the summer of 2021. Ever since, those essentially commonplace historical assertions, acknowledged for at least the last millennium as axiomatic by all the locals from Kiev to Moscow, have disconcerted quite a few nation-builders in the collective West.

And that precisely is the reason for the Ukraine history project which lately has obsessed British minds. The construction of a viable anti-Russia is glaringly incomplete unless endowed with a suitable “history” written to reflect not just Ukraine’s supposed distinctness but more importantly its antithetical nature in relation to Russia. The task of the London-based Ukrainian History Global Initiative is to fill the embarrassing gap in the scholarship by hiring a bevy of what in the narcissistic West passes for reputable academics for the job. The undertaking has been conceived by serious hybrid warfare operatives to supersede the inadequate and primitive rantings of native propaganda assets with a glossy, sophisticated version of exactly the same rantings, but skilfully packaged as respectable scholarship in order to impress the simpleminded.

The Ukrainian History Initiative is expected to complete its work in three years and has been entrusted to ninety largely non-Ukrainian, Western academics. It is chaired by Swedish politician Karl Bildt (whose credentials as a historian are not clear) and includes such luminaries as the stridently anti-Russian Yale historian Timothy Snyder, intelligence asset Anne Applebaum (who just happened to fall in love and marry Russian fifth-columnist Ilya Ponomarev), British lawyer and KC Philippe Sands, and Klaus Schwab associate Yuval Harari, among others.  

It may seem odd that the fabrication of Ukrainian history is being managed from London, not having been entrusted to the intellectual brain-power of the Kiev regime, the party which presumably should be interested the most in the success of this academic travesty. Western curators, however, prefer to keep such undertakings under tight control and to delegate execution to reliable staff. The identical approach – seemingly just as odd, but not really – was employedseveral years ago for the fabrication of the “Montenegrin language”. The new language was created by a committee composed entirely of foreigners, without a single Montenegrin. Just as NATO satrapy Ukraine would be incomplete without a history, for roughly similar reasons the new NATO satellite Montenegro would appear inauthentic without a separate language.

The front man for the Ukraine history operation is an individual by the name of Viktor Pinchuk, self-identified on the internet page of the Fund bearing his name as “a Ukrainian businessman and philanthropist.” Specific information about Pinchuk’s “philanthropic” activities, beyond the tritely stated goal of “empowering future generations to become the change makers of tomorrow,” is scarce. The fact, however, that Pinchuk’s business accomplishments date back to the early 1990s, an era not particularly remembered for its philanthropic spirit, suggests the origin and manner of acquisition of his considerable wealth. And to boot, Pinchuk is the son-in-law of Ukraine’s second President, the notoriously corrupt Leonid Kuchma, whose pointedly entitled book, “Ukraine is not Russia,” should probably prove enormously helpful to the scholars being assembled in Britain to give an academic articulation to precisely such an idea. A chip off the old block indeed.

The evident purpose of the sham history of Ukraine that is being prepared Britain is to turn it into a reference text supplanting everything previously written on the subject that might be in disaccord with its premises. The goal is both ambitious and brazen.

The probability that the synthetic history of Ukraine being forged in London will have a measurable impact on public perception is very slight. During the three-year time frame for its completion the situation in the Ukraine will hardly remain static. By the time the “history” is unveiled it may already be an anachronism given the military and political trends on the ground. Expecting it to be a psychological game-changer is just as unrealistic as expecting the tanks, fighter planes, and munitions scheduled for delivery sometime next year to make a significant difference on the battlefield.

Kiev regime ultra-nationalists should think twice before betting on the expected benefits of the Ukraine History Initiative for another reason as well. All policies and commitments initiated by the collective West are inherently mutable in relation to shifting momentary interests. The erstwhile political mantra of supporting the Kiev regime “as long as it takes” has evolved in response to changing conditions into an altogether different current narrative. In the near future tinkering with Ukrainian history may also be abandoned or drastically modified in recognition of evolving circumstances.

The brutal lesson taught to the West’s obedient puppets in Macedonia should not be lost on anyone in Kiev. For years delusional Macedonian nationalism was being whipped up to irrational lengths, actively buttressed by phony scholarship fully endorsed by the collective West, claiming that Macedonians were heirs to a glorious legacy going back to antiquity and even descendants of Alexander the Great. The buttering up of an impressionable people and its ignorant, bought and paid for, ruling class came to an abrupt end when it was time to finalise NATO membership. Greece objected vigorously to the perpetuation of historical phantasies at its expense and threatened to block Macedonia’s entry into NATO unless they were explicitly and humiliatingly dropped.

And so they were. Strong-armed by its NATO “partners” Macedonia renounced not just its historical pretensions but also changed its official name to accommodate the demands of Greece, which apparently was of greater strategic importance to the duplicitous West.

Let those who have eyes and ears in Kiev see and hear. The hired scholars in London will be well taken care of for their efforts. As Timothy Snyder averred, “I can think of few endeavours, in contemporary humanities at least, which are on this scale, keeping just under 100 scholars active for around three years: if you just do the math, it’s a fair amount of money.” They will all be on the gravy train, as it is called in America, and the helpings will be generous.

A few Ukrainian collaborators, selected for window dressing, will also receive some crumbs. For the unfortunate people of Ukraine there will be nothing but mayhem and abandoned rotting corpses.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Stephen Karganovic is president of “Srebrenica Historical Project,” an NGO registered in the Netherlands to investigate the factual matrix and background of events that took place in Srebrenica in July of 1995. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

Featured image source